A Proof That God Exists

Since: Feb 13

Long Beach, CA

#1344 Apr 30, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
I make no such promise. Once again,*I AGREE* that an object cannot cause itself. But I do not agree that this means it is caused by something else. I could simply be uncaused.
Unlike you, I admit the possibility that there are uncaused events. There is even evidence of such things. One problem is simply getting a precise definition of the term 'to cause'.
The best definition I have seen for 'A causes B' is that when 'A" is an initial condition, then the physical laws predict 'B' at a later time. By this definition, causality requires both time and physical laws. Because of this, it is incoherent to talk about a cause for either time or of physical laws.
If this is NOT your definition of 'A causes B', then please provide *your* definition. In particular, please give a definition where the concept of 'a cause of time' is coherent. Up to now, I have seen no definition that makes this coherent.
----

Would you please provide the evidences you claim there are for uncaused events? Thank you. And for time it is a human concept to measure the motion of matter. Hence the definition of time as an accident of matter in motion.

Since: Feb 13

Long Beach, CA

#1345 Apr 30, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>

Yup, it has to be matter or energy. Otherwise you're just talking "spirituality" BS and its existence can be dismissed.
--------

I have just come to the understanding that from your barbarian way to express yourself as in "Spirituality BS" that you perhaps have been born without the attribute of spirituality like the irrational
animal. Pity!

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#1346 Apr 30, 2013
Shibolet wrote:
<quoted text>
----
Would you please provide the evidences you claim there are for uncaused events? Thank you. And for time it is a human concept to measure the motion of matter. Hence the definition of time as an accident of matter in motion.
Causality is also about matter in motion. Time is NOT just about matter in motion. It is an independent dynamic variable.

Before I give examples of uncaused events, please supply *your* definition of 'A causes B', so I can be sure my example satisfies your requirements.

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

#1347 Apr 30, 2013
The Dude wrote:
Hey, DS. Long time no see.
Didn't ya know that Bucky is the greatest scientist and greatest mathematician in the whole entire freakin' universe? And stonger than the Hulk too.
Bucky, in his own mind, is the most intelligent human being that has ever lived, or ever will live.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#1348 Apr 30, 2013
Darwins Stepchild wrote:
<quoted text>
Bucky, in his own mind, is the most intelligent human being that has ever lived, or ever will live.
It just seems that way 'cause I'm on Topix.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#1349 Apr 30, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
Causality is also about matter in motion. Time is NOT just about matter in motion. It is an independent dynamic variable.
Before I give examples of uncaused events, please supply *your* definition of 'A causes B', so I can be sure my example satisfies your requirements.
No. Causality is NOT about matter in motion.

It is not about matter; it is not about motion.

You have no examples of uncaused events.

...also none of infinity.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#1350 Apr 30, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
I make no such promise. Once again,*I AGREE* that an object cannot cause itself. But I do not agree that this means it is caused by something else. I could simply be uncaused.
Unlike you, I admit the possibility that there are uncaused events. There is even evidence of such things. One problem is simply getting a precise definition of the term 'to cause'.
The best definition I have seen for 'A causes B' is that when 'A" is an initial condition, then the physical laws predict 'B' at a later time. By this definition, causality requires both time and physical laws. Because of this, it is incoherent to talk about a cause for either time or of physical laws.
If this is NOT your definition of 'A causes B', then please provide *your* definition. In particular, please give a definition where the concept of 'a cause of time' is coherent. Up to now, I have seen no definition that makes this coherent.
Cause does not require time or physical laws.

It usually does, but there is no such requirement.

Time has a cause.

You concede universe time did not always exist, I think. It requires, therefore, a cause.

If you claim universe time is eternal, then all causes would be in universe time and the question of whether a cause requires time would be irrelevant.

Of course, it is impossible that universe time always existed.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#1351 Apr 30, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually I thought it slightly more resembled Christianity, what with the Galilean prophet and all. Jesus Christ, King of the Jews. You may have heard of him.
Hence invisible magic Jewish wizard.
A Galilean being a prophet is not the basis of Christianity.

Nor Judaism.

Nor any religion.

Newsflash for you, Dud.

Remind me never to respond to one of your idiot questions.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#1352 Apr 30, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>

Sorry, Buck already ruled out infinity. I don't but he did, so...(shrug)
If you don't rule out infinity, please explain how an infinity could be realized, and where an infinite quantity of anything could be located.

Poincare: "Actual infinity does not exist."

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#1353 Apr 30, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>

Yup, it has to be matter or energy. Otherwise you're just talking "spirituality" BS and its existence can be dismissed.
Learned neuroscientists and neurosurgeons disagree with you.

So the reader might choose to rely on your knowledge of the field, but I would not recommend it.

Particularly since you are a proven liar, not to mention an idiot.

So that you don't take my labeling of you a "liar" as frivolous, with your own words you made a claim of fact concerning me, then later admitted you "presumed" it.

But don't let the exposure ruin your day. I'm sure it's happened before.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#1354 Apr 30, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>

Without some other entity God would not exist.
No. Not unless God did not exist, and began to exist.

Do you have knowledge on that to share?

Didn't think so.

The infinite regression argument does not logically apply.

You won't learn anything if you don't try to think.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#1355 Apr 30, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
No. Not unless God did not exist, and began to exist.
Do you have knowledge on that to share?
Didn't think so.
The infinite regression argument does not logically apply.
You won't learn anything if you don't try to think.
Do you have proof of your god?...apart from your own delusions naturally.

No?

Hmmmm... we thought as much: you are batshyt insane.

Seriously: get help.

_-Alice-_

Since: Apr 13

Location hidden

#1356 May 1, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, sure, the morons and idiots would lap up the "People Magazine" shyt-- this is because they have shyt for brains.
But there is a group of people, who do enjoy architecture for it's own sake, and might buy your collection of photographs.
I dunno, getting it published would be a chore-- most publishing houses cater to the willfully stupid (as in line 1, above). But not all of them do-- National Geographic does not, for example.
It's just a hobby.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#1357 May 1, 2013
Shibolet wrote:
<quoted text>
--------
I have just come to the understanding that from your barbarian way to express yourself as in "Spirituality BS" that you perhaps have been born without the attribute of spirituality like the irrational
animal. Pity!
Then that makes two of us.(shrug)
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#1358 May 1, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
A Galilean being a prophet is not the basis of Christianity.

Nor Judaism.

Nor any religion.

Newsflash for you, Dud.

Remind me never to respond to one of your idiot questions.
Newsflash for you Buck. Everything you THINK you know about God comes from those very churches you claim to despise. Just because you say you have beefs with organised religion doesn't make you any different from any other fundie who cherry-picks what they like from the Bible, such as ignoring the inconvenient parts that state the Earth is flat.

I'm sure the Galilean prophet who "knew stuff about God" bit is just a coincidence.
Buck Crick wrote:
If you don't rule out infinity, please explain how an infinity could be realized, and where an infinite quantity of anything could be located.
God's house.

So I'm often told.(shrug)

Or indeed anywhere else beyond the expansion phase of our universe. I'm gonna take a wild stab in the dark and point out that you probably ain't been there to find out either way.
Buck Crick wrote:
Learned neuroscientists and neurosurgeons disagree with you.

So the reader might choose to rely on your knowledge of the field, but I would not recommend it.
Unfortunately learned neuroscientists have not learned anything at all about spirituality. Just because a scientist is an apologist in their spare time doesn't mean they have any authority on "spirituality", whatever the heck that is, beyond flowery metaphors.

That's why NOT ONE of them have objectively verifiable scientific evidence of it. I know that Mario Bureaugard (for example) has at least tried, and apparently his results turned out to be "inconclusive". What a shocker. You're simply stupidly gullible enough to believe in the personal anecdotes of fundies. Just as valid as UFO nuts.
Buck Crick wrote:
Particularly since you are a proven liar, not to mention an idiot.
Well you have at least mastered the art of projection.(shrug)
Buck Crick wrote:
So that you don't take my labeling of you a "liar" as frivolous, with your own words you made a claim of fact concerning me, then later admitted you "presumed" it.
Then had it verified.
Buck Crick wrote:
But don't let the exposure ruin your day. I'm sure it's happened before.
If it has, it ain't been you.
Buck Crick wrote:
No. Not unless God did not exist, and began to exist.

Do you have knowledge on that to share?

Didn't think so.

The infinite regression argument does not logically apply.

You won't learn anything if you don't try to think.
As usual you missed what people were getting at. I don't claim my statement was valid, only that it's as valid as yours. See, hypothetically speaking there COULD be an invisible magic Jewish wizard that did NOT require a cause but caused our universe. But since you are applying so-called "logic" arguments without evidence or backing up your logic we can dismiss your logic as being as valid as Aristotle.

Unless of course you have scientific evidence of this invisible wizard of yours.

Do you have knowledge on that to share?

Didn't think so.

Same as usual.(shrug)

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#1359 May 1, 2013
_-Alice-_ wrote:
<quoted text>
It's just a hobby.
:)

But an interesting one nonetheless.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#1360 May 1, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Cause does not require time or physical laws.
It usually does, but there is no such requirement.
Time has a cause.
You concede universe time did not always exist, I think. It requires, therefore, a cause.
If you claim universe time is eternal, then all causes would be in universe time and the question of whether a cause requires time would be irrelevant.
Of course, it is impossible that universe time always existed.
Please supply your definition of causality. You have made some strong claims, but have not backed it up with definitions or evidence.
Libertarian

London, UK

#1361 May 1, 2013
I've been watching the news and seen nothing yet.

Did somebody not say they had proof?

Its lazier and so much easier to say goddidit than actually educate yourselves and read a bit of physics. The answers are there. You seem to have such arrogance to think that if you, yourself don't understand something then it cannot be real. Do you think that people who have had the ability to spend their whole careers studying something are just making it up? I weep for the human race.

Its the same with evolution. You dont want to know the truth, you're happier just thinking a magical being just waved his magic wand. Well he wanted you to stay ignorant and happy so you're doing a great job.
Look around you at all the things you wouldn't have if people hadn't disobeyed the religous powers and actually improved the lot of the human race.

_-Alice-_

Since: Apr 13

Location hidden

#1362 May 1, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
:)
But an interesting one nonetheless.
I liked tombstones for awhile. I got this filtered shot of my prosthetic leg laying in the shadow of the stipe of a cross in a cemetery. It's kinda cool.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#1363 May 1, 2013
_-Alice-_ wrote:
<quoted text>
I liked tombstones for awhile. I got this filtered shot of my prosthetic leg laying in the shadow of the stipe of a cross in a cemetery. It's kinda cool.
Tombstones can be interesting in an historical sense too-- I remember going over the really old ones, on my mother's side of the family, in their little plot, which dates back to very early Missouri statehood, and a little before.

Sadly, many of the stones were of limestone, and have weathered badly.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form 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.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 2 min superwilly 256,029
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 3 min One way or another 40,677
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 7 min woodtick57 20,605
Who Is Satan The Devil? Is He Real? (Jan '16) 15 min Reason Personified 20
A Universe from Nothing? 30 min ilovedesigirls 76
For Atheists: Why do You Call Theories "Scient... 47 min Reason Personified 255
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 2 hr ChristineM 16,157
News Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038 (Apr '12) 4 hr ChristineM 24,079
More from around the web