(April 13, 2025 at 10:16 am)Deesse23 Wrote:

(April 13, 2025 at 7:24 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: I think the chief flaw is that his argument has logical leaps: intelligence exists, therefore it was deliberate, therefore it was designed. One might as easily claim, to paraphrase JBS Haldane, that the Universe exists because the Creator has a beetle fetish.

Boru

God: Seems to rather have an empty space fetish.
Drew: continues to state, like a mantra, that life, specifically human life, that intelligence, specifically human intelligence, was the goal for creating the universe, but never ever gave a single good reason why this would be the case.

The universe just could be different, without human life and human intelligence. End of story.

He also seems to gloss over the fact that the overwhelming majority of the universe is devoid of life, specifically human life, and intelligence, specifically human intelligence.

Seems rather an incompetent Cosmic Engineer who created an infinite universe with trillions of galaxies, 200 sextillion stars, and 10^25 planets just to accomplish the goal of a minuscule number of intelligent beings on one tiny planet in a rather hum-drum galaxy.

Boru

I have begun to wonder if Drewvy is trying to convince us or himself.

(April 13, 2025 at 12:43 pm)arewethereyet Wrote: I have begun to wonder if Drewvy is trying to convince us or himself.

Oh, I imagine he could convince me. If that happens, I’ll start believing in God, eating pizza, listening to accordion music, and getting in touch with my feminine side.

Then Drew and I will meet for coffee at half-past impossible.

Boru

(April 12, 2025 at 11:22 pm)Paleophyte Wrote:

(April 12, 2025 at 11:01 am)Drew_2013 Wrote: Black holes are supernatural.

Black holes are not supernatural you infinitely dense motherfucker. 

Black holes are natural right? They're an extreme example of nature. Just as supernova's are an extreme example of a nova.

(April 13, 2025 at 1:42 pm)Drew_2013 Wrote:

(April 12, 2025 at 11:22 pm)Paleophyte Wrote: Black holes are not supernatural you infinitely dense motherfucker. 

Black holes  are natural right? They're an extreme example of nature. Just as supernova's are an extreme example of a nova.

By that ‘logic’ a municipal sewer is supernatural because it’s an extreme example of a pit toilet.

You’re an idiot.

Boru

Quote:Black holes are natural right? They're an extreme example of nature. Just as supernova's are an extreme example of a nova.

No their  just natural. Interesting to be sure but very much natural

(April 12, 2025 at 11:01 am)Drew_2013 Wrote: When we put the word super in front of something like superstar, supernova it doesn't mean its not a star or it not a nova.

(April 13, 2025 at 1:42 pm)Drew_2013 Wrote: Just as supernova's are an extreme example of a nova.

You clearly dont know what either a nova, or a supernova, is.

(April 12, 2025 at 11:01 am)Drew_2013 Wrote: The word supernatural gets a bad rep. When we put the word super in front of something ..... It only means it exceeds the transcends the usual meaning of those words. Black holes are supernatural.

You clearly dont know what black holes are, too.

Supernatural:

Quote:(of a manifestation or event) attributed to some force beyond scientific understanding or the laws of nature.

You also dont know what supernatural is.


4 birds with one stone, impressive.

(April 13, 2025 at 12:43 pm)arewethereyet Wrote: I have begun to wonder if Drewvy is trying to convince us or himself.

I said he was a xian wannabe. He just using us to see how ridiculous he will look to normal people.

(April 13, 2025 at 1:42 pm)Drew_2013 Wrote:

(April 12, 2025 at 11:22 pm)Paleophyte Wrote: Black holes are not supernatural you infinitely dense motherfucker. 

Black holes  are natural right? They're an extreme example of nature. Just as supernova's are an extreme example of a nova.

Yes, black holes are understood as an entirely natural phenomenon.

@Paleophyte Wrote:

Quote:It's hilarious that you're asking Google to make your arguments for you AND you're too lazy or dumb to strip the code from your post.

Its anal of you to worry about it.

Quote:No, have you? I note that you don't list all of the scientists that don't support your peculiar little worldview.

You're more anal retentive than I thought. I've never claimed I support multiverse theory. 

The micro world is dominated by quantum physics one of the most difficult things to understand is it simple? Is the double slit experiment where matter behaves differently if its being observed than not being observed? Any simple explanations for that?  Is the singularity from which its alleged the universe came from simple? Is whatever existed prior to the big bang is simple? Scientists describe it as where the known laws of physics break down. Even in biology it was thought at one time that single cells are simple but as they dug into it, it became vastly more complex than originally thought. Mindless natural forces without plan, intent or a degree in biology somehow figured out how to transform non-biological matter into living matter. A feat that still eludes scientists...shouldn't that have been simplicity in itself?

thank you for making my argument for me? Really not sure what you're trying to achieve with this. Let me simplify for you:

Quote:Step 1: Start with some very simple rules, aka fundamental forces.

We start with the big bang. Perhaps the most complex mystery we still know very little about. I watch just about every documentary there is on the big bang and never heard a single scientist claim its simple. Whatever caused the big bang was outside of spacetime and our laws of physics. 

Trigger warning I coped this from AI. 

The singularity at the heart of the Big Bang theory describes a point of infinite density and gravity from which the universe is believed to have emerged. This concept, while not fully understood, suggests that all the matter and energy of the universe was once compressed into a tiny, incredibly hot space, and then began expanding
 
Even though something like this appears to be what would happen if we rolled the universe back about 13.8 billion years ago. Still infinite density, infinite gravity? If that's not supernatural I don't what would be. Its nothing that happens in this universe. Black holes are close but they don't cause a universe to exist. Scientists claim the laws of physics don't apply to the singularity that became our universe.

In order to make a time-line for all the events that occurred from t-0 to the first 100 years is broken up to the smallest unit of time possible for us humans. 

Trigger warning I coped this from AI.


Planck time is the theoretical smallest unit of time, roughly 5.39 × 10^-44 seconds. It's the time it takes for light to travel one Planck length in a vacuum. This time is so small that it's generally considered the point where our current understanding of physics breaks down, and the concept of time itself might not be meaningful below this scale.


https://www.snexplores.org/article/what-...c-timeline

0 to 10-43 second (0.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 sec) after the Big Bang: This earliest period is known as the Planck Era. It goes from the instant of the Big Bang to this minuscule fraction of a second afterwards. Current physics — our understanding of the basic laws of energy and matter — cannot describe what happened here.

Sounds simple to me...if it can't be described it must be simple.

10-43 to 10-35 second after the Big Bang: Even within this tiny span, known as the Grand Unified Theory (GUT) Era, major changes take place. The most important event: Gravity becomes its own distinct force, separate from everything else.

10-35 to 10-32 second after the Big Bang: During this short snippet of time, known as the Era of Inflation, the strong nuclear force separates from the remaining two unified forces: the electromagnetic and weak.

Quote:Step 2: Repeat those rules over and over again.

Like Tic Tac Toe or scissors, paper, rock? It probably wouldn't take more than a high school science project gone awry to cause a universe to exist. 

Quote:Step 3: More complex behaviours arise from the system. That's called "emergence". 

I call it the laws of physics and the four fundamental forces operating in space over time. The first emergence was matter over antimatter. Even though they always appear equal somehow there was more matter or the most oft repeated line in science, "We wouldn't be here". The universe started off with hydrogen, some helium and a little bit of lithium. Add gravity, the other 3 fundamental forces (all working in tandem) inside spacetime and stars begin to exist. That's a long way from having an earth like planet. For that to happen galaxies need to form. Because if they didn't...'we wouldn't be here'. However as it turns out for galaxies to form and not fly apart the universe has to be made up of mostly dark matter. What a lucky break for us humans it happened to exist in the right amount to keep galaxies together. You're a firm believer that natural forces didn't give a shit if earth existed, stars existed, bio friendly laws of physics existed, if dark matter existed. Mindless natural forces didn't give a rats ass if stars going supernova create new material needed for life. The only explanation is it happened to happen and what a lucky break for us who enjoy being alive. Galaxies staying together is necessary to cause second generation stars made of the new material for planets and the ingredients life and humans are made of. 

Quote:Step 4: Emergent behaviours are favoured by thermodynamics because they leads to more stable low-energy, high-entropy states more efficiently.
Step 5: Go back to Step 2 with the new emergent rules and do the Rinse, Lather, Repeat thing again.

You're living in a fantasy world where somehow matter is compressed infinitely, a little baking a little shaking and out comes a universe with all the laws of physics and properties to cause life to exist minus any plan or intent to do so. 

Quote:Step 7: If you let the system run for long enough then it gets complex enough to start asking pesky questions. Sentience is just an emergent property of biology, biology an emergent property of chemistry, and chemistry an emergent property of physics.

If only the list of scientists who claim we live in a multiverse were just a 10th the genius you are they'd abandon that theory like ugly on an ape. By the way how is it we haven't been able to create life? We already have all the ingredients. It was the result of a few simple rules right?