skepticalme Posted November 7, 2011 Share Posted November 7, 2011 The anthropic principle is an argument from final consequences. Another logical fallacy. Lets compare the fine-tuned argument with an analogy so we can see how redicules it is. Imagine that there is a desert, a vast desert that stretches for billions of light years in all directions. In that desert is a single small oasis. Using the same logic you are using for the fine-tuned argument, you would conclude that clearly deserts are designed to contain water. Our planet is like an oasis in a vast desert universe that is completely inhospitable to life. How can that be fine-tuned? That is the worst design EVER. Thats a machine that only works 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000001% of the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bornagainathiest Posted November 7, 2011 Share Posted November 7, 2011 Oh btw, B.I.G.... ...have you managed to get the Kalaam to work properly yet? Since you like statistics and lots of impressive, overwhelmingly large numbers, maybe you should get a bunch of monkeys to sit at typewriters and attempt to make it work by tapping away at the keys for umpteen zillion years? Could you quote me the chances of them getting it to work? Ooopsie! I didn't tell you what the total number of monkeys with typewriters is, did I? Without that all important number you won't be able to work anything out. So maybe you could just fall back on what you're good at and try and stubborn your way out of this train wreck? Have fun! BAA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bornagainathiest Posted November 7, 2011 Share Posted November 7, 2011 Why are you asking for this evidence, B.I.G.? You've been agreeing with me that it is expanding, so why would you want the Agnosticator to present you with evidence you've already accepted? your assertion is that it will expand forever. I would like to see evidence for this assertion. Here... http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0702178 BAA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mymistake Posted November 7, 2011 Share Posted November 7, 2011 Next time you are outside and you realize it's about to rain because you were hit by a raindrop consider this. The probability that particular raindrop was going to hit you exactly on that spot is astronomically low. If we were to calculate it there would be a lot of zeros in the number. But when there are enough raindrops falling you will get hit. That is because the probability that a given raindrop will land somewhere is 1. The same principle would apply to planets. With billions of stars and thousands of galaxies - the probability that each will have some kind of form is 1. Enough chances and strange things will eventually happen. On top of that our universe might be just one in an endless cycle or chain of universes. In the big picture rare situations will happen just like a raindrop hitting you during a rain storm. http://www.reasons.o...ar-out-habitats The data demonstrate that the probability of finding even one planet with the capacity to support life falls short of one chance in 10140 (that number is 1 followed by 140 zeros). http://www.reasons.o...e-plan-humanity In the 1960s the odds that any given planet in the universe would possess the necessary conditions to support intelligent physical life were shown to be less than one in ten thousand.5 In 2001 those odds shrank to less than one in a number so large it might as well be infinity (10173) Ah so our universe is not fine tuned for life and no fine tuner is needed. You might be impressed by such numbers and yet you beat odds like that every time you get hit by rain. Perhaps some of the underlying assumptions used in the calculation are wrong. It's kind of like calculating that a rain drop is going to fall somewhere on Earth what are the odds that it will hit you on the nose. Yet you will get hit on the nose by rain in your lifetime despite the low odds. If it turns out that our universe is just one in a forever cycle or a forever chain then of course unlikely things will happen and no something-from-nothing creator is required. Lots of cycles happen in nature. Perhaps the Big Bang wasn't the beginning but just a natural stage a universe goes through every time a black hole exists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vigile Posted November 7, 2011 Share Posted November 7, 2011 Odds are funny things. Winning the lottery has very low odds on an individual basis, but the odds that someone, somewhere will win are exceedingly high. Godboy is playing the individual game here with dubious assumptions, while ignoring the big picture. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SillyString Posted November 7, 2011 Share Posted November 7, 2011 "Is it not better to place a question mark upon a problem while seeking an answer than to put the label "god" there and consider the matter solved? Does not the word "god" only confuse and make more difficult the solution by assuming a conclusion that is utterly groundless and palpably absurd?" - Joseph Lewis Since so many quotes are being thrown around in this thread, I'll throw one in too! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouroboros Posted November 7, 2011 Share Posted November 7, 2011 Quote mining, quote mining, quote mining. No individual thought or explanations. 99% cut-n-paste from other people's websites. We're not discussing with a person. We're discussion with an automated quote-mining robot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vigile Posted November 7, 2011 Share Posted November 7, 2011 Quote mining, quote mining, quote mining. No individual thought or explanations. 99% cut-n-paste from other people's websites. We're not discussing with a person. We're discussion with an automated quote-mining robot. I bet he impresses his peers in the pews though. Like Archie and the gang backing Moose at the big game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdelsolray Posted November 7, 2011 Share Posted November 7, 2011 The best explanation for our existence is cause and effect subject to physical laws how did these physical laws come into exstence ? beyond our universe, they did not exist. Since you've been telling me that you don't even know the full extent of our universe (it's radius and volume) B.I.G., how can you possibly know about anything 'beyond' our universe, if such a condition exists at all? Is that you method of argument, say one thing to one person and then the exact opposite to another? Hardly consistent! and constants operating with uniformity upon matter and energy. Of course, this explanation is tentative, and based on current empirical evidence. Feel free to falsify it utilizing the same intellectual rigor and honesty upon which it is based. you've not said nothing concrete, really...... Maybe you have nothing concrete to say, yourself? All I can see from you is an uninformed, stubborn, stonewall, dogmatic defiance of the evidence. BAA. I answered your initial question. You don't like it because it is different than your explanation. Having read your other posts in this thread, I have one observation: Disingenuousness combined with irrational thinking, logical fallacies and sanctimony make a dangerous combination. You have my sympathies. Good luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouroboros Posted November 7, 2011 Share Posted November 7, 2011 Quote mining, quote mining, quote mining. No individual thought or explanations. 99% cut-n-paste from other people's websites. We're not discussing with a person. We're discussion with an automated quote-mining robot. I bet he impresses his peers in the pews though. Like Archie and the gang backing Moose at the big game. Sadly true. Oh. I just found out who this guy is. I banned him a while back. He was just as crazy back then. I might let him stay for a little bit today, but from past experience, no one will get anywhere with this airhead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bornagainathiest Posted November 7, 2011 Share Posted November 7, 2011 [ Oh. I just found out who this guy is. I banned him a while back. He was just as crazy back then. I might let him stay for a little bit today, but from past experience, no one will get anywhere with this airhead. Not Troy (Biblocality) Brooks, again? BAA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouroboros Posted November 7, 2011 Share Posted November 7, 2011 Not Troy (Biblocality) Brooks, again? BAA. No. But almost as bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
believeingod Posted November 8, 2011 Author Share Posted November 8, 2011 What's wrong with "we don't have enough data to answer"? Let me ask you something : what is your goal of being at this forum ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
believeingod Posted November 8, 2011 Author Share Posted November 8, 2011 You simply refuse to accept accept those parts of the BBT that don't suit your agenda - that's all. BAA. really ? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultimate_fate_of_the_universe The ultimate fate of the universe is a topic in physical cosmology. Many possible fates are predicted by rival scientific theories, including futures of both finite and infinite duration. Once the notion that the universe started with a rapid inflation nicknamed the Big Bang became accepted by the majority of scientists,[1] the ultimate fate of the universe became a valid cosmological question, one depending upon the physical properties of the mass/energy in the universe, its average density, and the rate of expansion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
believeingod Posted November 8, 2011 Author Share Posted November 8, 2011 Our planet is like an oasis in a vast desert universe that is completely inhospitable to life. How can that be fine-tuned? That is the worst design EVER. Thats a machine that only works 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000001% of the time. But it works. Why is there something, rather than nothing ? And why is it a life permitting universe, facing the odds this to happen ? If it would be the result of chance, there would be a almost infinitely bigger probability, that never a life permitting universe would have come into existence, rather than the oposit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astreja Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 Let me ask you {Vigile} something : what is your goal of being at this forum? Well, I'm not Vigile, but I'll tell you why I'm here -- To challenge bad science and immoral superstitions such as Christianity, with the express goal of making life on Earth better for everyone. Even for you, B.I.G. If you could just, for one moment, drop the pretense of being a science expert and face up to the possibility that your god is fictional and there is no eternal life waiting for you, your life would almost certainly take off in wondrous new directions. As it is, you're stuck in a nasty myth, desperately trying to get the Evil Atheists™ to acknowledge your invisible friend and pretending not to hear what we're saying. How's that strategy working out for you, B.I.G.? Do you feel vindicated? Virile? Properly martyred by the vicious apostates, and waiting for that heavenly crown you'll never get? I know how it's worked out for Me -- It's reinforced My desire to never, ever become like you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mymistake Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 Why is there something, rather than nothing ? And why is it a life permitting universe, facing the odds this to happen ? If it would be the result of chance, there would be a almost infinitely bigger probability, that never a life permitting universe would have come into existence, rather than the oposit. Well, if we don't know the answer then clearly the answer must be "the Flying Spaghetti Monster". (Are you kidding me?) You can't answer these questions either. You don't have the answer. You also misunderstand probability. We say a properly ballanced coin has a 50/50 chance. That is because we cannot measure the wind, the exact power used in flipping the coin and all other factors that effect how it bounces. When all the factors are known then we can calculate exactly how things will turn out. So these estimates with all the zeros are based on our perspective and all the unknowns. The way our sun and planets are right not is the only way they could have formed given the condition of the gas cloud they formed from and all factors effecting it. It's a natural process just like the waves on the beach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
agnosticator Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 Why are you asking for this evidence, B.I.G.? You've been agreeing with me that it is expanding, so why would you want the Agnosticator to present you with evidence you've already accepted? your assertion is that it will expand forever. I would like to see evidence for this assertion. Dark energy causes the acceleration of the universe's expansion. If you had read my post #175, you would have seen all the possible scenarios. Read what bornagainatheist linked to in post #228. #http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/48701-please-present-the-best-explanation-for-our-existence/page__view__findpost__p__701089 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noggy Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 Out of all the argument TO believe in biblegod logic and reason are not good ones. This kind of christian is the saddest, but maybe I just say that because I used to be one of them. One day, kid, you'll get over yourself. And your Occamrazor-thin arguments, and you'll grow a pair of balls. Until then, enjoy raising your hands and singing to a omnipotent omniscient deity that is a logical contradiction in and of itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
believeingod Posted November 8, 2011 Author Share Posted November 8, 2011 Let me ask you {Vigile} something : what is your goal of being at this forum? Well, I'm not Vigile, but I'll tell you why I'm here -- To challenge bad science and immoral superstitions such as Christianity, with the express goal of making life on Earth better for everyone. First of all : christianity is NOT science. Secondly. You have not been capable, not even in the slightest manner, to come up with a explanation, that justifies to endorse naturalism. Third : You have no evidence whatsoever to claim christianity is just superstition. I have experienced the God of the bible in so many different ocasions, and so many different ways, no way someone like you to be able to convince me my faith is superstition. Forth : Its plain ridiculous to call christianity immoral, specially, faced the two major commands of Jesus, which are to love God, and our next. It seems what moves you is blind, irrational hate. Forth : please show in what way and kind atheism has been able to promote a better life on earth. Even for you, B.I.G. If you could just, for one moment, drop the pretense of being a science expert and face up to the possibility that your god is fictional and there is no eternal life waiting for you, your life would almost certainly take off in wondrous new directions. 1. Your world view does not even pass the truth test : http://worldview3.50webs.com/truthtests.html 2. Atheism/naturalism does not propose there is somebody that can help us in a concrete manner. There is nothing, that could help somebody to improve life in whatever kind. 3. According to Pascal Wager's, yours is a very bad bet. If you are wrong, you face a eternity in hell. As it is, you're stuck in a nasty myth, desperately trying to get the Evil Atheists™ I don't think atheists are worse than any other human being. We are all sinners, atheists or not, i don't make any distinction whatsoever. You call the bible a " nasty myth ". That shows, your position is not based on reason, but on emotion and bad will. That shows, even if i could prove you the God of the bible is the true one, you would prefere not to live with him. to acknowledge your invisible friend and pretending not to hear what we're saying. i don't try you or anyone else to acknowledge anything. I don't have the pretension you have. I am not here to try to convert someone. Thats your business, you need to figure that out with yourself. I just testify my faith, and the reasons behind it. What you do with my information, is entirely your business. How's that strategy working out for you, B.I.G.? Do you feel vindicated? Virile? Properly martyred by the vicious apostates, and waiting for that heavenly crown you'll never get? You completely missunderstand the reasons why i am here. I am here to tell you that God loves you, and its my concern to give others the choice to find, what i have found most precious in my life : Jesus Christ. I know how it's worked out for Me -- It's reinforced My desire to never, ever become like you. I think you have only been able to illude yourself, make yourself believe, you killed your conscience - i don't think that is a good thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
believeingod Posted November 8, 2011 Author Share Posted November 8, 2011 So these estimates with all the zeros are based on our perspective and all the unknowns. No, these estimates are based on what we DO know. Or do you think scientific research all these centuries along have not brought us any knowledge ? I know, you and others here, and so many atheist, play the " we don't know" card. Based on scientic knowledge we have today, this is hardly a position that can be justified. The way our sun and planets are right not is the only way they could have formed given the condition of the gas cloud they formed from and all factors effecting it. It's a natural process just like the waves on the beach. Well, if you think , the way to go is, to ignore the fine-tune argument, shall it be. Scientist atheists like Dawkins, Stenger, Rees , and many others have not. They aknowledge the universe is finely tuned.......their strategy is to avoid God, in searching for alternative answers , like multi verse etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
believeingod Posted November 8, 2011 Author Share Posted November 8, 2011 Why are you asking for this evidence, B.I.G.? You've been agreeing with me that it is expanding, so why would you want the Agnosticator to present you with evidence you've already accepted? your assertion is that it will expand forever. I would like to see evidence for this assertion. Dark energy causes the acceleration of the universe's expansion. If you had read my post #175, you would have seen all the possible scenarios. Read what bornagainatheist linked to in post #228. #http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/48701-please-present-the-best-explanation-for-our-existence/page__view__findpost__p__701089 you are right. There are different possible scenarios. So the assertion the universe will expand forever, into eternity, has no hard scientific evidence whatsoever to back up this claim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
believeingod Posted November 8, 2011 Author Share Posted November 8, 2011 enjoy raising your hands and singing to a omnipotent omniscient deity that is a logical contradiction in and of itself. oh really ? why so ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mymistake Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 No, these estimates are based on what we DO know. Wrong. Example: We most certainly do not know the mass down to the last gram for the star that exploded to form the cloud from which Sol condensed. Nor do we know to the meter per second the velocity of the ejected material. Such things are unknown. That is why we get all those zeros when we try to calculate the probabilities from what we know in our ignorance. So much is unknown. That is why the calculations are so wide open. Or do you think scientific research all these centuries along have not brought us any knowledge ? Your question does not follow from my statement. That we do not have a specific piece of information does not mean we have zero knowledge. I know, you and others here, and so many atheist, play the " we don't know" card. Based on scientic knowledge we have today, this is hardly a position that can be justified. By the way I am not an atheist. Since you claim we cannot justify that "we don't know" please tell me the exact mass of the Milky Way galaxy to the nearest gram without estimating and without any uncertainty. If you can't do that then your claim is wrong and we can justify "we don't know". Well, if you think , the way to go is, to ignore the fine-tune argument, shall it be. Scientist atheists like Dawkins, Stenger, Rees , and many others have not. They aknowledge the universe is finely tuned.......their strategy is to avoid God, in searching for alternative answers , like multi verse etc. I didn't ignore the fine tune argument. I pointed out why it is wrong. (Again I remind you that I am not an atheist. I find it puzzling that you would mention atheists twice while responding to me. When it comes to religion I'm agnostic and a bit of a deist.) Others have pointed out why the fine tune argument is a failure. It has been well covered. You get hit in the nose when you are caught out in the rain yet earth is not fine tuned for a raindrop to hit you exactly on that spot. I could explain it again and again but it won't make a difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mymistake Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 1. Your world view does not even pass the truth test : http://worldview3.50...truthtests.html 2. Atheism/naturalism does not propose there is somebody that can help us in a concrete manner. There is nothing, that could help somebody to improve life in whatever kind. So does the value of a world view depend on how much magical help it proposes? The Invisible Pink Unicorns rule! 3. According to Pascal Wager's, yours is a very bad bet. If you are wrong, you face a eternity in hell. Do you have have the right spells from the Book of the Dead so that when Osiris weights your heart in the afterlife it will be found worthy? Maybe you should worry about that. I don't think atheists are worse than any other human being. We are all sinners, atheists or not, i don't make any distinction whatsoever. That is yet another opinion that you cannot justify. You have no objective evidence that anybody actually sins against any god or goddess. You call the bible a " nasty myth ". That shows, your position is not based on reason, but on emotion and bad will. That shows, even if i could prove you the God of the bible is the true one, you would prefere not to live with him. Yeah, you can't prove God exists. Don't tell other people what they would do if you could prove things that you will never be able to prove. I don't have the pretension you have. I am here to tell you that God loves you, and its my concern to give others the choice to find, what i have found most precious in my life : Jesus Christ. We have all experience that bondage and discovered it to be a lie. You are not going to fool anybody. I think you have only been able to illude yourself, make yourself believe, you killed your conscience - i don't think that is a good thing. You are right. It is not a good thing that you think that. I hope your thinking improves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts