Are all discussions of God speculative nonsense?

[Shadow1]

.

Science disproves a personal God. But you are correct, I cannot disprove an infinite variety of Gods.

Define personal.

If something preceded the big bang, then that could be the cause. Or the big bang could be uncaused.

Effcorse, the hall universe is built on laws and causes.

Can you define God? Probably not.

Now this is your magic point, you know that I would say "no", so therefore, you say God don't exist.

If you want me to define as what/who.. is God scientificly, I can't.
If you mean who is God, God is the creator, who created the laws of the physics wich the universe follow to continue, who created the universe and us.
List of 99 Names of Allah, according to the Qur'an
Btw, "names" isnt exactly names, but also descriptions..
The translation of those to english may not be exact, but, check the link.
Just check that list of words.

 

[spidergoat]

Define personal.

A God that cares about you personally and interferes with events.

Effcorse, the hall universe is built on laws and causes.

Some things are uncaused, like radioactive decay.

Now this is your magic point, you know that I would say "no", so therefore, you say God don't exist.

Right, theists cannot define God, so it becomes pointless to argue about it, it's not even an idea that can be discussed. Not because it's somehow transcendent, but because it's not really an idea.

If you want me to define as what/who.. is God scientificly, I can't.
If you mean who is God, God is the creator, who created the laws of the physics wich the universe follow to continue, who created the universe and us.
List of 99 Names of Allah, according to the Qur'an
Btw, "names" isnt exactly names, but also descriptions..
The translation of those to english may not be exact, but, check the link.
Just check that list of words.

You can only describe it in positive emotional words, but your God is also a killer and indifferent to human suffering, but no one wants to admit that. If you accept that Allah created the world, then he also created the problem of suffering, so he can't be called moral or a role model.

 

[Shadow1]

Some things are uncaused, like radioactive decay.

Define uncaused.

Right, theists cannot define God, so it becomes pointless to argue about it, it's not even an idea that can be discussed. Not because it's somehow transcendent, but because it's not really an idea.

Then, i assume that you can explain everything?

You can only describe it in positive emotional words, but your God is also a killer and indifferent to human suffering, but no one wants to admit that. If you accept that Allah created the world, then he also created the problem of suffering, so he can't be called moral or a role model.

Did you hear about something called, physic laws?
Let's say, no earthquakes at all, that means a dead planet..etc...
There's also politics, dictators, murders, thiefs, drugs (that we made).
Each decision you make in your life, will affect your next decisions..and so on...
We have the freewill to do anything.

 

[spidergoat]

Define uncaused.

Something that happens spontaneously or without cause.

Then, i assume that you can explain everything?

Nope. Why does that matter? The absence of scientific proof doesn't make the God theory any more true.

Did you hear about something called, physic laws?
Let's say, no earthquakes at all, that means a dead planet..etc...
There's also politics, dictators, murders, thiefs, drugs (that we made).
Each decision you make in your life, will affect your next decisions..and so on...
We have the freewill to do anything.

Say there have been about 100 billion people ever born on Earth. About half of those people died as babies. That's 50 billion people that died through no fault of human beings.

 

[Shadow1]

..

Something that happens spontaneously or without cause.

You're joking right?

http://www.physics.isu.edu/radinf/natural.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioactive_decay

...

Nope. Why does that matter? The absence of scientific proof doesn't make the God theory any more true.

That matters, because since you can't understand the existence of God scientificly, that means to you, it's impossible.

What if someone 10 000 years from now (after a total destruction of the present human civlisation, and a new fresh start from nothing, and they are now, idk an advanced level of education and etc.. (but not electricity and technology and such things) ), heard a myth, that once upon a time, people had balls that light up at night, and turn the night into day, they call them electric lamps, here, it's just a myth to them, yet it's true, the person who have just heard the "myth" will say, there's no scientific proof for that! I can't understand how can that be possible, therefore, that is a faulse myth.

Well, it's just a story
Something you/we don't understand (scientificly) , doesnt mean it's impossible or can't be.
The scientific proof of God himself, as, what/who is God? is what we don't know, it's beyond our understanding (even our imagination is related to our known world), but the logical proof, is there, effcorse not everyone beleive, since they are in a complete neglecting of the existence of God...

The absence of a scientific proof of something, doesnt make a theory totally wrong, due to the absence of scientific knowledge, and we however, don't know everything, and we are soo far from that.

Understanding God himself scientificly may be beyond our udnerstanding and our mind, but other proofs that can proove that scientificly are there, either we discovered/saw those proofs, or not yet.

Don't you think that there's more than the physical and matter part of the universe? what we can interact with and deal with physicly (atoms), is only 4% of the univerce (theoreticly).

To me, seing how everything in the universe is coherent and attched, including life itself, where everything in it is in need to the other element and in complete fiting in the life cycle and etc... (wich is suposed to be "randomy" developed" ..etc...that prooves me tha there is a universal, law?, force?, ..., call it what you want, but it's a controlling force/...
To me it's also a feeling (I know that this sentence, will make all what I typed here "fall" in your opinion, but, we're just not robots to take everything by numbers, I know that this is not a scientific proof)

You however, did say it's not impossible that a god ( or God...) exist.

Excuse me for my bad spelling.

Say there have been about 100 billion people ever born on Earth. About half of those people died as babies. That's 50 billion people that died through no fault of human beings.

Back to the physic laws and nature science.
Let's say, half of those, died because of a genetic error. (still physic and nature science laws)
Many others died because they were stuck, either because of a bad way of giving birth, a first time, something like that... (no miracles in that)

Besides, kids and insane people who dies, go to heaven, people who died in work (not the kind of bad work apparently, like drug dealer or a strip dancer or such things), or someone on travel (not to a bad reason too, like drug drealer or an assasin), someone died in an accident while going to work, to pray, someone died in.... etc...
Those people go to heaven, there's always exceptions however, God is more merciful and just than that.

 

[spidergoat]

Yes, I didn't say that all versions of God are impossible, only that there is no reason to believe any of them are true. Believing in things without reason is a bad thing. And religion teaches people that God wants all kinds of things, which is strange since you admit God is beyond our understanding. I can say that some versions of the God concept are very unlikely thanks to our scientific understanding of the universe (Islam, Judaism, Christianity).

-----------------------------


If I lived in the future when no one knew about light bulbs, I would also tell you that light bulbs might be possible, but there is no evidence for one. Why would I believe in light bulbs when I've never seen one or even read about it? You could be lying about light bulbs. You seem to be saying that I should believe whatever someone tells me because it might be true. That's absurd.

---------------------------

From your Wikipedia link about radioactivity:

The emission is spontaneous, in that the atom decays without any interaction with another particle from outside the atom.

Therefore, the decay of any particular particle is uncaused. We know the particle will decay, but we cannot predict exactly when.

-------------------------

Don't you think that there's more than the physical and matter part of the universe? what we can interact with and deal with physicly (atoms), is only 4% of the univerce (theoreticly).

No.

What you are talking about is dark matter, which is still matter, and physical, and it affects us through it's gravity.

Even the illusory world of our minds and imagination are a product of the physical brain.

----------------

As far as evolution and the apparent order of life, it is not random. Natural selection is not random, it's based on the environment. So life forms itself to fit in the environment as long as it can adapt gradually.

----------------------

kids and insane people who dies, go to heaven

Not in Christianity. They believe that everyone is born with original sin, so if you die before you are saved, you don't go to heaven. Then, the Catholic church decided that this might not be fair to babies, so they invented "limbo".

This still leaves the original fact that god made most people die before they even got a chance to live, so how can we call that a good God, or even a fine-tuned universe? If you believe in a God, these deaths do not make sense.

Furthermore, why is it OK for a stripper to be tortured for all eternity in hell just for showing her tits? This isn't a God that I would respect. Even if I grant that your God is real, he's a horrible person and no one should admire him.

 

[Shadow1]

.

If I lived in the future when no one knew about light bulbs, I would also tell you that light bulbs might be possible, but there is no evidence for one. Why would I believe in light bulbs when I've never seen one or even read about it? You could be lying about light bulbs. You seem to be saying that I should believe whatever someone tells me because it might be true. That's absurd.

about the underlined, no

From your Wikipedia link about radioactivity:

The emission is spontaneous, in that the atom decays without any interaction with another particle from outside the atom.

Therefore, the decay of any particular particle is uncaused. We know the particle will decay, but we cannot predict exactly when.

Causes:
Inhaled, other internally deposited radionuclides, terrestrial Radiation, cosmic Radiation..

No.

What you are talking about is dark matter, which is still matter, and physical, and it affects us through it's gravity.

Even the illusory world of our minds and imagination are a product of the physical brain.

Right
Don't forget the dark energy btw.

As far as evolution and the apparent order of life, it is not random. Natural selection is not random, it's based on the environment. So life forms itself to fit in the environment as long as it can adapt gradually.

I thought you said it's completly random?
So we're back to the nature and physics laws.

This still leaves the original fact that god made most people die before they even got a chance to live, so how can we call that a good God, or even a fine-tuned universe? If you believe in a God, these deaths do not make sense.

It does make sense, those deaths didnt happen with no cause...
What deaths don't make sense?

Furthermore, why is it OK for a stripper to be tortured for all eternity in hell just for showing her tits? This isn't a God that I would respect. Even if I grant that your God is real, he's a horrible person and no one should admire him.

First, God can forgive anyone.
Second, a stripper don't go to hell necesserly because she was a stripper, what if she had no job to do but that? and she had to to live.
It's said that a bad woman that do unlegitimated relations (sex...) and etc...saw a thirsty dog, she felt pitty on it, so she went back to a well that she saw in her way, and filled her shoe with water, and went back to the dog, and gave it the water, and for that, she will go to heaven.
On the other hand, there was a good woman that always pray and work and etc... cought a cat, and "imprisoned" it, that it couldnt eat or drink..for that, she will be in hell.

I forgot the other details about it, but that's the general story, by the prophet Mohamed peace be upon him.

Now that was a story for the lesson, that the least thing you do, God can forgive you.
Even if you did very bad things, and one day, you just went back to the straight path, and called for God to forgive you and effcorse regret about it (and etc...), God may forgive you (I'm not God to say God will forgive him or not effcorse)

I hope that that explains it.

Btw, God isnt a person.
I did say God, as God himself, is beyond our understanding.

 

[lightgigantic]

Science disproves a personal God. But you are correct, I cannot disprove an infinite variety of Gods.

why talk of infinite gods, it doesn't even disprove a personal one.

Now go to the corner.
Now.

 

[Greatest I am]

That's not the entirety of evolution. Evolution is variation (caused by randomness) in addition to natural selection. Natural selection is not random, so evolution is not random.

If not random, then it would be directed. It is not.
If the DNA errors are random then evolution must be random.
No choice.
The best form will survive by inadvertently selecting it's environmental niche but it's form is random.

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

If you are trying to say "science disproves god" I think its time for you to shirk off into the corner now ...

Science would not bother trying to prove what is impossible to prove. The negative of God's existence.

It is to those who make the claim that he is real to show the tracks or the shit when they cry wolf.

Science seems to have just proven that God is not necessary for the universe to exist.

Regards
DL

 

[lightgigantic]

Science would not bother trying to prove what is impossible to prove. The negative of God's existence.

doesn't stop a helluvalotta atheists trying though

It is to those who make the claim that he is real to show the tracks or the shit when they cry wolf.

then there is those who make a million and one excuses not to acknowledge the tracks ... yourself being a prime example

Science seems to have just proven that God is not necessary for the universe to exist.

complete bollocks
science does nothing of the sort since it is not even remotely close to establishing the complete requirements for existence (even merely theoretically speaking)

Now go to the corner.
Now.

 

[wellwisher]

Random has a connection to entropy, with entropy losely defined as degrees of freedom. An error in the DNA will add an additional degree of freedom to the DNA. Although this looks random on the surface, these error are not exactly random, since it is possible to induce/direct entropy into order.

Let me give an example. Say I had a container of some gas. I open the container while in the vaccum of space. The gas will expand, increasing entropy, as the gas molecules gain additional degrees of freedom. The gas will cool as the entropy absorbs energy. The additional degrees of freedom will add randomness.

Consider this situation. We have a large expanse of air, within a huge room, that is full of water vapor. In the middle, I place a large condenser that will take the water out of the air, condensing water vapor into liquid. Because there is a 1000 fold drop within volume, as the water vapor condenses to liquid, the partial pressure of the water, within the air, will decrease. This will lower the air pressure near the condenser.

Because we have a pressure drop near the condenser, air further away, which is at slightly higher pressure, will expand toward this zone of lower pressure near the condenser. What we have is the distant air expanding toward lower pressure (entropy increases), but with this entropy increase being directed/ordered by a central source of low pressure.

The perception of random is a function of how deep you look at this scenario. If we isolate and only look at the distant air, that is increasing entropy as this starts to expand, entropy and random is increasing. But if we look deeper, including the condenser, one will then notice that although the distant air is increasing entropy, it is being directed down a pressure gradient, to the source of low pressure.

With life, the entropy condenser of the cell occurs at the cell membrane due to cationic pumping. Cationic pumping uses the lion's share of a cell's energy, lowering the entropy of these two cations, by segregating them on each side of the membrane; sodium out and potassium in. If we didn't add energy or work, the cations would spontaneously increase entropy/random to a uniform solution. This induced loss of entropy is similar to our pressure drop, in the condenser analysis, inducing higher entropy states elsewhere. This is why life creates so much entropy. But all these have a sense of direction to the source of the original entropy lowering. This is based on chemical potential addition; concentration gradients.

This is not unique to the universe. Our quantum universe implies the total theoretical randomness, of all possible theoretical particles was narrowed down to less variety via quantum restrictions (loss of theoretical entropy). This creates the pressure drop analog that will increase the entropy in the universe, but in directed ways toward this quantum condenser. Life builds on this technique with random DNA changes being directed. One just needs to leave the shallow water.

The atheist believe in gods of random and casino's but those gods only exist in the shallow water. You need to look deeper to see how even this apparent genetic random is increasing entropy in a way that has an ordered sense of direction to it; cationic condenser.

 

[Shadow1]

.

why talk of infinite gods, it doesn't even disprove a personal one.

Now go to the corner.
Now.

he propably meant by a personnal god, a god that "belong" to only belong to one person or something like that..
If not, then i disagree, as he said it's possible for "infinite" gods, so it's even more possible, for one god, God.
I mean, try to imagine if there was like, infinite gods, each god, will try to make there own laws of physics and etc... it would be like, a conflict of physic laws and etc...

 

[Shadow1]

.

Science seems to have just proven that God is not necessary for the universe to exist.

DL

You are saying science prove that, while science, don't stick to one theory...
There are always many theories to say..
But if you beleive so, it's an opinion, not a fact to force on everyone else.

 

[NMSquirrel]

Science seems to have just proven that God is not necessary for the universe to exist.

complete bollocks
science does nothing of the sort since it is not even remotely close to establishing the complete requirements for existence (even merely theoretically speaking)

um.Stephen Hawking just did a tv show comparing science with religion and spoke of pure science(did not even come close to addressing humanities role, he just stuck with the physics of it) to disprove the concept of God creating the universe, he concluded that God did not create the universe.

so are you now claiming that Hawking does not speak for science?

 

[Shadow1]

.

um.Stephen Hawking just did a tv show comparing science with religion and spoke of pure science(did not even come close to addressing humanities role, he just stuck with the physics of it) to disprove the concept of God creating the universe, he concluded that God did not create the universe.

so are you now claiming that Hawking does not speak for science?

Yes, he's not the only scientist in the world, I know he's a brillian great scientist, but not every word he says makes him always correct, it's normal that everyone of us, beleive everyword that is said from other people usually, or some scientists, that make a backup to the personal ideas, a kind of a proof and a fact.

Besides, he's an atheist, what do you want him to proove? effcorse he would try proove that God "doesn't exist"
Also, what we know about the universe, is very limited...

 

[Shadow1]

(brb)

 

[NMSquirrel]

Yes, he's not the only scientist in the world, I know he's a brillian great scientist, but not every word he says makes him always correct, it's normal that everyone of us, beleive everyword that is said from other people usually, or some scientists, that make a backup to the personal ideas, a kind of a proof and a fact.

true enough..i do not agree with his conclusion (to an extent)

Besides, he's an atheist, what do you want him to proove? effcorse <of course> he would try proove that God "doesn't exist"
Also, what we know about the universe, is very limited...

i have posited that religion should be separated from God (what religion wants is not necessarily what God wants)

I am leaning more and more to the opinion that we should separate the physical sciences from the human condition, and that God does not affect the physical sciences, that does not mean God does not exist, it only means he is more concerned with our human condition than he is with the physical universe.

 

[Shadow1]

.

i have posited that religion should be separated from God (what religion wants is not necessarily what God wants)

Well, idk..
How do you know what God wants then?

I am leaning more and more to the opinion that we should separate the physical sciences from the human condition, and that God does not affect the physical sciences, that does not mean God does not exist, it only means he is more concerned with our human condition than he is with the physical universe.

Well, God created the physic laws, so, it's kinda an automatic system.

 

[spidergoat]

why talk of infinite gods, it doesn't even disprove a personal one...

I think it can and does. How? Because it can show that all the arguments for a God that is involved in our personal lives are invalid. When this happens, the premise can be considered to be disproved beyond a reasonable doubt. At least until theists come up with better arguments.

about the underlined, no

Then you failed to prove your point. When there is no evidence for light bulbs or even their possibility, then it's unreasonable to believe in them. I think you are implying that science doesn't have a complete picture of reality, but that does not justify rejecting science in favor of faith.

Causes:
Inhaled, other internally deposited radionuclides, terrestrial Radiation, cosmic Radiation..

Incorrect, this happens in a vacuum too. There is no cause for the radioactive decay of any particular particle!

Right
Don't forget the dark energy btw.

Energy is also matter.

I thought you said it's completly random?
So we're back to the nature and physics laws.

I never said that.

It does make sense, those deaths didnt happen with no cause...
What deaths don't make sense?

You assert that humans are the special creation of God, and the reason he created the universe in the first place. So why has he set up a system where half of us die before we even experience life? Historically, this is true, although with science and modern medicine, the death rate of newborns is far less. This amounts to an estimated 50 billion deaths.

First, God can forgive anyone.
Second, a stripper don't go to hell necesserly because she was a stripper, what if she had no job to do but that? and she had to to live.
It's said that a bad woman that do unlegitimated relations (sex...) and etc...saw a thirsty dog, she felt pitty on it, so she went back to a well that she saw in her way, and filled her shoe with water, and went back to the dog, and gave it the water, and for that, she will go to heaven.
On the other hand, there was a good woman that always pray and work and etc... cought a cat, and "imprisoned" it, that it couldnt eat or drink..for that, she will be in hell.

I forgot the other details about it, but that's the general story, by the prophet Mohamed peace be upon him.

Now that was a story for the lesson, that the least thing you do, God can forgive you.
Even if you did very bad things, and one day, you just went back to the straight path, and called for God to forgive you and effcorse regret about it (and etc...), God may forgive you (I'm not God to say God will forgive him or not effcorse)

I hope that that explains it.

Btw, God isnt a person.
I did say God, as God himself, is beyond our understanding.

If God can forgive the most horrible criminal just for believing in Him, then there is no eternal justice. Forgiveness is not justice.

If not random, then it would be directed. It is not.
If the DNA errors are random then evolution must be random.
No choice.
The best form will survive by inadvertently selecting it's environmental niche but it's form is random.

Regards
DL

Evolution is directed, by natural selection. The randomness just provides variation from which nature can select.