Subject:
|
Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 24 Oct 2006 21:43:49 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
4854 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Eaton wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote:
| |
| |
| |
Okay, then a rationalist is safe as long as he never asks the question WRT
to the origin of the universe. Convenient.
JOHN
|
As I said elsewhere in this thread there is overwhelming evidence for the
Big Bang hypothesis. I wouldn’t call that conveniently ignoring the
question, I would call that behaving like scientists and considering the
evidence at hand and what hyptheses best suit them.
|
Yeah, I meant to address this elsewhere and forgot: I’m not talking about
the Big Bang theory, which is entirely within the scope of scientific
scrutiny; I’m talking about stuff that set the Big Bang in motion previously
to the Big Event. That is outside the peruse of science. Don’t equate the
origin of the universe with the Big Bang theory.
|
Well, that’s pretty unfair. That’s like saying we NEED an answer, and if we
can’t come up with one, creationism is correct.
|
Now that’s unfair:-) I am NOT arguing for creationism. Science is about
explaining things. All I’m saying is that what happened pre Big Bang is
inexplicable.
| |
If you go back to 500 BC and
asked people why lightning happened, I’m sure they could come up with
answers. But just because they were the ONLY answers they were able to come
up with doesn’t make them right.
|
Agreed.
| |
Science makes no claim (that I know of) about what happened “before” the Big
Bang because we have no way of falsifying any not-already-falsified theories
which might provide explanation.
|
Thank you. That is entirely my point. Therefore any explanation about the
origin of the universe is outside the peruse of science, irrational, and
illogical to boot. But here it exists.
| |
My personal guess is that there’s no such thing as “before” the Big Bang. It
would be like me asking you “who created God?” or “have you stopped beating
your wife?” or what-have-you. The premise of the question is incorrect. But
that’s just my personal guess.
|
But that’s clearly a dodge in my mind. The one thing science does know is
that there was AN EVENT. The beginning of the universe happened at a point in
time. It is similar those questions you posed, because we are dealing outside
the bounds of logic and reason pre Big Bang, which is an uncomfortable place for
a person of science to be.
| |
To Tim’s point (as I’m suprised that Dave! hasn’t pointed out), there
actually is NOT an overwhelming amount of evidence for the Big Bang theory.
To be more accurate, there is a severe LACK of DISPROOF for the Big Bang. The
Big Bang theory, if accurate, has lots of falsifiable consequences (not that
I can even begin to list them or know much about them). Hence, the theory is
scientific because we can set up experiments and observe the outcome. If the
theory is correct, we expect to see a particular outcome. And sure enough,
that’s what we’ve seen. If we saw a DIFFERENT outcome, it could invalidate
the theory, and we’d need to come up with a new one.
The theory of creationism is not falsifiable, therefore, not science. The
best thing you can do is posit that creatures and objects appeared
*instantly*, inferring that something outside the realm of the measurable
universe was the cause. That’s falsifiable (not that we presently have the
tools to falsify it). But stating that an intelligent being did it is NOT
falsifiable. We may *believe* it, but we can’t *disprove* it, so we can’t say
with any degree of certainty that it’s true or not.
|
When I talk about “creationism”, I strictly refer to initiating the Big Bang and
then everything naturally happens from there. And yes, you are correct about it
not being science because it is not falsifiable, and you are correct in your
sidebar discussion with Tim.
JOHN
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
| (...) I'm not sure that it will be forever outside the scope of science. The more we learn, the more we discover. Take Brendan's sealed-closet example. And let's suppose we can walk around the closet. Well, we know whatever's in the closet has to (...) (18 years ago, 24-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
| (...) Well, that's pretty unfair. That's like saying we NEED an answer, and if we can't come up with one, creationism is correct. If you go back to 500 BC and asked people why lightning happened, I'm sure they could come up with answers. But just (...) (18 years ago, 24-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
86 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
