RE: First things first
June 25, 2013 at 7:22 pm
(This post was last modified: June 25, 2013 at 7:24 pm by Brian37.)
Quote:So you are quite sure that what we know now is all there is to know
Dont fucking twist my words to suit your own fantasy.
There are in human history dead claims that no one goes around claiming anymore and even the top scientist Stephen Hawkins says "God is not required", so if that is the case why would any form of cognition be required?
I am sure that a cognition is not required just as a hurricane doesn't need Posiden and lightening does not need Thor as an explanation. Si fi woo is just as stupid to fill in a gap.
Do not accuse me of being a know it all. I can't build a combustion engine either but I certainly can rule out pixy dust fueling my car.
Saying "science and nature" are all there is does not mean we have discovered everything about the universe. Gap filling is what you are doing, not me.
Neil Degress Tyson has a video somewhere explaining the history of gap filling some scientists in history would do and stop and say "we cant know anymore so therefor god did it" Only for further scientists to go further and take once was attributed to a god, to nature.
"ENTITY" is the same gap crap with a different name. "Entity" what exactly does that fucking mean? Seems as hollow and vacuous as every damned god claim I've ever heard.
Keeping an open mind does not presume which is what you are doing. If I am going to place my bets on any future discovery our best data so far is increasingly and speeding toward pointing to "all this" as as being non cognitive so thus whatever we do discover ALSO would not need an "entity" or a God" to explain.
Now unless you can define "entity" as more than "something" I'd suggest you scrap such vacuous hollow language, and look to the best data we have to date. All you are doing is pulling shit out of your ass because the idea of an "entity" feels right to you.
The universe is a what, not a who. THAT we do know so we can rule out a "who" as a cause.
