|
Post by heeeeey on Dec 3, 2018 19:07:24 GMT
The quotes by the referenced atheists are 100% accurate, just in case that idiot faustus5 dares to refute them.
|
|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on Dec 3, 2018 19:32:28 GMT
Seen it before. Bear in mind:
1. The video seems to be using the "Fine Tuning Argument" ("there must be these exact parameters for life to occur"). That's not necessarily the case, as organisms are typically plastic to their environment and can adapt through any number of conditions through natural selection and generational evolution. It's why we have wildcats that live in both ice cold environemnts and humid hot jungles.
2. Those "parameters" given are used for life as we understand it, specifically carbon based life forms that requrie oxygen. For all you know there could be life forms out there that are made of completely different, undiscovered elements and sustain on other sustances besides oxygen.
3. Vast majority of scientists (including biologists and comsologists) are still atheists, so even trying use an appeal to authority ('these atheist scientists are pondering on the idea of Fine Tuning") still fails rather miseably
4. This is not the best argument as I try to avoid ad homs, but Prager U is well known right wing propaganda and chronic liars, I get the feeling they're misrepresenting a lot of facts and probably quote mining as well.
|
|
|
Post by thefleetsin on Dec 3, 2018 19:43:13 GMT
well, someone who was never alive can't actually be dead.
|
|
|
Post by Winter_King on Dec 4, 2018 12:00:26 GMT
The blood runs free
The rain turns red
Give me the wine
You keep the bread
The voices echo in my head
Is God alive or is God dead?
Is God dead?
|
|
|
Post by FridayOnElmStreet on Dec 4, 2018 12:12:14 GMT
Have you not seen Gods Not Dead?
Dont because it sucks ass.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 4, 2018 13:23:09 GMT
Much of that argument is nonsense. He's spouting numbers that have very little support. We don't even know how many planets there are. We don't know what the factors required for a planet to support life are. We certainly don't know how many planets there are that could support life. We have no reliable way to detect life, if it exists. And so on.
"Doesn't supposing that an intelligence created those conditions requite far less faith?"
No. No it absolutely does not. His premise is wildly off, but even if we granted his premise, that conclusion simply doesn't follow from it. He asks at what point it's reasonable to use the statistical improbability of life to take it to imply god - the answer is "never".
If we accept his premise, then the very most we can get out of it is "Wow, life-bearing planets are incredibly rare. Perhaps Earth is even completely unique." And that's that.
Then he goes on to make the fine tuning argument, which is utter bunk.
All of this is just an argument from incredulity. "Wow, it's incredibly unlikely that the universe could be exactly the way it is... so it must be deliberate." To use an old analogy, if water were sentient then a puddle in a pothole could just as easily look around and say "Wow, this pothole fits me perfectly! Everywhere there's a bulge, I have a dent. Everywhere there's a dent, I have a bulge! Surely this pothole must have been intelligently designed specifically for me!"
The universe does not fit us - to think it does is the height of arrogance. It is us that fit the universe. If the universe had been different then life of our kind or of the kind we know may be impossible, but life of a very different kind may exist.
In short, nothing but long debunked arguments for god.
He's right about one thing, though. Science doesn't prove that there is no god. It never has, it never will. It also doesn't need to. It's those making the assertion that there is a god who need to prove their case. And they can't.
|
|
|
Post by lunda2222 on Dec 4, 2018 23:37:16 GMT
Seen it before. Bear in mind: 2. Those "parameters" given are used for life as we understand it, specifically carbon based life forms that requrie oxygen. For all you know there could be life forms out there that are made of completely different, undiscovered elements and sustain on other sustances besides oxygen. There's more than that. The first mass extinction on earth was due to oxygenpoisoning from plants. Yes oxygen is actually poison. Life eventually adapted and now need oxygen to survive. That's why we need both oxygen and antioxygens in order to survive.
|
|
|
Post by OpiateOfTheMasses on Dec 6, 2018 7:23:59 GMT
Well there certainly aren't any signs of life. Apparently God used to be happy to make overt displays but we haven't seen anything for 2,000 years. So if he's not dead he's at least sleeping/absent/disinterested.
|
|
|
Post by yougotastewgoinbaby on Dec 6, 2018 7:35:24 GMT
Of course. NASA astronauts killed him back in 2011...don't you remember?
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Dec 6, 2018 10:57:02 GMT
So are you a New Age pagan? You believe that consciousness exists outside the brain but you don't believe in God? Is that fair to say? I wouldn't want to mislabel you, Toasted Cheese.
|
|
|
Post by koskiewicz on Dec 7, 2018 21:58:46 GMT
sycophant, n. One who approaches greatness on his belly so that he may not be commanded to turn and be kicked. He is sometimes an editor. -Ambrose Bierce
|
|