Given your initial premise that God exists, I challenge you to do the same. Not that I really, at a deep level, care. I have been away from the SDMB for quite some time, was unaware you had a reputation already, and should probably have avoided the thread. In fact, I should probably avoid GD altogether.
Fundamentally, neither you nor I, nor anyone, is in a position to know precisely what happened at such a distant point in time and in such a difficult-to-understand event. (We do have investigative methods that will allow us to form well-founded theories.) I may believe one thing, and you another. Each one’s beliefs are of little concern to the other, and for various reasons, you are far more interested in getting me to believe yours than I am in getting you to believe mine.
I knew you would have to get a dig in there some where. Is it necessary to say I have “poor logic” when you don’t agree with me? BTW, it is solid logic.
As for the electron, anti-electron point, I’ll trust you that this is a true phenomenon.
Now, I’m not an astrophysicist nor a physicist, but, I believe that black holes or worm holes will make something that is inducted in one side “appear” out of nothing on the other side? I don’t know this for sure, but the point is, because these particles appear to have came from nowhere certainly doesn’t meant they didn’t. Is it possible that there are some physical realms we don’t have knowledge of, yet exist anyway?
Perhaps God resides there.
Patrick Ashley
“For those who believe, no evidence is necessary; for those who don’t believe, no evidence is enough.” -Unknown
[QUOTE]
Originally posted by manhattan:
**
…Here, we have a higher standard than that. If you want to believe, believe. Heck, some of my favorite people, including many on this board, one of whom is posting to this very thread, believe. But don’t you dare come around and try to co-opt logic and science to try to “prove” that the tooth fairy exists. If you are so insecure in your alleged “faith” in this monster that you feel you have to twist into knots the precepts of logic and science, that’s your problem.
QUOTE]
My, when the logic penetrates, it cuts deep.
HE exists. HE is the cause, the first cause, as I have argued.
Call him the “tooth fairy”, of whatever you want. Your denial doesn’t erase him.
And yes, I will dare to use logic. I’m not sure who you think YOU are, telling me what I can and cannot do, just because you refuse to believe that a higher power exists.
I don’t know what your problem is with God buddy, but i can tell you this: God is a loving God, but a just God.
Peace.
Patrick Ashley
“For those who believe, no evidence is necessary; for those who don’t believe, no evidence is enough.” -Unknown
The fact that people can’t give an example of something that currently exists that doesn’t have a cause does not render your argument logical, pashley. (Although you have ignored Gaudere’s example.)
As people have already pointed out, it’s just as logically possible that there was never a time “before” the universe existed in some form. This is difficult to imagine, but it makes just as much sense as creation by a supernatural being.
No one is trying to prove that God doesn’t exist. Why? Because He doesn’t play by the rules of logic–not even yours. You say that everything that exists must have been created, but then refuse to answer the obvious question of who created God.
It’s like the old creationist argument that God planted fossils to test our faith. If He can magically do anything, it is not possible to prove anything about Him.
I agree this universe did have a creator. An amazingly compact object like a black hole can punch through the fabric of space. It is now thought that they may be other universes and that when a black hole becomes massive enough it will “pop out” of its parent universe and start expanding like greater air pressure in an object, making that object expand. As for the rules in this multiverse, logic would be like using the planetary gravity model to predict quantum physics. There for it is quite a posibity that our universe created itself and that everything was created by itself(remember that time is a rule in our universe, not “out there”).
“I don’t know what your problem is with God buddy, but i can tell you this: God is a loving God, but a just God.”
And when logic fails, smite the unbelievers.
As always, you assume far too much. Unlike you, I read prior to posting and try to get my facts in order. You would not be posting this tripe if you had read anything besides your precious religious propaganda.
No need to restate your lack of scientific background. Evidence abounds from your postings to confirm that hypothesis.
Worm holes are an entirely theoretical construct with no evidence (so far) of their existence, so I wouldn’t try to base any argument on them. Black holes do NOT make things appear out of nowhere, though I imagine it could make something seem to disappear.
It is possible that unknown realms exist. It is possible that God, Santa Claus, the tooth fairy and the Invisible Pink Unicorn reside there. However, I wouldn’t be so silly as to try to prove this with logic. I would try finding some evidence.
We can reason, however, backwards in time. Like a staircase, going back down the steps, there is a landing. Everything in the material world has a starting point.
And what is this about “getting me to believe yours…” bit? Did I ever mention a religion or belief? I dont’ think so. I am not telling you to believe that there is a God. But i am asking you.
Peace
Patrick Ashley
“For those who believe, no evidence is necessary; for those who don’t believe, no evidence is enough.” -Unknown
It’s not an outrageous statement when you do demonstrate poor logic. There’s plenty of people I disagree with, but I’ll only say they show poor logic if they actually do. It is poor logic to draw the conclusion “all things must have a cause” from the fact that “some things appear have a cause and some do not”. It is poor logic to say “all things must have a cause” and then state that God did not need a cause.
You can believe whatever you wish. But if you use lousy arguments in an attempt to prove the unprovable, you’re going to get jumped on. Not just by atheists; there’s plenty of theists who loathe illogical “proofs”.
pashley- there can also be the start of the stares at the end like a like a snake eating its tail.
hardcore- there is a lot of evidence for worm holes. The Curent model of the universe state that at the quantum level there are wormholes.
Who said I was angry? Please don’t make assumptions.
Let’s be careful, however, that we do not fall down the stairs and bump our heads, or we may begin saying unbelievable silly things.
You’ve mentioned God several times in this thread, and your interests, according to your profile, include “arguing” and “Jesus,” so I can only work with the material I’m given. Knowing that Christianity is a proselytizing religion and that Jesus commanded his disciples to make converts of the world, I can logically conclude that you are at least mildly interested in having everyone believe in God, and preferably YOUR God.
To expound a little: quantum electrodynamics predicts that particles and antiparticles pop into existence continually, and annihilate each other almost unimaginably fast. I am not aware of any theories as to what, if anythng, causes this behavior. There have been experiments looking for this phenomenon, and the results are consistent with our understanding of the phenomenon. One of the most tested and convincing predictions is the Casimir Effect.
This phenomenon could be interpreted as something that exists without a cause.
OK, pashley has several times pointed to his first reply to otto:
An unsupported assumption. I believe that this implicitly assserts the existence of a creator, and that any deduction of a creator based on this assertion is indeed circular reasoning.
Why not? Remember that inability to conceive how it could be, or visualize it, is not evidence.
I fail to see how that follows from the previous quote.
So you have stated that “Whatever begins to exist, has a cause for it’s coming into being (something cannot spontaeously come to be with a causing agent)” is not true; you posit (without justification or discussion) the existence of at least one uncaused thing. Why should there be only one uncaused thing?
Remember that I’m not attacking your faith, but your logic is flawed. You have not presented a logical deduction of the existence of God (and I doubt that one can be presented).
Could you please explain, in detail, the exact manner in which it is illogical? I don’t see how it is. All I’ve seen so far is intimations that you think everything must have a cause (with one notable exception for which you’ve provided no justification) because you can’t conceive of things being otherwise. If that’s you’re reasoning, that in itself is a fallacy.
Firstly, howdy Phil. Good to see you–you just visiting or staying around for a while?
Secondly,
There is no evidence for the existence of wormholes. That is, none have been observed in any way. They fit into many current models (and there are many of them, rather than one gospel “model of the universe”), but that doesn’t mean they exist. Or that they exist in the several ways theorized.
Thirdly, Patrick, the problem here is simply this: if god created everything, where did god come from? You said 9in you oft-cited Response To Otto,
Why? If we can keep getting smaller and smaller, why muct there be a smallest? If we can always add one to our total, why must there be a biggest?
Further, if I accept that the universe was caused and that the root cause was the tooth Fairy (or more realistically, the IPU), are you saying then that your God and my Invisible Pink Unicorn are the same?
That means all gods are one god, right? So the Hindus and Moslems aren’t going to Hell? Yay!
You are going to have to back this up. Wormholes are theoretically possible at the quantum level, but are not required. This is far cry from being evidence supporting wormholes. Are you thinking of the Casimir effect?
Maybe I should have worded that differently. there are theoreticly worm holes in the string theory, but they are extremely small and don’t produce any matter. Their effect might have something to do with the strange movement in electrons. Bigger protons and neutrons don’t exihbit this behavior.
The kalam cosmological argument for God’s existence; is the ontological argument coming up in the next thread? For those interested in further reading: