Religion Religions and rudeness.

Snake_Baker

L'enfant terrible
Joined
Apr 24, 2013
Posts
40,850
Likes
73,328
Location
inside your head
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
The Unicornia Reactants
I am merely pointing out science is not the answer in this situation.
To prove "faith" or "god"?

it brings up more questions than it answers.
Yes and no, depending upon your perspective.

and yet people want proof in a creator.. and choose science that answers with nothingness..
Yes, but "nothingness" IS an answer.

which is why Dawkins talks about aliens and they might have created everything

he knows something created everything.. he puts his faith in aliens and not God!

but who created Dawkins' aliens?

nothing has existed without something that created it.. even Dawkins'scientific explanation of aliens!

anyway his answer is less satisfactory than God!
Atheism is not built solely upon his musings, but in my personal opinion, he puts a lot more on the table than any theist has ever managed to deliver.

Dawkins is a scientist. Dawkins isn't science in it's entirety personified. Far from it.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

TheHeatleyStand

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Posts
5,961
Likes
1,156
Location
Iceland
AFL Club
Carlton
Completely agree. And the further comments only reinforce it. The writing style alone had my alarm bells ringing.
Ahhh because you guys can’t answer the questions asked of you with any reason.. you resort to attacks.. nice!

Why do you not answer the questions I’ve asked? When u can.. and you can provide proof you’re free to laugh and abuse ... when u can’t.. your attacks don’t excuse your lack of proof.. it’s how it works !.. lol
 

TheHeatleyStand

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Posts
5,961
Likes
1,156
Location
Iceland
AFL Club
Carlton
To prove "faith" or "god"?



Yes and no, depending upon your perspective.



Yes, but "nothingness" IS an answer.



Atheism is not built solely upon his musings, but in my personal opinion, he puts a lot more on the table than any theist has ever managed to deliver.

Dawkins is a scientist. Dawkins isn't science in it's entirety personified. Far from it.
Nothingness isn’t the answer.. proof is the answer.. use any atheist scientist you like to prove that the a Big Bang happened without cause.. and that from random chaos comes perfection !

Use any scientific laws or formulas you like..or any supercomputer ..but provide a scientifically proven answer..


I don’t mean just you.. but anybody here! ...


the Narrative that’s taught as fact.. most people believe it until they’re questioned.!

Then u get those that realise it’s a narrative without proof.. and they get angry.. but I will turn the other cheek to their barbs..because I know they’re not angry at me but at the fact that they believe a narrative taught to them by others which is not proof ..

Christopher Hutchins and his little green men...


Funny..
 

Roylion

Moderator
Joined
Oct 17, 2000
Posts
13,077
Likes
8,670
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Other Teams
Fitzroy Football Club
Moderator #256
I am merely pointing out science is not the answer in this situation.. it brings up more questions than it answers.. and yet people want proof in a creator..
Of course they do. A claim is being made about a creator. Science makes no such claim.

which is why Dawkins talks about aliens and they might have created everything
He says no such thing.

he knows something created everything.. he puts his faith in aliens and not God!
He says no such thing.

nothing has existed without something that created it.. even Dawkins'scientific explanation of aliens!
Dawkins makes absolutely no scientific explanation of aliens. This is just plain dishonesty or at best misinterpretation from you.

anyway his answer is less satisfactory than God!
Dawkin's has no answer. Aliens or anything else. He's said that clearly.
 

Snake_Baker

L'enfant terrible
Joined
Apr 24, 2013
Posts
40,850
Likes
73,328
Location
inside your head
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
The Unicornia Reactants

skilts

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Feb 14, 2002
Posts
17,611
Likes
6,154
Location
South-West Gippsland
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Other Teams
Lexton, Northcote Park
Nothingness is an answer.

Ever heard of a thing called a vacuum?

Ever asked a question and not gotten a response?

Ever seen proof of life after death?
For a vacuum to be created there must also be in play a container of some sort, which presumably cannot constitute a no thing.

Because a question has not been answered, that doesn't eliminate the action of the asking, which is, in itself, some thing.

However, your last point almost reaches the nub of what I think of when I contemplate no thingness. Rather than an after life, my thought goes to the period before we are born. We are in the womb for nine or so months, but have no recollection of that. We are almost here. (An argument against the appropriateness of the word, 'here' could be mounted). Due to the peculiar things to do with time, we are almost certainly, always 'there'.)

That is what I conjure in my mind when I think of no thingness. It is an essentially flawed and useless exercise, like all questions which have no answer. That doesn't stop me thinking about it. Like football it is a useless pursuit and therein lies its fascination.

All in all, a very stimulating post, and for that matter, thread.
 

Leeda

Talons B Sharp
Joined
Sep 26, 2012
Posts
4,571
Likes
771
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Roger, Serena, Rafa, Novak
Is it outright rudeness to talk to strangers about your religion, or just on the fringe of impoliteness?
you like to think that you can chat to anyone about anything and about religions..
however, you should always like to think that chatting about stuff, will not have to be about checking the persons entire personal history
and therefore checking all that you want to say or want to hear..

gather the balls people.. we can't be so precious. thanks Byng for the thought.
 

Leeda

Talons B Sharp
Joined
Sep 26, 2012
Posts
4,571
Likes
771
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Roger, Serena, Rafa, Novak
Just thought of this.. Is PM another version of Pum Mel.. I;ll take my short pants off when they cry fowl..
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Snake_Baker

L'enfant terrible
Joined
Apr 24, 2013
Posts
40,850
Likes
73,328
Location
inside your head
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
The Unicornia Reactants
For a vacuum to be created there must also be in play a container of some sort, which presumably cannot constitute a no thing.

Because a question has not been answered, that doesn't eliminate the action of the asking, which is, in itself, some thing.

However, your last point almost reaches the nub of what I think of when I contemplate no thingness. Rather than an after life, my thought goes to the period before we are born. We are in the womb for nine or so months, but have no recollection of that. We are almost here. (An argument against the appropriateness of the word, 'here' could be mounted). Due to the peculiar things to do with time, we are almost certainly, always 'there'.)

That is what I conjure in my mind when I think of no thingness. It is an essentially flawed and useless exercise, like all questions which have no answer. That doesn't stop me thinking about it. Like football it is a useless pursuit and therein lies its fascination.

All in all, a very stimulating post, and for that matter, thread.

As you would well know my metaphysical friend, you cannot contemplate "nothingness" because you would have to exist in it at the same time.

However, for the purposes of dealing with a cherry picking theist science denier, it will do.
 

Leeda

Talons B Sharp
Joined
Sep 26, 2012
Posts
4,571
Likes
771
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Roger, Serena, Rafa, Novak
As you would well know my metaphysical friend, you cannot contemplate "nothingness" because you would have to exist in it at the same time.

However, for the purposes of dealing with a cherry picking theist science denier, it will do.
lol my /our friend Skilts always purports to have a knowledge of outer space and with a kick to the nether regions for the boys
and with a handball to the upper regions for the female tragic..
 

Snake_Baker

L'enfant terrible
Joined
Apr 24, 2013
Posts
40,850
Likes
73,328
Location
inside your head
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
The Unicornia Reactants
lol my /our friend Skilts always purports to have a knowledge of outer space and with a kick to the nether regions for the boys
and with a handball to the upper regions for the female tragic..

How's the performance art career working out for you?
 
Joined
Mar 24, 2018
Posts
584
Likes
1,106
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Ahhh because you guys can’t answer the questions asked of you with any reason.. you resort to attacks.. nice!


Why do you not answer the questions I’ve asked? When u can.. and you can provide proof you’re free to laugh and abuse ... when u can’t.. your attacks don’t excuse your lack of proof.. it’s how it works !.. lol
Im not attacking you. Without wishing to be unkind, you have a writing style that is very unusual. Both the content and delivery lead me, rightly or wrongly, to make assumptions about you.

As far as I can see you haven’t asked any questions of me so I’m not sure what you’d like me to answer.

science without proof?

any quantum scientist will tell you there's no proof in that kind of science

it's no different but without the morals
I honestly think you misunderstand the basics here. A scientist of any standing will not make an assertion without facts. Do you have any idea of the mathematics that leads these people to form ideas about quantum theory? They’re not pulling this stuff out of their arses. Is any quantum scientist claiming to have a complete understanding of the universe?
 

TheHeatleyStand

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Posts
5,961
Likes
1,156
Location
Iceland
AFL Club
Carlton
Of course they do. A claim is being made about a creator. Science makes no such claim.



He says no such thing.



He says no such thing.



Dawkins makes absolutely no scientific explanation of aliens. This is just plain dishonesty or at best misinterpretation from you.



Dawkin's has no answer. Aliens or anything else. He's said that clearly.
I agree he has no answers

and must my writing style be usual?

do you like everything to fit in the consensus you dwell in?

I think that's the problem with most people today!

I feel like I'm unique

you feel like I shouldn't be unique

I should agree with your narratives that you have no answers in

and I should have a ' usual' writing style too

I bet you don't like LGBT community and you tell them they're unusual also?

or are you going to try and tell me my writing style is unusual but they're usual

either way you need to not hang out inside of the box and realise I don't need to be you!
 

Roylion

Moderator
Joined
Oct 17, 2000
Posts
13,077
Likes
8,670
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Other Teams
Fitzroy Football Club
Moderator #268
I agree he has no answers
You said he was providing an answer

"which is why Dawkins talks about aliens and they might have created everything."

Why should I believe your claim of 'God' is correct?

I bet you don't like LGBT community and you tell them they're unusual also?
What? How is this relevant to anything that's been discussed? Strawman argument.
 
Last edited:

Roylion

Moderator
Joined
Oct 17, 2000
Posts
13,077
Likes
8,670
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Other Teams
Fitzroy Football Club
Moderator #269
I honestly think you misunderstand the basics here. A scientist of any standing will not make an assertion without facts.
This is the problem. He doesn't understand science. The reason there is 'consensus' amongst scientists is because all the collected evidence across a number of scientific fields supports a particular theory such as that of 'Evolution' or the 'Big Bang'.

No piece of evidence collected thus far has falsified either.
 

Total Power

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 19, 2004
Posts
26,359
Likes
7,300
Location
Grand Finals
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Team Rafael Nadal
Empty space between matter (i.e., what is informally called a vacuum) is never completely empty; it is still filled with the quantum fields emanating from the matter. Just like the space between the sun and the planets is not empty but filled with the gravitational field. If this field is strong enough one can extract energy from it. For example, a ball falling in a conventional vacuum gains kinetic energy from the gravitational field.

Vacuum is in fact not empty. According to our current understanding all of space is permeated by fields which due to quantum mechanical effects only tend around a zero energy value. This means that the vacuum is subject to fluctuations in the fields permeating it.


http://www.hep.caltech.edu/~phys199/lectures/lect5_6_cas.pdf

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_state

https://curiosity.com/topics/empty-...searchers-now-have-direct-evidence-curiosity/
 
Last edited:

Total Power

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 19, 2004
Posts
26,359
Likes
7,300
Location
Grand Finals
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Team Rafael Nadal
This is the problem. He doesn't understand science. The reason there is 'consensus' amongst scientists is because all the collected evidence across a number of scientific fields supports a particular theory such as that of 'Evolution' or the 'Big Bang'.

No piece of evidence collected thus far has falsified either.
I agree but science in general is a tough to grasp and misinterpreted by both sides. Take consciousness for example, neuroscience can't define it, yet so many assume it's a product of the brain when science is silent about this. There are hundreds if not thousands of hypothesis but no workable theory

. Just look at how vaccum is misunderstood as nothingness from so called warriors of science.
 

Total Power

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 19, 2004
Posts
26,359
Likes
7,300
Location
Grand Finals
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Team Rafael Nadal
9

a vacuum isn’t nothing.. there’s matter in any vacuum.. lol

Now you’re making things up
There is no matter in vacuum but it doesn't mean its nothingness either. Jesus, just stop with science, just stick to what you know.
 
Last edited:

TheHeatleyStand

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Posts
5,961
Likes
1,156
Location
Iceland
AFL Club
Carlton
There is no matter in vacuum but it doesn't mean its nothingness either. Jesus, just stop with science, just stick to what you know.
There is no matter in a vacuum mate lol

there's just less matter in a vacuum

there are always partial atoms
but in language you can refer to a vacuum
but in reality what you're suggesting doesn't exist

ok so you're using language as science
 

Total Power

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 19, 2004
Posts
26,359
Likes
7,300
Location
Grand Finals
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Team Rafael Nadal
There is no matter in a vacuum mate lol

there's just less matter in a vacuum

there are always partial atoms
but in language you can refer to a vacuum
but in reality what you're suggesting doesn't exist

ok so you're using language as science
The reality is you should not talk about subjects you don't understand, starting from simple things like evolution and things like Quantum Field theory is way beyond your reach. You don't even know what matter is. I have provided the links above, read. Not only you don't understand science, you post stuff that makes you look downright stupid. You dont even know what partial charge atoms are, PTA's cannot exist in a perfect vacuum and virtual particles are not really what you think it is, virtual particles are not matter. If you want a TECHNICAL answer here it goes: The entropy of the vacuum in quantum mechanics is exactly ZERO, and that's really THE POINT. The entropy has to be exactly zero because it's the integral of an entropy density and like charge density, its the time component of a 4-vector. Any nonzero value of this 4-vector would imply a violation of the Lorentz symmetry because the vector (rho, 0, 0, 0) only has vanishing spatial components in one preferred inertial frame. Microscopically, itss EXACTLY zero because the entropy is S = k*ln(N) where "N" is the number of macroscopically indistinguishable pure states, and for the vacuum, N=1 because the vacuum is the unique ground state.

the vacuum is always EXACTLY the same, measurements of local fields yield values that are only predictable probabilistically, but all the probabilistic distributions for them are fully determined from the information that it's the vacuum, and there can't exist any "other vacuum" (like partial charged Atoms) that would produce other predictions (different probability distributions).

I am well read on this subject. Accept when you are wrong, only then you can start to learn. I have made an effort to educate you, but you are on your own now.
 
Top Bottom