Proof for an Intelligent Creator and His purpose

[Beelzebub2]

He seems to have posted exactly the same post on INTP forum - here, on Rotten Tomatoes forum - here, sportal.com.au - here, Let's Roll forum - here, The Arrogant Atheist Forum - here, 2012 forum - here, R21CLUB - here, etc etc, all within a day or two, and on some like this or this it has already been deleted as spam.


That is what I call spreading the joyous news!

[charlou]

pffft.

I just said the same thing in his welcome thread ...

... but without the value-added graphic.

Yeah, the effort was more than it deserves.



*coffee time*

[Sisifo]

Whether it is spam or post and run, the raison d'être of this forum should answer these posts first and think about the poster goals later...

- The causality law does not require external causes. The Big Bang theory has formulated many possible triggering explanations without any external stimulus. Even mechanical physics recognize internal causes.
- It is a common science fiction misconception to take "outside space and time" like it would be vacuum. Universe outside space and time is like saying an square ball.
- Attributes like "orderly and perfect" are nonsensical in science and arguable in logic. Even humanistic sciences would never use perfection and would rather use efficient.
- It is absurd; merely poetic, to say that an effect mirrors the qualities of the causes.
- The link between the proposed cause and religion is an argumental jump and a logic crack.


And now, the plaque number of that poster was...

[charlou]

Whether it is spam or post and run, the raison d'être of this forum should answer these posts first and think about the poster goals later...

- The causality law does not require external causes. The Big Bang theory has formulated many possible triggering explanations without any external stimulus. Even mechanical physics recognize internal causes.
- It is a common science fiction misconception to take "outside space and time" like it would be vacuum. Universe outside space and time is like saying an square ball.
- Attributes like "orderly and perfect" are nonsensical in science and arguable in logic. Even humanistic sciences would never use perfection and would rather use efficient.
- It is absurd; merely poetic, to say that an effect mirrors the qualities of the causes.
- The link between the proposed cause and religion is an argumental jump and a logic crack.

[CJ]

[Thinking Aloud]

Whether it is spam or post and run, the raison d'être of this forum should answer these posts first and think about the poster goals later...

I thought the raison d'être of this forum is to get away from having to do that ... OK, I know there's a remote chance some theist will come along and read our response and go "gosh, they're right", but it's a remote chance, unlike RDF!

Either way ... the magical disappearing act has disappeared, and probably won't return in three days to see whether we've responded.

[klr]

He seems to have posted exactly the same post on INTP forum - here, on Rotten Tomatoes forum - here, sportal.com.au - here, Let's Roll forum - here, The Arrogant Atheist Forum - here, 2012 forum - here, R21CLUB - here, etc etc, all within a day or two, and on some like this or this it has already been deleted as spam.


That is what I call spreading the joyous news!

That's what I was sayin'. I suppose we should be happy that we were noticed, and considered worthy of being informed ...

[Яasputin]

I'm just gonna leave this right here...

[BlackBart]

Well, he's got me convinced. Sayonara, cheese eating infidels!!

[owtth]

I for one would welcome the occasional chew toy. If only for the flexing of admittedly tiny, atrophying, mental muskles,

Any........way didn't the physical laws of this universe only apply to this universe after the point when physical laws became physical laws, ie., not till some time after the big bang? when it was less of a bang and more of a big.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

According to science our universe has a beginning (search at “age of the universe” on www.pnas.org) and time is purely physical. Therefore there can be no such thing as time external to the physical universe. Timespace has a beginning.[/quote]
So you assume that YOUR God started the universe without any good reason.

It is a fundamental law of physics (causality) that every physical occurrence in the universe has a cause.
The fundamental laws of physics then require a cause of the universe ex nihilo (since timespace has a beginning); i.e., a Prime Cause Singularity that is non-dimensional and independent of timespace.

Rain is caused by water vapor condensing. There is no reason to believe anything more complex than a physical process caused the beginning of the universe.

To conclude the above paragraphs:
Fact: No thing nor event in the known universe or laws of physics lacks a cause.
Assume: There is no Prime Cause (Creator / Singularity).
Ergo: There is no universe.
Fact: There is a universe.
Therefore: the statement that was assumed is proven to be a false statement by reduction ad absurdum (proof by disproof).
(Since "There is no Creator" is proven false, the opposite is true: There is a Creator.)

You don't give any compelling reason to believe that such a possible creator gives a flying fuck at a rolling donut about hummin' beans.

[BlackBart]

Nothing wrong with the occasional chew toy as long as it's not a thinly disguised riff on St.Anselms or Pascal's wager or not being able to prove a sodding negative or whatever long since debunked fallacy they try to peddle.

[AndersBranderud]

Quote:” - The causality law does not require external causes. The Big Bang theory has formulated many possible triggering explanations without any external stimulus. Even mechanical physics recognize internal causes. “

What is the source of this statement: “The Big Bang theory has formulated many possible triggering explanations without any external stimulus.” And this statement: “The causality law does not require external causes.” ?

It is a fundamental law of physics (causality) that every physical occurrence in the universe has a cause (Source, for example an Oxford Physicist quoted here: http://bloganders.blogspot.com/2009/09/ ... tence.html). Since space-time has a beginning there was a first physical occurrence. Causality requires that the first physical occurrence had a cause. The fact that space-time has a beginning implies that this Prime Cause is non-dimensional and independent of space-time.

None known scientific phenomena contradicts the scientific principle of causality. It is a scientific principle with is foundation on many observations. By induction causality is regarded to be true for all of time-space.

It is a law of formal logic that a person stating the unknown has to prove his/her departure from the known state. The known state is that everything in this physical universe follows the scientific law of causality. Some examples of a statements that is a unknown state: “The laws of causality are not applicable before one plank-second after Big Bang;" (or the statement “the laws of causality are not applicable on the first physical occurrence in space-time") Both of these examples contradicts science, i.e. it is a clear departure from the known state. The person who says there are scientific phenomena that contradicts causality has to prove his/her point (i.e. he/she has the burden of proof), not merely assume it.

It is another common counter argument that says "the universe does not have a beginning".
Arvind Borde and Alexander Vilenkin (in the report below) proves (based on a set of reasonable assumptions ) that the “eternal inflation” cannot be eternal to the past. According to their article space-time has a beginning (that is: not only our universe has a beginning (according to science our universe does not need to be the first universe), but space-time as a whole has a beginning).

The report of cosmologist Alexander Vilenkin of the Tufts university and Arvind Bonde is found here: http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/9403004

You wrote: “. It is a common science fiction misconception to take "outside space and time"..
Yes, I agree. There is no universe “outside” space-time.

Quote: “Attributes like "orderly and perfect" are nonsensical in science and arguable in logic. Even humanistic sciences would never use perfection and would rather use efficient.

The term "orderly" is being used in two, contradictory, senses; the cause of the confusion. The human-perceived "state" of a subsystem (often relatively infinitesimal) of the universe seems to tend toward "disorder." (Though that is arguably untrue since it, e.g., a decomposing material or carcass, usually depends on a small fragment of the universe, which, in its totality, always obeys "orderly" laws of physics and mathematics. Decomposing wood or animal carcass turns to soil and is recycled in an orderly—i.e., inerrantly conforming to orderly laws—system. Thus, increasing entropy is an integral part of an orderly (always obeying orderly laws) universe; not a contradiction of it.)

There is no known exception to the laws of physics. (If there were, our understanding of the laws of physics would be refined to incorporate the phenomenon.)


You wrote: “It is absurd; merely poetic, to say that an effect mirrors the qualities of the causes. “ and
“- The link between the proposed cause and religion is an argumental jump and a logic crack. ”

My post is to long now, but the answers to your questions are found here: http://bloganders.blogspot.com/2009/10/ ... -life.html and this post: http://bloganders.blogspot.com/2009/09/ ... or-is.html

Anders Branderud

[Feck]

Just a short post because I'm busy , but to say that because we do not know the exact origins of our present universe must mean there is a GOD is a damn silly Idea .To then decide that You know Your mythology is entirely true despite every indication that it's made up is even worse .What are you going to do with string theory ? claim god knitted all the strings ?

[tattuchu]

Just a short post because I'm busy , but to say that because we do not know the exact origins of our present universe must mean there is a GOD is a damn silly Idea .To then decide that You know Your mythology is entirely true despite every indication that it's made up is even worse .What are you going to do with string theory ? claim god knitted all the strings ?

Well, the bullwork done, the universe having already been created and all, I imagine God has a lot of time on His hands at this point. And knitting is a fine hobby