Why does science always upstage God?

[Billy Bob]

Again, YOU...."This is completely understood by science and is called Natural Selection."

What the hell, what is selecting?!!! 

Variable rates of survival and reproduction based upon heritable traits within breeding populations.  Glad I could clear that up for you.

Ok, follow the bouncing ball. First we need a universe and you never got around how that happened naturally. You skipped then how we got the fine-tuning. Then you skipped how life came about on its own. Then you jumped way forward that there is life with a selection of traits to choose from. 

So, first show that creation, the fine tuning, AND life came about on its own. 

The topic is Why Does Science Always Upstage God? I'm showing you all it does NOT and you're one of the many examples of that. All you have is bluff. I love to show that all you have is bluff. It's fun but so easy too.

[The Grand Nudger]

Well, if you'd like to "follow science" you could, and..for example, you would be able to personally verify that selection effects breeding populations. Plenty of believing people have done so and concluded, then, that natural selection must have been how goddidit.

It would seem, to some, to be ridiculous to reject gods work for it's naturalness.

[Billy Bob]

"On evidence, you haven't provided any so there is nothing to get around."

I clearly did and you can lie all you want.

All you done in relation to giving evidence is to prove that you don't understand the con you're trying to run.  Because you're so far off on what the science says and how much evidence backs it, it's clear you don't understan what you're saying.  You're a cut price Banana man.

"All you done in relation to giving evidence is to prove that you don't understand the con you're trying to run."

Run? I have no reason to run. I enjoy showing what fools you are that think science always upstages God. You're jokes. Look how you lie and say I need to run. Just another lie from you that said I didn't provide evidence so there is nothing to get around. Anyone with a fraction of integrity saw that I started with creation and gave evidence that it had to be supernatural. You have NO integrity. You see a need to lie. I love bringing out what you are. As if I had to because you make it so CLEAR you love to resort to lying.

[Billy Bob]

"Given that there are terrestrial environs where humans can't survive (at least not without very special help), it's mighty hard to make the case that even the Earth  is finely tuned for human life."

Says the person who is alive on this earth.

Yes, I'm alive on this Earth, but they are more places on this Earth where I can't survive unaided than places where I can. 

If a supernatural being fine-tuned the universe for human life, why can't I survive in a geothermal vent, or under six tonnes of gravel? Why is it that I have to breathe a mixture of nitrogen/oxygen and not sulfur dioxide? Why do I need supplemental oxygen to ascend to great heights or descend to great depths? Why can't I thrive in conditions where polar bears or tardigrades seem to make a good living?

The most - the very most - you can claim is that a very, very narrow range of living conditions have been fine-tuned for human beings. And even that claim is more than a little specious, since evolutionary theory has already answered it.

You're very stupid.

Boru

"If a supernatural being fine-tuned the universe for human life, why can't I survive in a geothermal vent, or under six tonnes of gravel?"

Look, go be stupid with someone else. If that is your standard for saying the earth is not suitable for life, then so be it. I'm not going to your low standard of making that stupid comment. From the same joke who also can't take things in order that we first needed a universe. So you skip to fine-tuning and make this stooooooo-pid comment...

"If a supernatural being fine-tuned the universe for human life, why can't I survive in a geothermal vent, or under six tonnes of gravel?"

The big laugh is from the title of this topic, as if you fools take science seriously.

One more time for absurdness.....

"If a supernatural being fine-tuned the universe for human life, why can't I survive in a geothermal vent, or under six tonnes of gravel?"

[The Grand Nudger]

Yet another strange constraint on a god. That this, this finely tuned universe, is the only way that a god could have made a universe for human life.

We hear the next life has none of these limitations. It's a mystery.

[Peebothuhlu]

 


(Hello and welcome to the forums Billy Bob)

Not at work.

[Fake Messiah]

One more time for absurdness.....

"If a supernatural being fine-tuned the universe for human life, why can't I survive in a geothermal vent, or under six tonnes of gravel?"

Billy, you are the one claiming that the universe is fine-tuned for life, and yet the universe is all dead matter except for Earth which is minuscule compared to the universe. And on top of that, Earth is full of deadly stuff, like sun rays give you skin cancer which is not fine-tuned for life.

[Angrboda]

Our current laws of physics are incapable of accurately describing the universe before the inception of the big bang and so our laws are not knowably applicable at the time when the universe ostensibly began.

But keep spinning your outrageous fantasy for anyone bored enough to listen.

YOU chose to pick the naturalistic way. YOU DID! We have NO science to show in the natural realm the laws could not have existed.

Sure. I agree. But your ask was that the laws do not apply, not that they could not apply. Those are two very different standards, and the moving of the goalposts from one to the other makes your prior argument into Swiss cheese. You challenged us to show that they do not apply, thus necessitating a cause that was not natural. The fact that the laws could have applied means nothing because that means they didn't necessarily apply, and since they didn't necessarily apply, a supernatural cause is no longer necessarily required, and your conclusion no longer follows from the premises. And even your changed argument is moot because the laws as we have them are knowably incorrect, so those laws specifically can only show that an incorrect understanding of the origin leads to what is at the end of the day, nothing more than a potentially incorrect conclusion. Possibly wrong is not necessarily correct, and never the twain shall meet.

Don't worry, even if you lose here, you and your family can always play the home game.

[Angrboda]

Variable rates of survival and reproduction based upon heritable traits within breeding populations.  Glad I could clear that up for you.

Ok, follow the bouncing ball. First we need a universe and you never got around how that happened naturally. You skipped then how we got the fine-tuning. Then you skipped how life came about on its own. Then you jumped way forward that there is life with a selection of traits to choose from. 

So, first show that creation, the fine tuning, AND life came about on its own. 

The topic is Why Does Science Always Upstage God? I'm showing you all it does NOT and you're one of the many examples of that. All you have is bluff. I love to show that all you have is bluff. It's fun but so easy too.

So, in other words, this whole thread is you laboriously knocking down a straw man. Nicely done.

[Angrboda]

Anyone with a fraction of integrity saw that I started with creation and gave evidence that it had to be supernatural.

Evidence which, when it was pointed out to you was not actually valid, prompted you like a fetid creationist to up and change your argument to one that no longer required the supernatural.

Nicely done. You have my esteem and then some.