Atheism Debunked by Scientific Evidence, Game Over

Posted in the Atheism Forum

Comments

Showing posts 1 - 20 of49
< prev page
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

Since: Jun 12

London, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
Jun 20, 2012
 

Judged:

3

1

1

http://www.youtube.com/watch...

I really want to see how atheists squirm out of this one considering they now have to prove that chaos creates order and design and that 0+0 can equal one. I think we can officially say that logic and science favor God now considering the Goldilocks properties of the universe pointing to a universe which was purposely designed.

No opinions or theories please. I want to see actual scientific evidences defending atheism and the idea of nothing creating something (something which has been scientifically tested with no results...)

“It's just a box of rain...”

Since: May 07

Knoxville, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
Jun 20, 2012
 
Atheism is not about science. Many atheists are fans of science, and some use science references in their arguments, but atheism is a theological/philosophical position, not a scientific one. The only scientific evidence that can debunk it is evidence that proves that God exists.

Your link says, "Atheists say that particles that led to the birth of our universe cam forth from the so-called vacuum." Some atheists may say that, but many more don't give a rat's ass how the universe began. So your link begins with a straw man argument.

Further on it says, "Logic says something must have been responsible for the creation of the universe because you don't get something from nothing." Logic says no such thing unless a cogent argument is made for it. Your link provides none. Causation and responsibility are not the same thing. The so-called logic of that paragraph is based on very sloppy language, but good logic requires the precise use of language.

The argument continues with an unsupported assertion that guidance from God is more logical than the processes suggested by the best astrophysicists of our time. I stopped there because at this point it was obvious that the argument being presented was theological and based on faulty or at least incomplete logic and thus not worth further consideration.

The argument fails.

No QED.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
Jun 20, 2012
 

Judged:

2

NightSerf wrote:
Atheism is not about science. Many atheists are fans of science, and some use science references in their arguments, but atheism is a theological/philosophical position, not a scientific one. The only scientific evidence that can debunk it is evidence that proves that God exists.
Your link says, "Atheists say that particles that led to the birth of our universe cam forth from the so-called vacuum." Some atheists may say that, but many more don't give a rat's ass how the universe began. So your link begins with a straw man argument.
Further on it says, "Logic says something must have been responsible for the creation of the universe because you don't get something from nothing." Logic says no such thing unless a cogent argument is made for it. Your link provides none. Causation and responsibility are not the same thing. The so-called logic of that paragraph is based on very sloppy language, but good logic requires the precise use of language.
The argument continues with an unsupported assertion that guidance from God is more logical than the processes suggested by the best astrophysicists of our time. I stopped there because at this point it was obvious that the argument being presented was theological and based on faulty or at least incomplete logic and thus not worth further consideration.
The argument fails.
No QED.
You are wrong.

Logic does say that you can't get something from nothing, as this would require something to cause itself, which would require that the "something" exist before it existed.

“It's just a box of rain...”

Since: May 07

Knoxville, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4
Jun 21, 2012
 
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
You are wrong.
Logic does say that you can't get something from nothing, as this would require something to cause itself, which would require that the "something" exist before it existed.
The full statement from the youtube video was actually, "Logic says something must have been responsible for the creation of the universe because you don't get something from nothing." There's an implied if/then structure to that statement. The problem is not that the premise is false, but that the conclusion has not been shown to follow from the premise.
IRYW

Malvern, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
Jun 21, 2012
 

Judged:

2

1

1

Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
You are wrong.
Logic does say that you can't get something from nothing, as this would require something to cause itself, which would require that the "something" exist before it existed.
Of course you can get something from nothing. We see posts from you all the time.......:-0

But seriously Buck, as you know, in logical arguments you have to have valid premises, inferences, etc. The 'something from nothing' argument in physics (I am not a physicist; this is my layman's version) is that what 'existed' before the big bang was nothing but a form of energy that was a net of zero (i.e., equal values of positive and negative energy creating what we might think of as nothing). So, until you define nothing (and something) in any meaningful way there isn't even a logical argument.
IRYW

Malvern, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
Jun 21, 2012
 
NightSerf wrote:
Atheism is not about science. Many atheists are fans of science, and some use science references in their arguments, but atheism is a theological/philosophical position, not a scientific one. The only scientific evidence that can debunk it is evidence that proves that God exists.
Your link says, "Atheists say that particles that led to the birth of our universe cam forth from the so-called vacuum." Some atheists may say that, but many more don't give a rat's ass how the universe began. So your link begins with a straw man argument.
Further on it says, "Logic says something must have been responsible for the creation of the universe because you don't get something from nothing." Logic says no such thing unless a cogent argument is made for it. Your link provides none. Causation and responsibility are not the same thing. The so-called logic of that paragraph is based on very sloppy language, but good logic requires the precise use of language.
The argument continues with an unsupported assertion that guidance from God is more logical than the processes suggested by the best astrophysicists of our time. I stopped there because at this point it was obvious that the argument being presented was theological and based on faulty or at least incomplete logic and thus not worth further consideration.
The argument fails.
No QED.
I didn't even get past the second frame of the video. They misrepresented the big bang with such a ludicrous strawman that I knew there was no point in watching the rest. The threat author is clearly mental.
EdSed

Wishaw, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
Jun 21, 2012
 
Gabrian wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =SJ8uXidvwM4
I really want to see how atheists squirm out of this one considering they now have to prove that chaos creates order and design and that 0+0 can equal one. I think we can officially say that logic and science favor God now considering the Goldilocks properties of the universe pointing to a universe which was purposely designed.
No opinions or theories please. I want to see actual scientific evidences defending atheism and the idea of nothing creating something (something which has been scientifically tested with no results...)
No squirming required.
Science offers no proof of the existence of a creator. Expaining that to you or Buck is probably impossible.
Religion = superstition
Amused

Lowell, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
Jun 21, 2012
 
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
You are wrong.
Logic does say that you can't get something from nothing, as this would require something to cause itself, which would require that the "something" exist before it existed.
You do realize that exactly the same argument applies to your god, right? Merely positing that god always existed is no more convincing than saying that matter always existed. Perhaps less, since we can see the matter, but not the god.
EdSed

Wishaw, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
Jun 21, 2012
 
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
You are wrong.
Logic does say that you can't get something from nothing, as this would require something to cause itself, which would require that the "something" exist before it existed.
I'm unsure of your grasp of the 'something from nothing' theory, but if one applies that logic to religion, then religion is equally obviously superstition.

Apparently, Quantum mathematics allows something to arise from 'nothing', but that depends on the exact meaning of 'nothing'- i.e. "empty space can contain energy".(Note that quote is from LAWRENCE KRAUSS, not Prof Dawkins). I think they misuse the word 'nothing' if energy (perhaps such as dark matter) exists.

In any case, I think the maths and theory are based on the observations that clearly indicate the universe is expanding. Even that isn't proven as we can only observe the universe from a single location in space and time,(relatively speaking:-)

Presumably we can agree there is nothing to suggest anything remotely like an Abrahamic god.

Since: Jun 12

London, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10
Jun 21, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

NightSerf wrote:
Atheism is not about science. Many atheists are fans of science, and some use science references in their arguments, but atheism is a theological/philosophical position, not a scientific one. The only scientific evidence that can debunk it is evidence that proves that God exists.
Your link says, "Atheists say that particles that led to the birth of our universe cam forth from the so-called vacuum." Some atheists may say that, but many more don't give a rat's ass how the universe began. So your link begins with a straw man argument.
Further on it says, "Logic says something must have been responsible for the creation of the universe because you don't get something from nothing." Logic says no such thing unless a cogent argument is made for it. Your link provides none. Causation and responsibility are not the same thing. The so-called logic of that paragraph is based on very sloppy language, but good logic requires the precise use of language.
The argument continues with an unsupported assertion that guidance from God is more logical than the processes suggested by the best astrophysicists of our time. I stopped there because at this point it was obvious that the argument being presented was theological and based on faulty or at least incomplete logic and thus not worth further consideration.
The argument fails.
No QED.
Wrong. I don't care if one atheist believes that the universe is eternal. We know that's wrong. We know the universe had a beginning and that's why the "something from nothing" theory came up because that's what atheists propose as the alternative to God. You're still not answering my questions and you don't know what logic is if you're denying the video. Have you got proof of nothing creating something? I didn't think so.

You've created a straw-man argument because the video is not claiming God guides everything but rather that he created the laws of this universe. Astrophysicists don't deny this and there are plenty of astrophysicists who believe in God which makes your argument flawed really. You also ignored the whole argument put forth about the fine-tuned properties of our universe. We don't observe chaotic and mindless forces creating order. We observe intelligent life doing so and therefore it's just plain common sense that the universe having order is testament to God creating it.

You haven't answered any of my questions and have responded with OPINIONS rather than facts. I'm not even going to bother reading your reply. Goodbye.
EdSed

Wishaw, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11
Jun 21, 2012
 
Gabrian wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong. I don't care if one atheist believes that the universe is eternal. We know that's wrong. We know the universe had a beginning and that's why the "something from nothing" theory came up because that's what atheists propose as the alternative to God. You're still not answering my questions and you don't know what logic is if you're denying the video. Have you got proof of nothing creating something? I didn't think so.
You've created a straw-man argument because the video is not claiming God guides everything but rather that he created the laws of this universe. Astrophysicists don't deny this and there are plenty of astrophysicists who believe in God which makes your argument flawed really. You also ignored the whole argument put forth about the fine-tuned properties of our universe. We don't observe chaotic and mindless forces creating order. We observe intelligent life doing so and therefore it's just plain common sense that the universe having order is testament to God creating it.
You haven't answered any of my questions and have responded with OPINIONS rather than facts. I'm not even going to bother reading your reply. Goodbye.
Fine, don't bohter to read responses you don't like.

However, what you claim for atheists suggests that you are uninterested in what atheists think, quote, "[the]'something from nothing' theory came up because that's what atheists propose as the alternative to God". Atheists don't need an alternative to god and we are talking of a scientific theory, not an atheist one.

And "We know the universe had a beginning.." Do we? Speak for yourself. There are scientific reasons for thinking that the Universe had a beginning. In fact, scientists,(religous or not) mostly agree that observations and mathematics strongly suggest it had a beginning in the 'Big Bang'.

Nothing to do with Abrahamic gods, nor any of these ones...
http://www.godchecker.com/

I think you were hoping to find some confirmation of some kind of superstitious belief in a creationist god. You can hardly be surprised or disappointed. Nothing in science suggests such an entity,(still less one that lords over us or requires worship).

“It's just a box of rain...”

Since: May 07

Knoxville, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12
Jun 21, 2012
 

Judged:

1

Gabrian wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong. I don't care if one atheist believes that the universe is eternal. We know that's wrong. We know the universe had a beginning and that's why the "something from nothing" theory came up because that's what atheists propose as the alternative to God. You're still not answering my questions and you don't know what logic is if you're denying the video. Have you got proof of nothing creating something? I didn't think so.
You've created a straw-man argument because the video is not claiming God guides everything but rather that he created the laws of this universe. Astrophysicists don't deny this and there are plenty of astrophysicists who believe in God which makes your argument flawed really. You also ignored the whole argument put forth about the fine-tuned properties of our universe. We don't observe chaotic and mindless forces creating order. We observe intelligent life doing so and therefore it's just plain common sense that the universe having order is testament to God creating it.
You haven't answered any of my questions and have responded with OPINIONS rather than facts. I'm not even going to bother reading your reply. Goodbye.
The point is atheism has nothing to do with quantum physics or the beginning of the universe. If I'm not answering your questions, it's because they are not pertinent. If astrophysicists don't deny you ideas about God's role in creation, neither do they confirm them. In point of fact, they simply don't factor God into their models at all. Nor do atheists. Like LaPlace, they have no need of that hypothesis. When astrophysical models don't work without the guiding hand of a deity, the models will have to change. so far, that hasn't happened.

The argument fails. No QED.

Since: Mar 11

Louisville, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13
Jun 21, 2012
 

Judged:

1

Something can't come from nothing? So where did your God come from?

Well them there science folk can't answer every question about everything so that there must mean it was a magical man floating in the clouds! And that magical man in the clouds sent his son on a suicide mission because a woman ate a magical fruit after being tricked by a talking snake!

Hahahaha you see free thinkers talking snakes and magical fruit explains what science can't. Dahurrrr dahurrrr! lmfao
IRYW

Malvern, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#14
Jun 21, 2012
 

Judged:

1

Gabrian wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong. I don't care if one atheist believes that the universe is eternal. We know that's wrong.We know the universe had a beginning .
No we don't. First you have to define universe.. do you mean the current detectable structure containing a finite amount of matter and energy and that we believe is around 14 billion years old? Or you mean all that matter and energy existing in some form, probably as yet unknown, before the big bang. How about defining eternity? Does a measurement of time cease without the relative motion of at least two physical bodies.
Gabrian wrote:
<quoted text>
and that's why the "something from nothing" theory came up because that's what atheists propose as the alternative to God..
There is no need to propose alternatives to things that don't exist. Let's try it. "I'm struggling to defend my position that there are no garden gnomes but I need an alternative to explain how the flowers bloom". Fail.
Gabrian wrote:
<You've created a straw-man argument because the video is not claiming God guides everything but rather that he created the laws of this universe. Astrophysicists don't deny this.
LOL
Gabrian wrote:
<and there are plenty of astrophysicists who believe in God which makes your argument flawed really..
There are plenty of people who don't believe in your god which makes your argument flawed really.
Gabrian wrote:
<. You also ignored the whole argument put forth about the fine-tuned properties of our universe..
Because they aren't. Read Stenger or Krauss.
Gabrian wrote:
<. We don't observe chaotic and mindless forces creating order..
Actually we do. Every day.

Since: Dec 10

Fogelsville, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15
Jun 21, 2012
 
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
You are wrong.
Logic does say that you can't get something from nothing, as this would require something to cause itself, which would require that the "something" exist before it existed.
If you want to assert that you can't get something from nothing, then you must be willing to stand by that assertion and admit that your god could not have always been as something would have had to come first. Also, if you want to hold to a standard that says you can't get something from nothing, than you can not say that in the beginning was nothing and god fabricated something from that nothing. In short, you can't argue a point using onbe standard, and than ignore that standard for your own story.

Since: Dec 10

Fogelsville, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16
Jun 21, 2012
 
Gabrian wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong. I don't care if one atheist believes that the universe is eternal. We know that's wrong. We know the universe had a beginning and that's why the "something from nothing" theory came up because that's what atheists propose as the alternative to God. You're still not answering my questions and you don't know what logic is if you're denying the video. Have you got proof of nothing creating something? I didn't think so.
You've created a straw-man argument because the video is not claiming God guides everything but rather that he created the laws of this universe. Astrophysicists don't deny this and there are plenty of astrophysicists who believe in God which makes your argument flawed really. You also ignored the whole argument put forth about the fine-tuned properties of our universe. We don't observe chaotic and mindless forces creating order. We observe intelligent life doing so and therefore it's just plain common sense that the universe having order is testament to God creating it.
You haven't answered any of my questions and have responded with OPINIONS rather than facts. I'm not even going to bother reading your reply. Goodbye.
Science does not claim something from nothing, nor does the big bang theory. To claim otherwise indicates a lack of knowledge of both.

“Citizen_Patriot_ Voter_Atheist!”

Since: May 09

Earth,TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#17
Jun 21, 2012
 
Gabrian wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =SJ8uXidvwM4
I really want to see how atheists squirm out of this one considering they now have to prove that chaos creates order and design and that 0+0 can equal one. I think we can officially say that logic and science favor God now considering the Goldilocks properties of the universe pointing to a universe which was purposely designed.
No opinions or theories please. I want to see actual scientific evidences defending atheism and the idea of nothing creating something (something which has been scientifically tested with no results...)
Squirm? You are a jackass! What is there to squirm out of?

Atheism isn't, an "ism".

Science can't decree that we not be, "not" theist. To become theist one must be indoctrinated, and until a person is indoctrinated, that person is atheist.

Plain and simple, A-T-H-E-I-S-T. No "ism" involved

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#18
Jun 21, 2012
 
Gabrian wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong. I don't care if one atheist believes that the universe is eternal. We know that's wrong.
Really? How? Were you there, before the Big Bang event?

No?

So how do you know the Universe did not exist prior, in some other form?

Answer: you do not.

There is no need for your nothing-god.
England 2012

UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#19
Jun 22, 2012
 
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>Really? How? Were you there, before the Big Bang event?

No?

So how do you know the Universe did not exist prior, in some other form?

Answer: you do not.

There is no need for your nothing-god.
Another desperate believer trying to make science fit their fantasy, science is constantly evolving and finding new answers, your religion is stuck in the bronze age and is in the process of decay
LMT

Hudson, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20
Jun 22, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

How fortunate that this groundbreaking book was featured on Colbert last night:

http://www.amazon.com/Universe-Nothing-There-...

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 1 - 20 of49
< prev page
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

11 Users are viewing the Atheism Forum right now

Search the Atheism Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 25 min Patrick 223,138
Our world came from nothing? 50 min Igor Trip 50
Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038 (Apr '12) 7 hr Buck Crick 21,333
Why do i deserve no respect. 13 hr Carchar king 7
Introducing The Universal Religion Wed NightSerf 718
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) Wed ChristineM 802
20+ Questions for Theists (Apr '13) Wed Buck Crick 324
•••
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••