Posts: 134
Threads: 1
Joined: February 2, 2012
Reputation:
1
RE: Book of Acts: Pure Fantasy
February 13, 2012 at 9:58 pm
(This post was last modified: February 13, 2012 at 10:00 pm by brotherlylove.)
(February 13, 2012 at 1:53 pm)genkaus Wrote: And here is the best argument against any fine-tuning. If the parameters were not what they are, there wouldn't be any existence or a universe at all. Which means, the parameters could not be anything other than what they are. Which means, they are not tunable. Ergo, no fine-tuning.
There are also many parameters where there would be a Universe and existence, but no life. Therefore, they are tunable.
(February 13, 2012 at 1:53 pm)genkaus Wrote: Are you too dense to realize that they are talking about the observable universe having a beginning?
I think you need to actually read the paper rather than skim it and pretend you know what you're talking about. The title of the paper is "Did the Universe have a beginning?" not, "Did the observable Universe have a beginning?", and then it goes on to refute eternal inflation, cyclic evolution and static seed scenerios. These theories cover both what we can and cannot observe.
(February 13, 2012 at 1:53 pm)genkaus Wrote: Except, there is evidence for actual infinities. There is none for god.
Feel free to demonstrate this evidence at any time.
(February 13, 2012 at 1:53 pm)genkaus Wrote: New past events? Who's talking about new past events? The events being added to the past would be "new" if all the events uptil now were accounted for. They are not, since past events are infinite. We are not adding new past events, simply discovering them.
The past has been actualized and is infinite, which is why it is an actual infinite. We simply refer to it as potential because we do not know all of it - obviously, since it is infinite.
Again, this all contradicts temporal becoming, and if you want to say the past is an actual infinite, then you have all the logical absurdities and contradictions that go with it. If we were to subject every third past event from the actual infinite, it would still be an actual infinite.
Even if I was to concede that an infinite past is possible, which I am not, the mere possibility of it is not persausive; the problem being that you don't have an argument. You don't even have a model to refer to.
(February 13, 2012 at 1:55 pm)Phil Wrote: go ahead and move the goalposts. I would expect nothing less.
I moved nothing; you simply selected an arbitrary definition of the word "created" and created a strawman argument with it.
(February 13, 2012 at 1:55 pm)Phil Wrote: Not gonna play your stupid game. If you meant scientific laws then that is what I will answer. They are the way they are because they could be no other way once the four fundamental forces took effect after the universe cooled enough. If they were any other way, you wouldn't be asking me such a silly question. Now if you want to know how the laws were formulated you have to stop thinking of "legal" laws. Scientific laws are descriptions of observations.
My stupid game? Do you mean you cannot justify your beliefs about morality? Since you are so confident that you are right about everything, why the hesitation?
Why are there fundemental forces to begin with? Where are you getting the uniformity in nature from?
(February 13, 2012 at 2:01 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Everything I know is completely, demonstrably, and fundamentally wrong. Everything any of us knows with regards to science is a terrible mistake. We're all wrong. Now, explain to me why you are right.
Since you admit you're wrong about everything, you must now admit that scripture is the only book we have that contains an accurate record of our history. Only an omnipotent being would know those details, such as the age of the Earth, and the details of how it was created and what happened between now and then. Therefore, scripture is true and Jesus Christ is God.
Psalm 19:1-2
The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork. Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night sheweth knowledge.
Posts: 1327
Threads: 37
Joined: January 15, 2012
Reputation:
15
RE: Book of Acts: Pure Fantasy
February 13, 2012 at 10:50 pm
(February 13, 2012 at 9:58 pm)brotherlylove Wrote: I moved nothing; you simply selected an arbitrary definition of the word "created" and created a strawman argument with it. No, you moved the goalposts by trying to define what you wanted AFTER you were answered. I'm not going to play that stupid game and if you continue this conversation will quickly turn into derision. Quote:My stupid game? Do you mean you cannot justify your beliefs about morality? Since you are so confident that you are right about everything, why the hesitation?
Derision time you insolent fuckwad.
Posts: 23918
Threads: 300
Joined: June 25, 2011
Reputation:
151
RE: Book of Acts: Pure Fantasy
February 14, 2012 at 3:17 am
(February 13, 2012 at 9:58 pm)brotherlylove Wrote: Since you admit you're wrong about everything, you must now admit that scripture is the only book we have that contains an accurate record of our history. Only an omnipotent being would know those details, such as the age of the Earth, and the details of how it was created and what happened between now and then. Therefore, scripture is true and Jesus Christ is God.
You almost make me feel sorry for you. Then you say crap like this . Why are you here? Do you really think that if we can't figure out all the answers to all the questions right now then we must admit that science is useless, so God did it? How can you expect that to be persuasive here? The beginning of everything. If we don't know, then the bible must be right? Pathetic.
Posts: 3188
Threads: 8
Joined: December 9, 2011
Reputation:
31
RE: Book of Acts: Pure Fantasy
February 14, 2012 at 3:20 am
(February 13, 2012 at 9:58 pm)brotherlylove Wrote: There are also many parameters where there would be a Universe and existence, but no life. Therefore, they are tunable.
Such as? How do you know that with these parameters there would be a universe, but no life - not just life as we know it, but no life at all?
(February 13, 2012 at 9:58 pm)brotherlylove Wrote: I think you need to actually read the paper rather than skim it and pretend you know what you're talking about. The title of the paper is "Did the Universe have a beginning?" not, "Did the observable Universe have a beginning?", and then it goes on to refute eternal inflation, cyclic evolution and static seed scenerios. These theories cover both what we can and cannot observe.
One cannot refute something that one doesn't know about. Currently, scientists can only talk about the observable universe, since they do not know of any limits to the actual universe. Therefore, it is implicit in all such theories that when they are talking about the universe, they are talking about the observable universe.
(February 13, 2012 at 9:58 pm)brotherlylove Wrote: Feel free to demonstrate this evidence at any time.
The past.
(February 13, 2012 at 9:58 pm)brotherlylove Wrote: Again, this all contradicts temporal becoming, and if you want to say the past is an actual infinite, then you have all the logical absurdities and contradictions that go with it. If we were to subject every third past event from the actual infinite, it would still be an actual infinite.
Even if I was to concede that an infinite past is possible, which I am not, the mere possibility of it is not persausive; the problem being that you don't have an argument. You don't even have a model to refer to.
What contradictions?
Posts: 66326
Threads: 140
Joined: June 28, 2011
Reputation:
160
RE: Book of Acts: Pure Fantasy
February 14, 2012 at 9:28 am
(This post was last modified: February 14, 2012 at 9:30 am by The Grand Nudger.)
(February 13, 2012 at 9:58 pm)brotherlylove Wrote: Since you admit you're wrong about everything, you must now admit that scripture is the only book we have that contains an accurate record of our history. Only an omnipotent being would know those details, such as the age of the Earth, and the details of how it was created and what happened between now and then. Therefore, scripture is true and Jesus Christ is God.
No, I "mustn't", you must demonstrate this to be the case. I don't default to fairies. I think you missed the point entirely. I want to see what's left when bitching and moaning about some scientific conspiracy against christ isn't an option. Judging by the above, looks like nothing.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
|
