Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

Scientific Quandary- or Logical Devil's Advocate

Page 3 of 10 [ 159 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 10  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

starvingartist
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Oct 2008
Age: 44
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,032

31 Dec 2008, 12:32 am

Awesomelyglorious wrote:
starvingartist wrote:
words like "before" can be tricky when discussing the universe.....if the universe or anything in it could be said to be infinite, then a word like before becomes irrelevant. linear time sort of becomes irrelevant. if something is infinite it has no beginning as well as no end, so how can something come before it? what if it is continuous cycles of big bangs, going on into infinity and somehow ending where they began? maybe time is not linear at all, but ultimately cyclical? and the hub of that wheel = god.

That is true, however, I *think* I used that correctly. However, to rephrase that, if time has no beginning, then the big bang cannot mark the beginning of time, this would mean that there was a causal chain that was prior to the big bang, the lack of beginning would mean that this causal chain stretched infinitely before the big bang. This goes against the 3rd premise of my argument. That is not to say that this is necessarily wrong, there are a number of people who have attacked the cosmological argument on this ground, but it would lead to some question. A continuous cycle of big bangs would be an infinite chain, and some have postulated this, I don't see how this leads to god, but we probably use the term differently.


i never said that the big bang marked the beginning of time. it is the beginning and the end and the beginning again....it is an event. that is all. a part of the cycle. a perpetuation and then implosion and then perpetuation of itself.....yes? round and round. perfect. harmonious. beatific. divine.



starvingartist
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Oct 2008
Age: 44
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,032

31 Dec 2008, 12:38 am

Shiggily wrote:
I challenge things that are faulty or illogical. I do not sit nearby and accept things that are taught to me based on the idea that many people believe it, or one person doesn't want me to question them. It is why I got out of biology and into math. Evolutionary theory is not advanced enough to be viable, though it appears that it has advanced enough to be falsely considered infallible by a majority.




if you're looking for an interesting read on arguments for/against evolutionary theory, check out "finding darwin's god" by kenneth r miller.....fascinating stuff. :wink: i haven't finished it yet, among many others, but what i have read was well presented, i though pretty unbiased considering the subject.



Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

31 Dec 2008, 12:40 am

starvingartist wrote:
if you're looking for an interesting read on arguments for/against evolutionary theory, check out "finding darwin's god" by kenneth r miller.....fascinating stuff. :wink: i haven't finished it yet, among many others, but what i have read was well presented, i though pretty unbiased considering the subject.

I like Kenneth Miller, I actually listened to him lecture once..... on youtube, but HEY! Youtube is still nice, right?



Shiggily
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 Dec 2008
Age: 40
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,317

31 Dec 2008, 12:42 am

Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Because deities are not finite or contingent, where as everything that exists is usually finite and contingent, the definitions of the terms probably stems back to some Aquinas stuff that I don't want to dig through, and frankly, I admitted that one philosopher claimed that a 0 dimensional point would satisfy the cosmological proof for God, but such a point is not the same thing as the big bang.



you are redefining deity to simply mean not finite?


Quote:
de-sign (di-zin)v. de-signed, de-sign-ing, de-signs.v. tr. 1. To conceive or fashion in the mind; invent: design a good excuse for not attending the conference. To formulate a plan for; devise: designed a marketing strategy for the new product. 2. To plan out in systematic, usually graphic form: design a building; design a computer program. 3. To create or contrive for a particular purpose or effect: a game designed to appeal to all ages. 4. To have as a goal or purpose; intend. 5. To create or execute in an artistic or highly skilled manner.
Quote:

so you are considering only those things that are created for a purpose or with intent or predetermined. Though I am not sure how you would classify something that was created, but not for a purpose or with intent or predetermined. How are you sure that life was not created on a whim, or designed but without a purpose?

Quote:
No, because the argument DOESN'T rest on the definitions of the terms used, and that is actually pretty plain to see. The argument actually rests upon premise 4, that things that could not arise naturally do exist.


arguments always rest on their definitions and starting premises.


Quote:
In any case, this is not even an argument I fashioned myself, but rather one I saw as serviceable and thus scraped off of wikipedia, but I still do not think you've found fault with it.


so you butchered someone else's argument... that you most likely do not understand and because you do not understand it...you don't think anyone can find fault with it.



Shiggily
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 Dec 2008
Age: 40
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,317

31 Dec 2008, 12:44 am

Orwell wrote:
Shiggily wrote:
I argue with the concept that evolution is fact. Not that it isn't possible. I could care less if they do not like to prove themselves. Just don't pretend something is more than it actually is. That is all I want. Honesty.. pure, brutal, naked honesty.

They're human, they get frustrated with obnoxious people, sometimes that gets taken out on people with honest questions. As for evolution being fact, we have observed speciation on numerous occasions, and we have also watched adaptation occur. The rest is just unhammered-out details.


adaptation might occur, that does not imply evolution is fact. Speciation might occur, that does not prove evolution as fact. If other people make them so frustrated that they hide evidence, falsify studies, lie about misconceptions, and publish books with errors in them... maybe they need new jobs.



Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

31 Dec 2008, 12:48 am

Shiggily wrote:
adaptation might occur, that does not imply evolution is fact. Speciation might occur, that does not prove evolution as fact. If other people make them so frustrated that they hide evidence, falsify studies, lie about misconceptions, and publish books with errors in them... maybe they need new jobs.

Any hiding of evidence or falsification of studies goes way over the line. I thought you were referring merely to the tendency of biologists to shout down anyone who questioned the theory rather than spend time answering questions.

How are you defining evolution? Adaptation is typically regarded as microevolution and speciation as macroevolution, so I'm not sure what you're still looking for. No, evolution does not have good, solid answers to every single question you might care you ask. It probably never will. It's a complicated subject that's hard to fully understand, and there will always be a degree of uncertainty.


_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH


Shiggily
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 Dec 2008
Age: 40
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,317

31 Dec 2008, 12:48 am

starvingartist wrote:
Shiggily wrote:
I challenge things that are faulty or illogical. I do not sit nearby and accept things that are taught to me based on the idea that many people believe it, or one person doesn't want me to question them. It is why I got out of biology and into math. Evolutionary theory is not advanced enough to be viable, though it appears that it has advanced enough to be falsely considered infallible by a majority.




if you're looking for an interesting read on arguments for/against evolutionary theory, check out "finding darwin's god" by kenneth r miller.....fascinating stuff. :wink: i haven't finished it yet, among many others, but what i have read was well presented, i though pretty unbiased considering the subject.


Wells was sort of interesting. But I avoid most of the debate as it tends to be overly emotional people dogmatically defending two beliefs that only really differ on one point.



starvingartist
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Oct 2008
Age: 44
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,032

31 Dec 2008, 12:49 am

Awesomelyglorious wrote:
starvingartist wrote:
if you're looking for an interesting read on arguments for/against evolutionary theory, check out "finding darwin's god" by kenneth r miller.....fascinating stuff. :wink: i haven't finished it yet, among many others, but what i have read was well presented, i though pretty unbiased considering the subject.

I like Kenneth Miller, I actually listened to him lecture once..... on youtube, but HEY! Youtube is still nice, right?


hey, a lecture is a lecture, however you get it :lol: ....

...i download lectures sometimes on different subjects of interest (currently working through "great scientific ideas that changed the world"). :oops: :oops: i wish i was kidding. how much of a dork does that make me look like? or is that ok on this forum? :lol:

i totally am a nerd, though :lol:



Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

31 Dec 2008, 12:51 am

starvingartist wrote:
...i download lectures sometimes on different subjects of interest (currently working through "great scientific ideas that changed the world"). :oops: :oops: i wish i was kidding. how much of a dork does that make me look like? or is that ok on this forum? :lol:

In what sick setting would that not be OK?

Quote:
i totally am a nerd, though :lol:

Join the club.


_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH


Shiggily
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 Dec 2008
Age: 40
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,317

31 Dec 2008, 12:52 am

Orwell wrote:
Shiggily wrote:
adaptation might occur, that does not imply evolution is fact. Speciation might occur, that does not prove evolution as fact. If other people make them so frustrated that they hide evidence, falsify studies, lie about misconceptions, and publish books with errors in them... maybe they need new jobs.

Any hiding of evidence or falsification of studies goes way over the line. I thought you were referring merely to the tendency of biologists to shout down anyone who questioned the theory rather than spend time answering questions.

How are you defining evolution? Adaptation is typically regarded as microevolution and speciation as macroevolution, so I'm not sure what you're still looking for. No, evolution does not have good, solid answers to every single question you might care you ask. It probably never will. It's a complicated subject that's hard to fully understand, and there will always be a degree of uncertainty.


At a basic level, biologists are very threatened by people who question things and challenge ideas. There are some other areas that are as well. I generally define evolution as the idea that spontaneous generation can happen randomly. Whereas creation is the belief that spontaneous generation cannot happen randomly.

Everything else can be mixed and matched to make numerous different theories.



starvingartist
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Oct 2008
Age: 44
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,032

31 Dec 2008, 12:52 am

Shiggily wrote:

you are redefining deity to simply mean not finite?


Quote:
de-sign (di-zin)v. de-signed, de-sign-ing, de-signs.v. tr. 1. To conceive or fashion in the mind; invent: design a good excuse for not attending the conference. To formulate a plan for; devise: designed a marketing strategy for the new product. 2. To plan out in systematic, usually graphic form: design a building; design a computer program. 3. To create or contrive for a particular purpose or effect: a game designed to appeal to all ages. 4. To have as a goal or purpose; intend. 5. To create or execute in an artistic or highly skilled manner.
Quote:

so you are considering only those things that are created for a purpose or with intent or predetermined. Though I am not sure how you would classify something that was created, but not for a purpose or with intent or predetermined. How are you sure that life was not created on a whim, or designed but without a purpose?


you have stated the purpose of creating life right there in your argument. the purpose is to create life. and to create life. the design is the purpose. life was designed to be, and to perpetuate.



Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

31 Dec 2008, 12:55 am

Shiggily wrote:
At a basic level, biologists are very threatened by people who question things and challenge ideas. There are some other areas that are as well. I generally define evolution as the idea that spontaneous generation can happen randomly. Whereas creation is the belief that spontaneous generation cannot happen randomly.

That is not a correct definition of evolution.


_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH


Shiggily
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 Dec 2008
Age: 40
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,317

31 Dec 2008, 12:56 am

Orwell wrote:
starvingartist wrote:
...i download lectures sometimes on different subjects of interest (currently working through "great scientific ideas that changed the world"). :oops: :oops: i wish i was kidding. how much of a dork does that make me look like? or is that ok on this forum? :lol:

In what sick setting would that not be OK?

Quote:
i totally am a nerd, though :lol:

Join the club.


try theoretical physics from Standford or "Exploring Black Holes" from MIT on Itunes U



starvingartist
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Oct 2008
Age: 44
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,032

31 Dec 2008, 12:56 am

Shiggily wrote:
Orwell wrote:
Shiggily wrote:
adaptation might occur, that does not imply evolution is fact. Speciation might occur, that does not prove evolution as fact. If other people make them so frustrated that they hide evidence, falsify studies, lie about misconceptions, and publish books with errors in them... maybe they need new jobs.

Any hiding of evidence or falsification of studies goes way over the line. I thought you were referring merely to the tendency of biologists to shout down anyone who questioned the theory rather than spend time answering questions.

How are you defining evolution? Adaptation is typically regarded as microevolution and speciation as macroevolution, so I'm not sure what you're still looking for. No, evolution does not have good, solid answers to every single question you might care you ask. It probably never will. It's a complicated subject that's hard to fully understand, and there will always be a degree of uncertainty.


At a basic level, biologists are very threatened by people who question things and challenge ideas. There are some other areas that are as well. I generally define evolution as the idea that spontaneous generation can happen randomly. Whereas creation is the belief that spontaneous generation cannot happen randomly.

Everything else can be mixed and matched to make numerous different theories.


what would you say to someone who told you they believed in creation and evolution at the same time?



Shiggily
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 Dec 2008
Age: 40
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,317

31 Dec 2008, 12:58 am

starvingartist wrote:
Shiggily wrote:

you are redefining deity to simply mean not finite?


Quote:
de-sign (di-zin)v. de-signed, de-sign-ing, de-signs.v. tr. 1. To conceive or fashion in the mind; invent: design a good excuse for not attending the conference. To formulate a plan for; devise: designed a marketing strategy for the new product. 2. To plan out in systematic, usually graphic form: design a building; design a computer program. 3. To create or contrive for a particular purpose or effect: a game designed to appeal to all ages. 4. To have as a goal or purpose; intend. 5. To create or execute in an artistic or highly skilled manner.
Quote:

so you are considering only those things that are created for a purpose or with intent or predetermined. Though I am not sure how you would classify something that was created, but not for a purpose or with intent or predetermined. How are you sure that life was not created on a whim, or designed but without a purpose?


you have stated the purpose of creating life right there in your argument. the purpose is to create life. and to create life. the design is the purpose. life was designed to be, and to perpetuate.


the purpose of creating life is to create life? seems rather circular...



starvingartist
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Oct 2008
Age: 44
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,032

31 Dec 2008, 12:59 am

Shiggily wrote:
Orwell wrote:
starvingartist wrote:
...i download lectures sometimes on different subjects of interest (currently working through "great scientific ideas that changed the world"). :oops: :oops: i wish i was kidding. how much of a dork does that make me look like? or is that ok on this forum? :lol:

In what sick setting would that not be OK?

Quote:
i totally am a nerd, though :lol:

Join the club.


try theoretical physics from Standford or "Exploring Black Holes" from MIT on Itunes U


i actually have "einstein's relativity for non-scientists" (translate as - practically sans math :lol: but i like the conceptual, unquantified way better....i find i follow it more intuitively than math).



Last edited by starvingartist on 31 Dec 2008, 1:01 am, edited 1 time in total.