 | | Re: We're being attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of culture!
|
|
(...) I think you misunderstood me. I meant that the origin of the universe (however it came to be) demands a leap of faith. At some point, logically, something came from nothing. I don't believe it is valid to simply state that "the universe always (...) (19 years ago, 11-Apr-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: We're being attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of culture!
|
|
(...) I don't think I'd consider it a dodge, really. My own thought on it is that there's no such thing as "first". The concept of time is just a perception you have that appears linear. I happen to think it's more circular in nature, without a real (...) (19 years ago, 11-Apr-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: We're being attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of culture!
|
|
(...) Science doesn't need to answer question for which it doesn't have enough evidence to address. According to the Big Bang Theory, one cannot ask what caused the Big Bang or where the Big Band came from, because (according to the theory), all (...) (19 years ago, 11-Apr-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: We're being attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of culture!
|
|
(...) Therefore science cannot encompass everything. That stated, something must exist outside of science. Let that something be God. Dave K (...) My math teacher in high school had that on his wall, along with other math related oddities. I (...) (19 years ago, 11-Apr-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: We're being attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of culture!
|
|
(...) No one said that science was everything to everyone. Literature, for example, is outside the scope of science (for the time being). (...) Ahh.. see if only it were so simple. Is it a God (all powerful, omnipotent) or a god (limited (...) (19 years ago, 11-Apr-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: We're being attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of culture!
|
|
(...) First of all, let's address this "Big Band" issue. I don't have much fondness for Lawrence Welk, but I guess Glenn Miller's okay. And Guy Lombardo? Don't get me started... (...) Not so fast! "Outside" is a dangerously tricky word in this (...) (19 years ago, 11-Apr-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: We're being attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of culture!
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Leonard Hoffman wrote: <snip> (...) And I would agree with the above--which God and such--all great questions. That said, the main agruement from the 'science camp' is that there can be no God because there is no proof (...) (19 years ago, 11-Apr-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: We're being attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of culture!
|
|
(...) Well, to expand upon the thoughts of the 'science camp' (which, if we wanna use isms, is Mechanistic Naturalism) - we can use Occam's Razor to cut away every explanation except the most simplistic. There is no supernatural diety, the entire (...) (19 years ago, 11-Apr-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: We're being attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of culture!
|
|
(...) Actually, I think the technical reason is that God doesn't exist because there can be no *disproof* of God. IE, no matter what sort of tests you could set up, you'd never be able to *disprove* God's existance no matter what the outcome of (...) (19 years ago, 11-Apr-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: We're being attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of culture!
|
|
(...) I will state again that my God isn't the 'god of the gap', so you don't have to go looking for it. Furthermore, I didn't consign 'God' to whatever science cannot answer. If that's the interpretation then I didn't make my point clear. Let's (...) (19 years ago, 11-Apr-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: We're being attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of culture!
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote: <snip> (...) And this may be the crux of my problem with Science. Science categorically denies the existence of anything it cannot investigate. It requires proof, something that is categorically (...) (19 years ago, 11-Apr-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: We're being attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of culture!
|
|
(...) It originated by a story about that, but I don't think anyone is defending it. It is more about a critique of Science WRT to the origin of the universe. JOHN (19 years ago, 11-Apr-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: We're being attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of culture!
|
|
(...) Funny. Here you argue against teleology (the world is as it is because it was {designed}) (...) And then here you finish an arguement {for} teleology. A question for you: Isn't it possible that these coincidental parts of physics (water being (...) (19 years ago, 11-Apr-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: We're being attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of culture!
|
|
(...) No doubt. The same way Apollo Landing denyers are a critique to History. Or Alien abductionists are a critique to Governmental policy. Or, I hate to say it(1), as Holocaust denyers are a critique to History. My point is that I have yet to hear (...) (19 years ago, 11-Apr-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: We're being attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of culture!
|
|
(...) Really? Upon what do you base that observation? Because based on all of my observations, everything known has a beginning and an end (except the existence of the universe). (...) My point was that it is UNscientific to generate a theory by (...) (19 years ago, 11-Apr-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: We're being attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of culture!
|
|
(...) An intelligent Designer could argue that God initiated the Big Bang. How can Science disagree? It isn't possible. The study of the origin of the universe by Science is in and of itself psuedoscience. JOHN (19 years ago, 11-Apr-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: We're being attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of culture!
|
|
(...) I'm not comfortable with the capital "S," by the way, but I suppose that's a stylistic choice rather than a deification of "Science." But I digress... I think that that's a mischaracterization, though. Regarding something that it can't (...) (19 years ago, 11-Apr-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: We're being attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of culture!
|
|
(...) "Where one cannot speak, there one must be silent." Here, we are confusing the scientific attitude with the attitude of scientists. Science doesn't take a stand on God, since the very idea, as you point out, is beyond the scope of science. (...) (19 years ago, 11-Apr-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: We're being attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of culture!
|
|
(...) Agreed. Which is why I have yet to see any science argue about events before the Big Bang(1). Those questions are best left to philosophers. -Lenny (1)= Well, not entirely true. Stephen Hawking has an interesting idea about the history of the (...) (19 years ago, 11-Apr-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: We're being attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of culture!
|
|
(...) Sounds wise. Therefore, let science be silent on the matter of the origin of the universe. (...) But so is the origin of the universe! (which is my whole point!) (...) Only if you are claiming that they are not physical. (...) There is no (...) (19 years ago, 11-Apr-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: We're being attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of culture!
|
|
(...) I don't make a statement about the origin. My statement would be: "There is not enough evidence to make an educated statement about the origin of the universe." The origin being defined as the moment(s) before the Big Bang. That statement (...) (19 years ago, 11-Apr-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: We're being attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of culture!
|
|
(...) It sort of bugs me when people who are referring to God not capitalize it in an attempt to somehow disacknowledge His existence, but I digress (and demote "Science" to "science") (...) I like Lenny's statement, but I think there is much (...) (19 years ago, 11-Apr-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: We're being attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of culture!
|
|
(...) Oops! Did I do that? If so, I didn't mean to--sorry! I usually try to refer to the Christian deity as capital-G "God," but I know that I've sometimes included him in the rhetorical group lower-case-g "gods." I try to use the latter reference (...) (19 years ago, 11-Apr-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: We're being attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of culture!
|
|
(...) It's primarily based on what I know about time considering its relation to energy, and how time is actually unconstant. Also, a sneaking suspicion that time is "curved" just like everything else. Similar to how we once thought the Earth was (...) (19 years ago, 11-Apr-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: We're being attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of culture!
|
|
Thank you for finally admitting that Christianity is irrational. (...) -- Tom Stangl *(URL) Visual FAQ home *(URL) Visual FAQ Home (19 years ago, 17-Apr-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: We're being attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of culture!
|
|
(...) I said Jesus' divinity was irrational. But what is so terrible about being irrational? Is Pi bad? JOHN (19 years ago, 17-Apr-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
