Please test this. Thank you.

[LogicalFallacy]

I agree, I'd be most interested, especially as it will (Or should) also help me with understanding the subject matter in the In the beginning topic. I'm trying to get a better grounding in cosmology. I think I've come in from virtually no education on the matter and trying to understand topics without a firm grounding.

[bornagainathiest]

. 

 

 

 

 

 

[pantheory]

BAA,

 

Is Inflation cosmology a scientific hypothesis or just science speculation?

Is Inflation  an ad hoc addendum to the Big Bang theory?

Does the Big Bang model need Inflation to support or salvage its validity?

Is Inflation either an ad hoc hypothesis or ad hoc speculation?

Are both dark matter and dark energy ad hoc addendums to the Big Bang model, collectively called the Lambda Cold Dark Matter model, or the Concordance model of the Big Bang?

 

These are rhetorical questions for consideration by any interested party. None need to be addressed.

 

Ad hod defined:

 

In science and philosophy, an ad hoc hypothesis is a hypothesis added to a theory in order to save it from being falsified. Often, ad hoc hypothesizing is employed to compensate for anomalies not anticipated by the theory in its unmodified form.

 

https://www.google.com/search?source=hp&ei=UQIFWoi5DIHGmQHy17CADA&q=ad+hoc+science+definition&oq=ad+hoc+science+&gs_l=psy-ab.1.1.0i22i30k1l7j0i22i10i30k1j0i22i30k1l2.2456.11539.0.15195.16.15.0.0.0.0.270.2354.0j13j2.15.0....0...1.1.64.psy-ab..1.15.2348.0..0j35i39k1j0i131k1j0i67k1j0i20i264k1.0.dGnbjiEzu8M

Scientific Hypothesis defined:

“In science, a hypothesis is an idea or explanation that you then test through study and experimentation. Outside of science, a theory or guess can also be called a hypothesis. A hypothesis is something more than a wild guess but less than a well-established theory.”

https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/hypothesis

A scientific hypothesis is a suggested solution for an unexplained occurrence that does not fit into current accepted scientific theory. The basic idea of a hypothesis is that there is no pre-determined outcome.

For a hypothesis to be termed a scientific hypothesis, it has to be something that can be supported or refuted through carefully crafted experimentation or observation. This is called falsifiability and testability, an idea that was advanced in the mid-20th century by the well-respected British philosopher Karl Popper.

Encyclopedia Britannica.

https://www.livescience.com/21490-what-is-a-scientific-hypothesis-definition-of-hypothesis.html

Scientific speculations defined:

A proposal, conclusion, opinion, or guess reached by such contemplation. Speculations are generally impossible to verify.  Speculations are a type of conjectural consideration or surmise of a matter. A speculative proposal is one based upon what is considered to be possible rather than demonstrable facts.

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/speculation

Scientific Speculation is a legitimate part of the scientific process that develops early ideas that are not yet robust enough to be a testable, falsifiable or worthy of being a more formal "hypothesis".  Scientific speculations are grounded in established knowledge in a field, but generally go beyond what is defensible. Speculations are not permitted in peer review literature, or are severely limited by editors and peer reviewers. However, speculations can point the way to future research in an area.

Definition from Professor Don Macdonald, Grant MacEwan College Alberta, Canada

http://www.answers.com/Q/What_is_scientific_speculation?#slide=1

[bornagainathiest]

.

 

[pantheory]

10 hours ago, bornagainathiest said:

Pantheory,

 

This thread is a discussion between Ex-Christians about the apologetic tactics used by Christians to promote their Christian beliefs.

Since you never were a committed Christian you cannot be an Ex-Christian.  Therefore please quit this thread immediately and also delete your input.  

 

Thanks,

 

BAA.

 

 

I respectfully disagree. Any member can partake in any thread as long as their postings and statements follow the rules of the forum. Although I was still a teenager when I decided religions in general were false, it seems somewhat presumptuous of you to say that before that time I was never a committed Christian. Since becoming an atheist I still sometimes go to various churches to meet old friends, sing the songs and socialize, contribute to good works etc. Imagine that!.

[bornagainathiest]

.

 

 

 

[sdelsolray]

BAA,

 

Your list of 10 points is an argument, not a set of rules.  Pantheory is addressing your argument.

[pantheory]

5 hours ago, bornagainathiest said:

 

...............................The context within which this whole thread sits is clearly defined in the OP.

 

1. The only branch of the sciences that employs proofs is math, whereas every other branch employs the best possible explanation according to the available evidence.

2.  Inflationary theory is the best possible explanation of the evolution of the early universe, according to the available evidence.

3.  Inflation is not a one-off event but a never-ending process that began an indefinitely long time before it 'inflated' our part of the universe.

4. The internal logic of physics tell us that inflation makes stars, planets and people in a finite number of patterns.

5.  Since inflation has a limited (finite) number of patterns in which to make these things, the longer it continues making them, the more it repeats these patterns.

6.  Therefore, once inflation begins the pattern Christians refer to as the fine-tuning of the universe will be repeated over and over again.

7.  Therefore, once inflation begins the pattern Christians refer to as intelligently designed life will be repeated over and over again.

8.  Therefore, once inflation begins the finely-tuned, intelligently-designed pattern known as planet Earth will be repeated over and over again.

9.  Therefore, once inflation begins the patterns we call ourselves will be repeated over and over again.

10.  Therefore, the Christian apologetic argument for only one finely-tuned, intelligently-designed Earth, populated by unique individuals who are saved by Jesus Christ's one-and-only sacrifice is refuted by inflationary theory. 

 

Points 6 thru 10 clear make it quite clear that this thread is exclusively about using inflationary theory to refute Christian apologetic arguments.

This thread is not a scientific discussion of inflationary theory.   Nor is it a discussion of the merits or demerits of inflationary theory.   Nor is it an discussion of any alternatives to inflationary theory.   It is a discussion of the way certain Christians misuse that theory to falsely promote their Christian beliefs.  Therefore , adherence to this forum's rules alone is not sufficient to entitle you to participate.......................

 

Are you interested in using inflationary theory to refute Christian apologetic arguments?

 

If your answer is No, then you have no place here and nothing relevant to contribute.  

If your answer is Yes, then I must ask you why you are interested in using it in this way, especially when you reject it and have argued at length against it in the Science sub-forum.

 

Please answer.

 

Are you interested in using inflationary theory to refute Christian apologetic arguments?

 

 

As a confirmed atheist, I am also not fond of Christian arguments against science.

 

But IMO Inflation is not a theory, not a hypothesis, and not even science at the present time. It is only speculation. I understand why it was proposed and I commend those that have been able to make such difficult ad hoc proposals. As you know there are a great number of different Inflation proposals made by a number of different individuals in cosmology

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_inflation

 

https://www.google.com/search?source=hp&ei=Z_sFWvKDMoSWmQHZuKCwBA&q=define+science+&oq=define+science+&gs_l=psy-ab.13..35i39k1j0i20i263k1j0l8.676.5617.0.12444.16.15.0.0.0.0.378.2513.0j13j1j1.15.0....0...1.1.64.psy-ab..1.15.2506.0..46j0i46k1j0i131k1j0i67k1j0i20i264k1.0.qco1tG-vw48

 

But IMO speculations of this kind are not good arguments to counter Christian apologetics.  There are too many other excellent arguments based upon observations, that cannot validly be countered by Christians, again IMO.

 

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/victor-stenger/how-to-debate-religion_b_4876997.html

 

 

[bornagainathiest]

5 hours ago, pantheory said:

.

 

[bornagainathiest]

6 hours ago, sdelsolray said:

.

[sdelsolray]

Thanks BAA.  That makes more sense now.

 

We can save the following for another time:  Inflation is not a scientific theory, at least not yet.

[pantheory]

3 hours ago, bornagainathiest said:

 

You've just displayed your ignorance of what this thread is about, Pantheory.

 

We  Ex-Christians are NOT the ones who are promoting Inflation theory.

It is the Christian apologists like William Lane Craig and the Christian visitors to this forum like OrdinaryClay who are doing that.  Inflation is their choice, not ours.  In this thread we Ex-Christians are seeking to discover just how the likes of Craig and OrdinaryClay misuse and abuse Inflation for their own ends.  How they bend it and distort to further their own religious agenda. 

 

Therefore, your suggestion of using other and better arguments against them is not just irrelevant - it is off-topic.

Because Inflation is the Christians argument of choice, that is the ONLY one that is under discussion here.  No other arguments.  No alternative theories.  ONLY inflation.  So, if you are not prepared to discuss only inflation and only in the context of how the Christians misuse it, then there is nothing you can contribute to this thread.

 

Now, please confirm that you understand that in this thread we Ex-Christians are RESPONDING to the Christian apologetic (mis)usage of Inflationary theory.

 

Please also confirm that you understand that Inflationary theory is therefore the only one under discussion here.

 

Please confirm that you understand that alternative theories and arguments have no place here, because Christian apologists do not use them.

 

Lastly, please confirm that you now understand that this thread is not for you and that you will be quitting it forthwith.

 

Thanks,

 

BAA.

 

 

"You've just displayed your ignorance of what this thread is about, Pantheory.

 

We  Ex-Christians are NOT the ones who are promoting Inflation theory. It is the Christian apologists like William Lane Craig and the Christian visitors to this forum like OrdinaryClay who are doing that.  Inflation is their choice, not ours.  In this thread we Ex-Christians are seeking to discover just how the likes of Craig and OrdinaryClay misuse and abuse Inflation for their own ends.  How they bend it and distort to further their own religious agenda."

 

If I were a Christian and wanted to argue religion, I too would jump on Inflation as a source of vulnerability concerning cosmology, and of science in general

 

"Therefore, your suggestion of using other and better arguments against them is not just irrelevant - it is off-topic.

Because Inflation is the Christians argument of choice, that is the ONLY one that is under discussion here.  No other arguments.  No alternative theories.  ONLY inflation.  So, if you are not prepared to discuss only inflation and only in the context of how the Christians misuse it, then there is nothing you can contribute to this thread."

 

What suggestion? I said there are far better arguments in science than Inflation which are observation based, not that I wished to discuss any other argument since there are so many of them.

 

"Now, please confirm that you understand that in this thread we Ex-Christians are RESPONDING to the Christian apologetic (mis)usage of Inflationary theory. Please also confirm that you understand that Inflationary theory is therefore the only one under discussion here. Please confirm that you understand that alternative theories and arguments have no place here, because Christian apologists do not use them. Lastly, please confirm that you now understand that this thread is not for you and that you will be quitting it forthwith."

 

I too am interested to learn how Christian apologetics have misused Inflation to justify religion, or to denigrate or discredit science.

 

[LogicalFallacy]

35 minutes ago, sdelsolray said:

Thanks BAA.  That makes more sense now.

 

We can save the following for another time:  Inflation is not a scientific theory, at least not yet.

 

I would be interested also in this topic - possibly better suited to Science vs religion board?

 

I have been doing some preliminary reading based on Pantheory's points, and looking at the various discussions for and against inflation.

 

(Because, unlike I've been recently accused of, I don't just follow some guy with a PHd)

 

However I also understand BAA's opposition to this kind of discussion when we are in fact talking about debate matters with Christians that we will no doubt run across. I'm not sure about the rest of members here, but I do spend some considerable time on other media engaging with Christians on the topic of the bible and God. Any knowledge that can help is welcomed. 

[bornagainathiest]

.

 

[pantheory]

31 minutes ago, bornagainathiest said:

Posted 1 minute ago

  3 hours ago, bornagainathiest said:

 

You've just displayed your ignorance of what this thread is about, Pantheory.

 

We  Ex-Christians are NOT the ones who are promoting Inflation theory.

It is the Christian apologists like William Lane Craig and the Christian visitors to this forum like OrdinaryClay who are doing that.  Inflation is their choice, not ours.  In this thread we Ex-Christians are seeking to discover just how the likes of Craig and OrdinaryClay misuse and abuse Inflation for their own ends.  How they bend it and distort to further their own religious agenda. 

 

Therefore, your suggestion of using other and better arguments against them is not just irrelevant - it is off-topic.

Because Inflation is the Christians argument of choice, that is the ONLY one that is under discussion here.  No other arguments.  No alternative theories.  ONLY inflation.  So, if you are not prepared to discuss only inflation and only in the context of how the Christians misuse it, then there is nothing you can contribute to this thread.

 

Now, please confirm that you understand that in this thread we Ex-Christians are RESPONDING to the Christian apologetic (mis)usage of Inflationary theory.

 

Please also confirm that you understand that Inflationary theory is therefore the only one under discussion here.

 

Please confirm that you understand that alternative theories and arguments have no place here, because Christian apologists do not use them.

 

Lastly, please confirm that you now understand that this thread is not for you and that you will be quitting it forthwith.

 

Thanks,

 

BAA.

 

 

"You've just displayed your ignorance of what this thread is about, Pantheory.

 

We  Ex-Christians are NOT the ones who are promoting Inflation theory. It is the Christian apologists like William Lane Craig and the Christian visitors to this forum like OrdinaryClay who are doing that.  Inflation is their choice, not ours.  In this thread we Ex-Christians are seeking to discover just how the likes of Craig and OrdinaryClay misuse and abuse Inflation for their own ends.  How they bend it and distort to further their own religious agenda."

 

If I were a Christian and wanted to argue religion, I too would jump on Inflation as a source of vulnerability concerning cosmology, and of science in general

 

Christians apologists like Craig do not do that, Pantheory.

They do the opposite.  They consider Inflation to be a source of reliability, not vulnerability.  They look to Inflation to support their beliefs.  They are not looking to debunk it.  Once again, you are displaying your ignorance of these matters.  More about that below.

 

"Therefore, your suggestion of using other and better arguments against them is not just irrelevant - it is off-topic.

Because Inflation is the Christians argument of choice, that is the ONLY one that is under discussion here.  No other arguments.  No alternative theories.  ONLY inflation.  So, if you are not prepared to discuss only inflation and only in the context of how the Christians misuse it, then there is nothing you can contribute to this thread."

 

What suggestion? I said there are far better arguments in science than Inflation, not that I wished to discuss any other argument since there are so many of them.

 

If you are not suggesting any other arguments and since you are also dead set against Inflation, then I see little point in you participating in this thread.

For years in the Science vs Religion sub-forum you've consistently and persistently argued against Inflation.  But today you're suddenly very interested in it.  I find your new-found interest in Inflation (particularly in a religious context that you are ignorant of) very difficult to square with your long-standing opposition to it.  

 

"Now, please confirm that you understand that in this thread we Ex-Christians are RESPONDING to the Christian apologetic (mis)usage of Inflationary theory. Please also confirm that you understand that Inflationary theory is therefore the only one under discussion here. Please confirm that you understand that alternative theories and arguments have no place here, because Christian apologists do not use them. Lastly, please confirm that you now understand that this thread is not for you and that you will be quitting it forthwith."

 

I too am interested in how Christian apologetics have misused Inflation to either justify religion, or to denigrate or discredit science.

 

I don't believe you.

I consider your sudden interest in the way Christians misuse Inflation to be a pretext for you to try and muscle your way into this thread.  A thread where you don't belong, where you have nothing to contribute and where you are ignorant of too much concerning Born-Again Christian theology.  Furthermore, your many years of arguing against Inflationary theory in the Science sub-forum have been marked by your many attempts to distort and manipulate science articles and reports to your own ends - to disparage and discredit Inflation in favor of your alternative theory.  I've stepped in many times and corrected your 'fake news', for the benefit of those members who are interested in understanding what these reports and articles were really about.

 

Now, giving you the benefit of the doubt...

Even in the unlikely event that you are genuinely interested in how William Lane Craig misuses Inflation, it's simply not practical for me to 'bring you up to speed' on the basics.  So that you can participate in this thread on an equal footing with Disillusioned, LogicalFallacy and myself.  It's already difficult enough for me to try and convey the complex scientific concepts involved to them.  Having to nursemaid you through the basics of Christian apologetics as well is simply too great a burden for me.  I won't do it.

 

So, here's the deal Pantheory.

I don't trust you.  Not one inch.  If you do not quit this thread today, I'll ask the Mods to lock it down and I'll proceed in my dialog with Disillusioned and LogicalFallacy privately, via e-mail.  They deserve to have their interest and their questions answered properly and I intend to do right by them.

 

Now it's over to you.

 

Are you going to quit this thread?  Y / N ?

 

 

Please inform me of what you think I do not know, concerning present Christian apologetics and Inflation.  I do not follow the arguments of Christianity very closely because IMO most all that I have read have been uninformed concerning science, and generally ridiculous as to their composition. IMO I could knock most of these arguments down with little effort.

 

 

[bornagainathiest]

37 minutes ago, pantheory said:

.

[bornagainathiest]

I have just contacted the Mods and requested that this thread be locked.

 

I have just deleted as much of my content from this thread as possible.

 

I have just copied all of my content over to another location.

 

I can therefore continue this thread with privately, via e-mail, with anyone (but Pantheory) who is interested in continuing it.

 

md884695@gmail.com

 

If Pantheory gives me his word that he will not participate, I can reboot this thread in the Den an it can be continued as before.

 

Thanks,

 

BAA.

 

[pantheory]

30 minutes ago, bornagainathiest said:

I have just contacted the Mods and requested that this thread be locked.

 

I have just deleted as much of my content from this thread as possible.

 

I have just copied all of my content over to another location.

 

I can therefore continue this thread with privately, via e-mail, with anyone (but Pantheory) who is interested in continuing it.

 

md884695@gmail.com

 

If Pantheory gives me his word that he will not participate, I can reboot this thread in the Den an it can be continued as before.

 

Thanks,

 

BAA.

 

 

I do not have to know what Christian apologetics says about Inflation. and if my interest continues I can just read your postings and those of others if this thread continues in my absence. I will not further participate in this thread if it is that important to you, but please do not use this tactic again on me to stay out of other threads that you have started, or are participating in.