There has to be a God/Creator

[Faith No More]

Ok, so you explain it, but you can't! And the truth is NOBODY can unless they come to terms that there is a God!

But I don't have to explain a reason for why the golden ratio appears in nature. All I have to do is give an explanation for why you're argument is illogical. People never used to understand lightning so they attributed that to God too, which is exactly what you're doing here. When something is not understandable by today's standards you simply declare it must be the work of God and that's it. Since I myself can't explain it away, I will simply say, "it's magic," and there's no way for you to refute that. So until you can prove to me that it's not magic, I will not entertain your God theory.

[Eternity]

Please answer the question in a rational, logical way or move on!

[Statler Waldorf]

But I don't have to explain a reason for why the golden ratio appears in nature. All I have to do is give an explanation for why you're argument is illogical. People never used to understand lightning so they attributed that to God too, which is exactly what you're doing here. When something is not understandable by today's standards you simply declare it must be the work of God and that's it. Since I myself can't explain it away, I will simply say, "it's magic," and there's no way for you to refute that. So until you can prove to me that it's not magic, I will not entertain your God theory.

Hey FNM,

When you say people used to thnk lightning was attributed to God, are you referring to the God of the Bible or some other god?

Mind if I ask you about your "magic" analogy a bit?

[orogenicman]

How is it possible that mathematics, a product of human thought that is independent of experience, fits so excellently the objects of physical reality?

Who said mathematics is independant of experience? Do we not have to experience a circle before we can mathematically describe it?

So what does all this have to do with belief in God? Well, these numbers, as well as many other numeric sequences, continually appear in what man calls nature, but what I call Creation.

Some might also call this a slippery slope. Others might call it special pleading. Triangles also appear in nature. It doesn't naturally follow that just because they appear in nature that God somehow exists.

The spirals of a pinecone have a clockwise rotation, and an anti-clockwise rotation, and in both cases if the number of spirals is counted in each rotation, each count will be a number contained within the Fibonacci series of numbers (8 and 13). The same principle applies to a pineapple as well, but the numbers of spirals are 13 and 23, still numbers appearing in the Fibonacci series.

Are you serious? The spirals in a pinecone are related to its growth. And such a pattern isn't restricted to pinecones. I think you confuse the math with the phenomenon. In other words, the math doesn't bring about the phenomenon. Quite the opposite is true. The math came about to describe the phenomenon. That it does it so elegantly is a testament to the skills of the mathematician to discover the pattern, not to the supposedly magical powers of the universe. Johannes Kepler observed that the ratio of consecutive Fibonacci numbers converges. A pinecone also converges. The comedian Gallagher noted that the pyramids ending in a point at the top indicated a civilation with diminishing goals. 'Oh my that must be proof of the divine!' Oh please!

On so on and so forth.

"Who said mathematics is independant of experience?"
Einstein said this; the rest of your answer will go unread! As you really don't understand what is being said!

Please answer the question in a rational, logical way or move on!

And of course, being a physics whiz, you can cite exactly where Einstein made such a statement. Of course, mathematics is NOT independant of experience. To suggest otherwise is silly. Mathematics, my friend, evolved directly from mankind's experiences in the world and the need to explain why the world is the way it is. Without such experience, mathematics would not be possible or even necessary.

Secondly, it is you who are being illogical and irrational and certainly don't understand what you are talking about. What I posted was not only logically consistant, it is readily supported by heaps of data. Now, if you can't swim with us adults, I suggest you remain in the kiddy pool for now.

[Andrastos]

Ok, i reread your bs, you say it must be a intelligent designer, so why do mathematicians or theoretical physicists come forward with this, or are you just writing bollocks?

It is as far from bollocks as it gets!

Dispite your BS comment,

There are books written about it!

It's all over Youtube!

Einstein asked the question!

Actually if you read the bio of stephen hawking you will find him talking about God too! Seriously! But who want to tell the Christians they are right? I don't!

But what are you going to do if your are a mathematician or theoretical physicist? Accept there is a God and then what? What options do they have? Any rational person knows the Bible is BS! You could ask what religion is correct! But none of them make sense! Right? even new age! Really!

So who is God?

[Statler Waldorf]

---

How is it possible that mathematics, a product of human thought that is independent of experience, fits so excellently the objects of physical reality?

Who said mathematics is independant of experience? Do we not have to experience a circle before we can mathematically describe it?

So what does all this have to do with belief in God? Well, these numbers, as well as many other numeric sequences, continually appear in what man calls nature, but what I call Creation.

Some might also call this a slippery slope. Others might call it special pleading. Triangles also appear in nature. It doesn't naturally follow that just because they appear in nature that God somehow exists.

The spirals of a pinecone have a clockwise rotation, and an anti-clockwise rotation, and in both cases if the number of spirals is counted in each rotation, each count will be a number contained within the Fibonacci series of numbers (8 and 13). The same principle applies to a pineapple as well, but the numbers of spirals are 13 and 23, still numbers appearing in the Fibonacci series.

Are you serious? The spirals in a pinecone are related to its growth. And such a pattern isn't restricted to pinecones. I think you confuse the math with the phenomenon. In other words, the math doesn't bring about the phenomenon. Quite the opposite is true. The math came about to describe the phenomenon. That it does it so elegantly is a testament to the skills of the mathematician to discover the pattern, not to the supposedly magical powers of the universe. Johannes Kepler observed that the ratio of consecutive Fibonacci numbers converges. A pinecone also converges. The comedian Gallagher noted that the pyramids ending in a point at the top indicated a civilation with diminishing goals. 'Oh my that must be proof of the divine!' Oh please!

On so on and so forth.

"Who said mathematics is independant of experience?"
Einstein said this; the rest of your answer will go unread! As you really don't understand what is being said!

Please answer the question in a rational, logical way or move on!

And of course, being a physics whiz, you can cite exactly where Einstein made such a statement. Of course, mathematics is NOT independant of experience. To suggest otherwise is silly. Mathematics, my friend, evolved directly from mankind's experiences in the world and the need to explain why the world is the way it is. Without such experience, mathematics would not be possible or even necessary.

Secondly, it is you who are being illogical and irrational and certainly don't understand what you are talking about. What I posted was not only logically consistant, it is readily supported by heaps of data. Now, if you can't swim with us adults, I suggest you remain in the kiddy pool for now.

---

I think you may be missing the point OGN, of course mathematics would not be possible without anyone to do it, but the mathematical relationships and constants we see in nature would still exist even if people were not around to describe them is the point being made I believe. Somebody please correct me if I am wrong though.

[Andrastos]

Ok, i reread your bs, you say it must be a intelligent designer, so why do mathematicians or theoretical physicists come forward with this, or are you just writing bollocks?

It is as far from bollocks as it gets!

Dispite your BS comment,

There are books written about it!

It's all over Youtube!

Einstein asked the question!

Actually if you read the bio of stephen hawking you will find him talking about God too! Seriously! But who want to tell the Christians they are right? I don't!

But what are you going to do if your are a mathematician or theoretical physicist? Accept there is a God and then what? What options do they have? Any rational person knows the Bible is BS! You could ask what religion is correct! But none of them make sense! Right? even new age! Really!

So who is God?

Stephen hawking mainly refered to it as "the presence" but he does mention "the presence", as being God once or twice! But actually hes wrong too, it's a spirit with him, not God! But thats another story!

---

Time for you to go.

So many rude people here!

Can I remind you, your just doing yourself harm by doing this!

You reap what you sow!

The simple law of compensation that most people are not aware of!

---

---

How is it possible that mathematics, a product of human thought that is independent of experience, fits so excellently the objects of physical reality?

Who said mathematics is independant of experience? Do we not have to experience a circle before we can mathematically describe it?

So what does all this have to do with belief in God? Well, these numbers, as well as many other numeric sequences, continually appear in what man calls nature, but what I call Creation.

Some might also call this a slippery slope. Others might call it special pleading. Triangles also appear in nature. It doesn't naturally follow that just because they appear in nature that God somehow exists.

The spirals of a pinecone have a clockwise rotation, and an anti-clockwise rotation, and in both cases if the number of spirals is counted in each rotation, each count will be a number contained within the Fibonacci series of numbers (8 and 13). The same principle applies to a pineapple as well, but the numbers of spirals are 13 and 23, still numbers appearing in the Fibonacci series.

Are you serious? The spirals in a pinecone are related to its growth. And such a pattern isn't restricted to pinecones. I think you confuse the math with the phenomenon. In other words, the math doesn't bring about the phenomenon. Quite the opposite is true. The math came about to describe the phenomenon. That it does it so elegantly is a testament to the skills of the mathematician to discover the pattern, not to the supposedly magical powers of the universe. Johannes Kepler observed that the ratio of consecutive Fibonacci numbers converges. A pinecone also converges. The comedian Gallagher noted that the pyramids ending in a point at the top indicated a civilation with diminishing goals. 'Oh my that must be proof of the divine!' Oh please!

On so on and so forth.

"Who said mathematics is independant of experience?"
Einstein said this; the rest of your answer will go unread! As you really don't understand what is being said!

Please answer the question in a rational, logical way or move on!

And of course, being a physics whiz, you can cite exactly where Einstein made such a statement. Of course, mathematics is NOT independant of experience. To suggest otherwise is silly. Mathematics, my friend, evolved directly from mankind's experiences in the world and the need to explain why the world is the way it is. Without such experience, mathematics would not be possible or even necessary.

Secondly, it is you who are being illogical and irrational and certainly don't understand what you are talking about. What I posted was not only logically consistant, it is readily supported by heaps of data. Now, if you can't swim with us adults, I suggest you remain in the kiddy pool for now.

---

I think you may be missing the point OGN, of course mathematics would not be possible without anyone to do it, but the mathematical relationships and constants we see in nature would still exist even if people were not around to describe them is the point being made I believe. Somebody please correct me if I am wrong though.

Yes your right! Before God Created the universe, he/she had to create the laws that would govern it! And even they are based on math! From the Law of gravity to the highst laws of Love! EVERYTHING she created is based on math!

[Epimethean]

"Stephen hawking mainly refered to it as "the presence" but he does mention "the presence", as being God once or twice! But actually hes wrong too, it's a spirit with him, not God! But thats another story!"

Time to catch up on ol' Steve. He recently said that based on everything he has learned since writing ABHoT, he finds no evidence of heaven or god and can no longer find reason to leave such a question mark in place.

Please stop trying to use the great scientists to support your points. You are perverting their statements in order to extend your own.

[Violet]

I am of no religion ...
Please don't make the mistake of classifying me as you would the typical religious believer!

---

---

Please hide this on page five so that people with epilepsy don't conk out.

I wonder why this thread is popular enough to gain 10 pages inside of a few hours... I'll have to respond to it I guess.

[Minimalist]

---

99.9999% of the Universe is hard vacuum.
99.9999% of what's left is flaming nuclear fireballs.
99.9999% of what's left from that is cold interstellar gas.
99.9999% of what's left from that is barren, airless balls of rock or gas giants, neither of which can sustain life.
99.9999% of what's left from that is barely habitable planets like Mars.
Then we come to Earth.
The Creator is an idiot. Or would be if one existed.

---

Huh? How did you logically get from those figures to concluding the Creator is an idiot?

There is no creator to be an idiot. People who profess to believe in such utter nonsense are the idiots.