Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I agree with Harry. Or at least, we have nothing to go on to determine what is "likely" and what is not, so it's up for grabs.
I am using the creationist argument that very complex things are less likely to be created by blind chance, and by taking that to it's logical conclusion, it is also less likely they would just exist for no reason. And an all knowing god would need to be very complex, so very unlikely.
Of course there are the ad hoc excuses that this god is immaterial, but as we have no evidence for an immaterial intelligence being able to exist, we can ignore that assumption as unreasonable. It also does not answer the question of how a first cause creator god knows things.
Even then...so what? So what if the universe is 100 TRILLION years old? Does that change the fact that it needed to be caused/created?
You are asking the wrong questions!
The observable universe is measured to be over 13 billion years old. What was going on 100 TRILLION years before that is one question. Then there is what was going on all time before that...
Unless we come up with a better answer, a Creator is the most likely answer. Not sure why you and others can't seem to really grasp that, or are willing to go with that.
I've read and I think I understand why you think God is a better answer, but clearly you don't understand the reasons it is not. You don't seem to understand all that is incongruous with your logic in any case.
Doesn’t the same apply to those who fill in that blank by believing that a creator does not exist?, i.e, “Believe without evidence”.
No. It is not the same at all...
You hear a loud bang in the dark. Somewhere off in the distance, and you have no real way to know what caused it. Is it the same to conclude it was caused by a guess on your part without any evidence to support it? The same as accepting you don't know what caused the loud bang? How can ANYONE think so?
This too is the sort of pretzel logic that apparently "works" for some people, but really it simply does not.
I agree with Harry. Or at least, we have nothing to go on to determine what is "likely" and what is not, so it's up for grabs. But as Fundie said earlier, "So what?" Is a sure answer to "What started the Big Bang" a real necessity to our current lives? As scientists are well aware, there is nothing wrong with the answer "We don't know."
Part of what I call the "slow maturing of man." AKA as not jumping to unwarranted conclusion(s)...
Not really. Because even without a settled explanatory framework, there are scientifically valid hypothesis that are far more likely to bear fruit than a magical explanation. So it is not "faith" in the religious sense but faith in the colloquial sense, that is, a reasonable belief based on past experience and existing patterns.
This subtlety is apt to be lost on a lot of people, though, because they doggedly assert that although many words have multiple definitions, this word "faith" has only one: theirs. In fact, in this case, the two definitions are almost opposites.
OK mine is “Faith”
And since science doesn’t have an answer, what oracle have you used to arrive at the conclusion that a creator does not exist?
Absence of evidence is the evidence of absence?
And since science doesn’t have an answer, what oracle have you used to arrive that the conclusion that a creator does not exist?
Absence of evidence is the evidence of absence?
Good point. But absence of evidence does not equate to god, either.
And since science doesn’t have an answer, what oracle have you used to arrive at the conclusion that a creator does not exist?
Absence of evidence is the evidence of absence?
Faith is obviously one answer that comes up a lot, but faith is not based on logic or reason, and this too we're all best to simply accept or we just waste more time wasting time...
What I believe to be important here is not to focus so much on what science is still not able to explain about such things but what science can and does explain about such things. Providing the evidence and proof that helps us to make some justified conclusions and/or avoid unjustified conclusions.
Location: The Circle City. Sometimes NE of Bagdad.
24,450 posts, read 25,984,086 times
Reputation: 59808
The OP has been banned and is no longer a member.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
