(January 13, 2016 at 11:48 pm)Beccs Wrote:

(January 13, 2016 at 11:35 pm)AAA Wrote: Fair enough. I'll predict that we don't find life on other planets. You might predict that we will. We'll have to wait and see.

And I'll predict we find some form of microbial life on at least one other planet or moon in our solar system before the turn of the century.

The data isn't fully in yet and the jury still out, but the methane detected by the Curiosity rover on Mars may just be microbially produced. Geophysicist Vladimir Krasnopolsky - who may have to change his field to Areophysics - has said that since the planet has been geologically inactive for the last few million years, biological processes may be the more plausible explanation. And he's from the Catholic University of America.

Ape: Ah yes, I asked that many many pages ago and no answer.

"What's the point of this whole thing you're fighting so hard for?" seems to be a question many people have never stopped to consider.

The only point seems to be making themselves feel less foolish for holding such a belief.

As for life on other planets, I'd say the odds of there not being any is close to zero. But prepare for the NTS as soon as we find something.

I'm still hopeful for an acknowledgement of my earlier question:

Would an entity existing outside of time and space have any influence on events inside it?

(January 14, 2016 at 8:27 am)Stimbo Wrote: I'm still hopeful for an acknowledgement of my earlier question:

Would an entity existing outside of time and space have any influence on events inside it?

Good question.

Also, how does an entity outside of time do anything?

(January 14, 2016 at 8:29 am)robvalue Wrote:

(January 14, 2016 at 8:27 am)Stimbo Wrote: I'm still hopeful for an acknowledgement of my earlier question:

Would an entity existing outside of time and space have any influence on events inside it?

Good question.

Also, how does an entity outside of time do anything?

God existed outside of the universe, meaning he existed outside of existence, or in other words, non-existence. God had to not exist before he could make the universe.

Exactly. If he created anything, it wasn't the universe by definition.

And if he has no time (or the equivalent) then he can't go from something not being created to something being created, because that's at least two distinct points on a "time line".

Otherwise, it's the old fallback of "well he's too complex to understand". Which is fine, but in that case, stop pretending you understand stuff about him.

I think it goes like this:

1) God exists
2) There is no evidence he exists
3) Therefor, he must "be" somewhere which is outside the scope of collecting evidence

The problem, of course, is with the initial assumption. This doesn't prove it, it just shows what stupid lengths you have to go to in order to hide God, and demonstrates you have no way yourself to know he is there anyway even if he was.

Also, "outside space and time" is about the exact opposite of "omnipresent". Which is it?

(January 14, 2016 at 8:39 am)ApeNotKillApe Wrote:

(January 14, 2016 at 8:29 am)robvalue Wrote: Good question.

Also, how does an entity outside of time do anything?

God existed outside of the universe, meaning he existed outside of existence, or in other words, non-existence. God had to not exist before he could make the universe.

It's funny when a believer says god exists outside of space and time, they're just stating he only exists in an imaginary place.

Which is entirely accurate, and there's plenty of reasons to think that this is exactly where "he" exists.

That's not true!

See, there's this book...

For people so invested in abstract metaphysical concepts, they have little skill for conceptualizing mind-bending ideas that stretch beyond human comprehension, a very poor imagination, I've observed.