The 2012 bug is catching on!

Page 11 of 12 First ... 69101112 Last
  1. Running with the Big Boys
    Board Sponsor
    Rodja's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  220 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Age
    30
    Posts
    23,077
    Rep Power
    918000

    Quote Originally Posted by Rodja View Post
    You're using the Bible as evidence for your point, yet it is the very element that is in question. That is the definition of arguing in a circle.
    Quote Originally Posted by DR.D View Post
    Ok tough guy, if you wanna get back on track so bad, then what do you think will happen in 2012?
    I said nothing about staying on track; instead, I merely wanted an answer to this without the pompous attitude that you have decided to use in your past several posts. Personally, my opinion on what may happen on 2012 has little relevance to my post.
    M.Ed. Ex Phys

  2. Registered User
    DR.D's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  228 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    6,779
    Rep Power
    307851

    Quote Originally Posted by Rodja View Post
    I said nothing about staying on track; instead, I merely wanted an answer to this without the pompous attitude that you have decided to use in your past several posts. Personally, my opinion on what may happen on 2012 has little relevance to my post.
    OK, well I tell you want Rodja, next time I'm at the outlet mall in your neck of the woods, I'll call you up and we can handle this like real men right there in the parking lot. How about that big man? Loser buys lunch.
  3. Registered User
    DR.D's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  228 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    6,779
    Rep Power
    307851

    Quote Originally Posted by SELFofGOD View Post
    AH CRAP ! I CANT FAK WITH A SPECIAL KID DAM UUU !!!!!!
    Oh no you di'ent! Don't make me get off this short bus and come over there to Iran, or Afgan, or wherever you be hidin' these days, lol

    So what do you think will happen in 2012?
    •   
       

  4. Running with the Big Boys
    Board Sponsor
    Rodja's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  220 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Age
    30
    Posts
    23,077
    Rep Power
    918000

    Quote Originally Posted by DR.D View Post
    OK, well I tell you want Rodja, next time I'm at the outlet mall in your neck of the woods, I'll call you up and we can handle this like real men right there in the parking lot. How about that big man? Loser buys lunch.
    Are you going to actually address my question or just commit more fallacies within your posts? Plus, you're not even worth my time or to risk a felony.
    M.Ed. Ex Phys
  5. Registered User
    DR.D's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  228 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    6,779
    Rep Power
    307851

    Quote Originally Posted by Rodja View Post
    Are you going to actually address my question or just commit more fallacies within your posts? Plus, you're not even worth my time or to risk a felony.
    Sorry bud, please repeat your exact question and I will gladly answer it right away.
  6. Running with the Big Boys
    Board Sponsor
    Rodja's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  220 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Age
    30
    Posts
    23,077
    Rep Power
    918000

    Quote Originally Posted by DR.D View Post
    Sorry bud, please repeat your exact question and I will gladly answer it right away.
    Arguing in a circle...
    M.Ed. Ex Phys
  7. Registered User
    DR.D's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  228 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    6,779
    Rep Power
    307851

    Quote Originally Posted by Rodja View Post
    Arguing in a circle...
    'Arguing in a circle' what? Please phrase your question in the form of a question, or I won't presume to know what you're asking.
  8. Running with the Big Boys
    Board Sponsor
    Rodja's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  220 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Age
    30
    Posts
    23,077
    Rep Power
    918000

    Quote Originally Posted by DR.D View Post
    'Arguing in a circle' what? Please phrase your question in the form of a question, or I won't presume to know what you're asking.
    Care to address your constant use of arguing in a circle and how you're NOT committing this logical fallacy?
    M.Ed. Ex Phys
  9. Registered User
    DR.D's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  228 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    6,779
    Rep Power
    307851

    Quote Originally Posted by Rodja View Post
    Care to address your constant use of arguing in a circle and how you're NOT committing this logical fallacy?
    I wish I could address it, but I'm really not sure what you're referring to. Do you just mean in general? If so, what else can I say man? I've made my points pretty clearly I think and I'm not sure what you think is so circular about them.
  10. Registered User
    SELFofGOD's Avatar
    Stats
    5'9"  215 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Afghanistan
    Age
    35
    Posts
    241
    Rep Power
    203

    Quote Originally Posted by DR.D View Post
    Oh no you di'ent! Don't make me get off this short bus and come over there to Iran, or Afgan, or wherever you be hidin' these days, lol

    So what do you think will happen in 2012?
    ABSULUTAMENTE NADA HERMANO lol
  11. Registered User
    DR.D's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  228 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    6,779
    Rep Power
    307851

    Quote Originally Posted by SELFofGOD View Post
    ABSULUTAMENTE NADA HERMANO lol
    Via con dios mi amigo!
  12. Registered User
    SELFofGOD's Avatar
    Stats
    5'9"  215 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Afghanistan
    Age
    35
    Posts
    241
    Rep Power
    203

    I will say one last thing b4 I eventually get booted off of AM :

    I would LOVE to be able to feel this Godly presence , summn lookn over us.
    I would LOVE to know that after I die there will be summn else to come.
    I would LOVE to be able to look up at the sky in my times of suffering and reach out for help from my father above

    BUT my brain is just NOT wired that way. I feel nothing. Even during the times I thought for sure I was going to die I felt no hand of GOD.
    My most recent NDE all that came to my mind after I saw my Wife and Child was "FOCK this Sucks " lol

    So yeah It would deff be great to have faith. I just can not. Maybe I envy some of you I dunno.

    Oh well fock it.
  13. Registered User
    SELFofGOD's Avatar
    Stats
    5'9"  215 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Afghanistan
    Age
    35
    Posts
    241
    Rep Power
    203

    Quote Originally Posted by DR.D View Post
    Via con dios mi amigo!
    kool I can curse ya out in spanish now !!! lol
  14. Running with the Big Boys
    Board Sponsor
    Rodja's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  220 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Age
    30
    Posts
    23,077
    Rep Power
    918000

    Quote Originally Posted by DR.D View Post
    I wish I could address it, but I'm really not sure what you're referring to. Do you just mean in general? If so, what else can I say man? I've made my points pretty clearly I think and I'm not sure what you think is so circular about them.
    Not too familiar with what this is I see. Google it.
    M.Ed. Ex Phys
  15. Running with the Big Boys
    Board Sponsor
    Rodja's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  220 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Age
    30
    Posts
    23,077
    Rep Power
    918000

    Here, I'll help you out:

    Circular reasoning is an attempt to support a statement by simply repeating the statement in different or stronger terms. In this fallacy, the reason given is nothing more than a restatement of the conclusion that poses as the reason for the conclusion. To say, “You should exercise because it’s good for you” is really saying, “You should exercise because you should exercise.”

    It shares much with the false authority fallacy because we accept these statements based solely on the fact that someone else claims it to be so. Often, we feel we can trust another person so much that we often accept his claims without testing the logic. This is called blind trust, and it is very dangerous. We might as well just talk in circles.
    M.Ed. Ex Phys
  16. Registered User
    DR.D's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  228 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    6,779
    Rep Power
    307851

    Quote Originally Posted by Rodja View Post
    Here, I'll help you out:

    Circular reasoning is an attempt to support a statement by simply repeating the statement in different or stronger terms. In this fallacy, the reason given is nothing more than a restatement of the conclusion that poses as the reason for the conclusion. To say, “You should exercise because it’s good for you” is really saying, “You should exercise because you should exercise.”

    It shares much with the false authority fallacy because we accept these statements based solely on the fact that someone else claims it to be so. Often, we feel we can trust another person so much that we often accept his claims without testing the logic. This is called blind trust, and it is very dangerous. We might as well just talk in circles.
    I understand your accusation, I just don't know what it's in reference to. Are you saying that belief in God is a circular argument? Because I never said believe in God just because he's God. Quite the contrary my belligerent friend!
  17. Registered User
    Flaw's Avatar
    Stats
    5'11"  240 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    Posts
    1,278
    Rep Power
    1400

    Quote Originally Posted by Rodja View Post
    You're using the Bible as evidence for your point, yet it is the very element that is in question. That is the definition of arguing in a circle.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rodja View Post
    Do you guys ever stop arguing in a circle? You can't have an ecumenical conversation and still commit this fallacy over and over and over and over...
    Your assumptions dismiss your very point of arguement and you are guilty of the Fallacy of Begging the Question.

    You have assumed the bible is false in order to argue that the bible is false.

    It appears that you are just trying to start a arguement and I didn't come in here to argue.
    “Lord, whom shall we go away to? You have sayings of everlasting life"- John 6:68

    WHAT has science offered?
  18. Registered User
    DR.D's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  228 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    6,779
    Rep Power
    307851

    Quote Originally Posted by SELFofGOD View Post
    I will say one last thing b4 I eventually get booted off of AM :

    I would LOVE to be able to feel this Godly presence , summn lookn over us.
    I would LOVE to know that after I die there will be summn else to come.
    I would LOVE to be able to look up at the sky in my times of suffering and reach out for help from my father above

    BUT my brain is just NOT wired that way. I feel nothing. Even during the times I thought for sure I was going to die I felt no hand of GOD.
    My most recent NDE all that came to my mind after I saw my Wife and Child was "FOCK this Sucks " lol

    So yeah It would deff be great to have faith. I just can not. Maybe I envy some of you I dunno.

    Oh well fock it.
    Dude, you just described half the guys in the Bible! God uses men such as this, and He may use you too before it's over (provided you are willing.) It wouldn't surprise me.
  19. Registered User
    Army Guy's Avatar
    Stats
    6'3"  230 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Searching for TG in Bilskirnir
    Posts
    3,206
    Rep Power
    1807

    Quote Originally Posted by DR.D View Post
    Dude, you just described half the guys in the Bible! God uses men such as this, and He may use you too before it's over (provided you are willing.) It wouldn't surprise me.
    I hope he posts his experiences then
    Working on living
  20. Registered User
    SELFofGOD's Avatar
    Stats
    5'9"  215 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Afghanistan
    Age
    35
    Posts
    241
    Rep Power
    203

    you would have 2 start an OH FOCK thread AG lol Im sure u got some 2 bro
  21. Running with the Big Boys
    Board Sponsor
    Rodja's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  220 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Age
    30
    Posts
    23,077
    Rep Power
    918000

    Quote Originally Posted by DR.D View Post
    I understand your accusation, I just don't know what it's in reference to. Are you saying that belief in God is a circular argument? Because I never said believe in God just because he's God. Quite the contrary my belligerent friend!
    I'm arguing against the Christian version of "God" and your only proof is using the very document, the Bible, that outlines your view. Now, you cannot use this for proof when it is the subject of debate. That is arguing in a circle.

    Also, isn't it a tad ironic you label me belligerent when you were the one challenging me to a fight?

    Quote Originally Posted by Flaw View Post
    Your assumptions dismiss your very point of arguement and you are guilty of the Fallacy of Begging the Question.

    You have assumed the bible is false in order to argue that the bible is false.

    It appears that you are just trying to start a arguement and I didn't come in here to argue.
    Petitio Principii refers to arguing for a conclusion that has already been assumed in the premise.

    By these terms, you can also say you're committing this fallacy because you're arguing that the Bible and, therefore, the Christian God are correct. You're assuming that this representation is correct based upon the Bible.

    I question the premise of the Bible due to the parallels found in several other texts. The creation myths themselves are my main source of doubt. Not to mention that they use a book as a foundation that is not even theirs. It takes a lot of arrogance to take the text of another religion and amend it to fit another viewpoint.
    M.Ed. Ex Phys
  22. Unbreakable
    Board Moderator
    David Dunn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Age
    49
    Posts
    11,723
    Rep Power
    949536

    Quote Originally Posted by AE14 View Post
    I understand where you are coming from D. However, for me I am on a search for the truth about civilization. There is so much evidence to support earlier advanced civilizations. Read Ancient Maya text and it talks about it. Think about the Noah/Gilgamesh flood stories, they tie to a logical conclusion which is the thawing of the last ice age.

    Damn it....I am going to have to go searching again
    My intellecual side enjoys that as well. My belief is that they all still fall under the creator of the universe - God.

    I by no means am ignorant to the idea that scripture has ties in with other cultural fables and stories. Would these others still lead me to the God I know today? Don't know. Does the God I know tell me to ignore these stories and fables? He does not tell me to ignore them. Does the God I know tell me to ignore other faiths. No He does not.

    I follow Jesus, the Christ, the New Testament teacher, The New Covenant. I'll stake my life on it and let the rest of you guys work out the intellectual contradictions in extraterrestrial existance, science, cultures and politics
  23. Registered User
    DR.D's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  228 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    6,779
    Rep Power
    307851

    Quote Originally Posted by Rodja View Post
    I'm arguing against the Christian version of "God" and your only proof is using the very document, the Bible, that outlines your view. Now, you cannot use this for proof when it is the subject of debate. That is arguing in a circle.
    You have now committed a fallacy, since I never claimed the Bible was proof of God. If you care to go back and read it again, I stated that I had a personal experience that demonstrated this truth to me, and that I suspect this is essential to the process for most men to understand. The Bible simply claims to offer insights into the workings of the Christian paradigm.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rodja View Post
    Also, isn't it a tad ironic you label me belligerent when you were the one challenging me to a fight?
    You had already challenged me by insinuation, I was just having the courtesy to get to the point with you. It would all be in good fun though, with the winner receiving a free meal afterward (thus implying that our friendship would not be compromised regardless of the results of the challenge.) However, you declined the gentlemanly offer to step in the ring with me, and I'm impressed with your wisdom on that choice.
  24. Running with the Big Boys
    Board Sponsor
    Rodja's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  220 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Age
    30
    Posts
    23,077
    Rep Power
    918000

    Quote Originally Posted by DR.D View Post
    You have now committed a fallacy, since I never claimed the Bible was proof of God. If you care to go back and read it again, I stated that I had a personal experience that demonstrated this truth to me, and that I suspect this is essential to the process for most men to understand. The Bible simply claims to offer insights into the workings of the Christian paradigm.



    You had already challenged me by insinuation, I was just having the courtesy to get to the point with you. It would all be in good fun though, with the winner receiving a free meal afterward (thus implying that our friendship would not be compromised regardless of the results of the challenge.) However, you declined the gentlemanly offer to step in the ring with me, and I'm impressed with your wisdom on that choice.
    If you want to boil it down to semantics, then I'm arguing against the Christian paradigm which you have been quoting the Bible to support this notion. Seriously, talk about insecurity; challenging someone to a fight based upon my opposition to your faith. That shows so much class and humility.
    M.Ed. Ex Phys
  25. Registered User
    DR.D's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  228 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    6,779
    Rep Power
    307851

    Quote Originally Posted by Rodja View Post
    If you want to boil it down to semantics, then I'm arguing against the Christian paradigm which you have been quoting the Bible to support this notion. Seriously, talk about insecurity; challenging someone to a fight based upon my opposition to your faith. That shows so much class and humility.
    Ohhhhh, don't be like that Rodja. I'm sorry if you got your feelers hurt bro. We can still do this sometime, if you need to save face now? Otherwise, why don't YOU show some class and quit talking ****!

    God bless you, friend.
  26. Running with the Big Boys
    Board Sponsor
    Rodja's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  220 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Age
    30
    Posts
    23,077
    Rep Power
    918000

    Quote Originally Posted by DR.D View Post
    Ohhhhh, don't be like that Rodja. I'm sorry if you got your feelers hurt bro. We can still do this sometime, if you need to save face now? Otherwise, why don't YOU show some class and quit talking ****!

    God bless you, friend.
    Heed your own advice.
    M.Ed. Ex Phys
  27. Running with the Big Boys
    Board Sponsor
    AE14's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  200 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    12,329
    Rep Power
    922354

    [/QUOTE]I thought many here would find this interesting:

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100902/...ritain_hawking

    LONDON (Reuters) – God did not create the universe and the "Big Bang" was an inevitable consequence of the laws of physics, the eminent British theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking argues in a new book.

    In "The Grand Design," co-authored with U.S. physicist Leonard Mlodinow, Hawking says a new series of theories made a creator of the universe redundant, according to the Times newspaper which published extracts on Thursday.

    "Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist," Hawking writes.

    "It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the universe going."

    Hawking, 68, who won global recognition with his 1988 book "A Brief History of Time," an account of the origins of the universe, is renowned for his work on black holes, cosmology and quantum gravity.

    Since 1974, the scientist has worked on marrying the two cornerstones of modern physics -- Albert Einstein's General Theory of Relativity, which concerns gravity and large-scale phenomena, and quantum theory, which covers subatomic particles.

    His latest comments suggest he has broken away from previous views he has expressed on religion. Previously, he wrote that the laws of physics meant it was simply not necessary to believe that God had intervened in the Big Bang.

    He wrote in A Brief History ... "If we discover a complete theory, it would be the ultimate triumph of human reason -- for then we should know the mind of God."

    In his latest book, he said the 1992 discovery of a planet orbiting another star other than the Sun helped deconstruct the view of the father of physics Isaac Newton that the universe could not have arisen out of chaos but was created by God.

    "That makes the coincidences of our planetary conditions -- the single Sun, the lucky combination of Earth-Sun distance and solar mass, far less remarkable, and far less compelling evidence that the Earth was carefully designed just to please us human beings," he writes.

    Hawking, who is only able to speak through a computer-generated voice synthesizer, has a neuro muscular dystrophy that has progressed over the years and left him almost completely paralyzed.

    He began suffering the disease in his early 20s but went on to establish himself as one of the world's leading scientific authorities, and has also made guest appearances in "Star Trek" and the cartoons "Futurama" and "The Simpsons."

    Last year he announced he was stepping down as Cambridge University's Lucasian Professor of Mathematics, a position once held by Newton and one he had held since 1979.
    [QUOTE]
    Controlled Labs Head Board Rep
    adam @ ControlledLabs.com
    CONTROLLED LABS products are produced in a GMP for Sport certified facility
  28. Registered User
    DR.D's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  228 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    6,779
    Rep Power
    307851

    Interesting. He still acknowledges God by stating that gravity removes the necessity for God to intervene in the creation of the universe, yet he comes short of refuting God's existence. Hmmmm, I'll have to think about that for a minute, lol.
  29. Registered User
    Army Guy's Avatar
    Stats
    6'3"  230 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Searching for TG in Bilskirnir
    Posts
    3,206
    Rep Power
    1807

    No one can dispute the brilliance of Hawking. He is a scholastic inspiration. But is he perfect... me thinks not. If he were to live 1000 years, his research would prove and disprove itself about every five years. Makes fascinating reading though, and helps gives us deeper understanding in these amazing areas...
  30. Running with the Big Boys
    Board Sponsor
    AE14's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  200 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    12,329
    Rep Power
    922354

    Its funny, it is a catch 22 imo. No matter what a great mind comes up with, a theist will say that they are human and thus flawed (which they can) so therefore god exists.

    Faith is a funny thing
    Controlled Labs Head Board Rep
    adam @ ControlledLabs.com
    CONTROLLED LABS products are produced in a GMP for Sport certified facility
  31. Registered User
    DR.D's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  228 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    6,779
    Rep Power
    307851

    Quote Originally Posted by AE14 View Post
    ... No matter what a great mind comes up with, a theist will say that they are human and thus flawed ...
    Who said that? It is Hawkins himself who is still clinging to God! And I don't think he's a theist.

    He states that God need not have participated in the big bang, so why does he not refute God all together? What need is there for a creator if his intercession was not needed for creation?? Still trying to understand his point with that.

    You know, Stephen Hawking was the single greatest influence in my choice to pursue a degree in sub-atomic physics. After reading his book (A Brief History of Time) and studying his work with Penrose on blackholes, I was hooked on theoretical physics! In his book, he said that the ultimate goal of science was to understand "the mind of God". I thought that was crazy talk back then, but I decided to overlook his spiritual delusions and focus on the science, lol. Funny how it all works out sometimes.
  32. Running with the Big Boys
    Board Sponsor
    AE14's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  200 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    12,329
    Rep Power
    922354

    Quote Originally Posted by DR.D View Post
    Who said that? It is Hawkins himself who is still clinging to God! And I don't think he's a theist.

    He states that God need not have participated in the big bang, so why does he not refute God all together? What need is there for a creator if his intercession was not needed for creation?? Still trying to understand his point with that.

    You know, Stephen Hawking was the single greatest influence in my choice to pursue a degree in sub-atomic physics. After reading his book (A Brief History of Time) and studying his work with Penrose on blackholes, I was hooked on theoretical physics! In his book, he said that the ultimate goal of science was to understand "the mind of God". I thought that was crazy talk back then, but I decided to overlook his spiritual delusions and focus on the science, lol. Funny how it all works out sometimes.
    Where is he clinging D? It seems quite the opposite. In fact the comment
    "It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the universe going." seems to illustrate that
    Controlled Labs Head Board Rep
    adam @ ControlledLabs.com
    CONTROLLED LABS products are produced in a GMP for Sport certified facility
  33. Registered User
    Army Guy's Avatar
    Stats
    6'3"  230 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Searching for TG in Bilskirnir
    Posts
    3,206
    Rep Power
    1807

    yeah I think that he is not 100% sure himself on where his placement of God would be in all this. like AE says, he definitely appears to push away from a God standpoint in the latest material he has published. That being said though, when reading all of his other works it leaves the reader in a quagmire as to what his actual belief actually is. He is brilliant to say the least though, and his discoveries will be talked about and studied for centuries IMHO
    Working on living
  34. Registered User
    DR.D's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  228 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    6,779
    Rep Power
    307851

    Quote Originally Posted by AE14 View Post
    Where is he clinging D? It seems quite the opposite. In fact the comment
    "It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the universe going." seems to illustrate that
    Right, it is not necessary to invoke God. But he still necessarily acknowledges God by that very statement doesn't he? I've read this article a few more times now and I still interpret that he has phrased it like a true agnostic and unbiased scientist. He states that the need for God to get involved in creation is redundant when assuming a big bag model of creation and considering the inherent forces involved in regard to his new calculations. But that's really all I see him saying here, he takes it no further to offer a conclusion for or against God. Redundancy is not exclusion, and still allows for both possibilities though only one be strictly required. It seems very obvious now that he is a firm agnostic, because he had a great opportunity to actually say "I no longer believe in God" but he didn't, that wasn't even his point I don't think. It sounds like some atheistic UK reporter tried to spin his statement for all it was worth, lol.

    Have you read Hawking's new book yet to validate the contextual fidelity of this Reuters article?
  35. Registered User
    Flaw's Avatar
    Stats
    5'11"  240 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    Posts
    1,278
    Rep Power
    1400

    I have some noteworthy quotes

    Astrophysicist Fred Hoyle in his book "The Intelligent Universe" (A very good read btw)

    “Orthodox scientists are more concerned with preventing a return to the religious excesses of the past than in looking forward to the truth [and this concern] has dominated scientific thought throughout the past century.”

    Such properties,” he says, “seem to run through the fabric of the natural world like a thread of happy accidents. But there are so many of these odd coincidences essential to life that some explanation seems required to account for them"

    "the origin of the universe requires an intelligence,’ an ‘intelligence on a higher plane,’ ‘an intelligence that preceded us and that led to a deliberate act of creation of structures suitable for life."

    He's very unbiased and does not point to the God of the bible but acknowledges the possibility of a intelligent creator.

    Roger Penrose, a famous British mathematician and a close friend of Stephen Hawking, wondered about the probability of life coming into existence by chance and tried to calculate the probability.

    He said the chance of life coming by chance was 1 in 10(50) which equals "zero probablity" I couldn't write a 50 above the 10.



    George Greenstein acknowledges all this intelligence involved in the earth’s structure. In his book The Symbiotic Universe, he speaks of the mysterious and incredible series of coincidences that are beyond explaining, coincidences without which life on earth would be impossible.

    “I believe that we are faced with a mystery—a great and profound mystery, and one of immense significance: the mystery of the habitability of the cosmos, of the fitness of the environment.” To detail what can only seem to be an astonishing sequence of stupendous and unlikely accidents that paved the way for life’s emergence. There is a list of coincidences, all of them essential to our existence.” Yet “the list kept getting longer So many coincidences! The more I read, the more I became convinced that such ‘coincidences’ could hardly have happened by chance.”
    “But as this conviction grew, something else grew as well. Even now it is difficult to express this ‘something’ in words. It was an intense revulsion, and at times it was almost physical in nature. I would positively squirm with discomfort. The very thought that the fitness of the cosmos for life might be a mystery requiring solution struck me as ludicrous, absurd. I found it difficult to entertain the notion without grimacing in disgust Nor has this reaction faded over the years: I have had to struggle against it incessantly during the writing of this book. I am sure that the same reaction is at work within every other scientist, and that it is this which accounts for the widespread indifference accorded the idea at present. And more than that: I now believe that what appears as indifference in fact masks an intense antagonism.”
    “As we survey all the evidence, the thought insistently arises that some supernatural agency—or, rather, Agency—must be involved. Is it possible that suddenly, without intending to, we have stumbled upon scientific proof of the existence of a Supreme Being? Was it God who stepped in and so providentially drafted the cosmos for our benefit?”
    “Lord, whom shall we go away to? You have sayings of everlasting life"- John 6:68

    WHAT has science offered?
  36. Running with the Big Boys
    Board Sponsor
    AE14's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  200 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    12,329
    Rep Power
    922354

    Quote Originally Posted by DR.D View Post
    Right, it is not necessary to invoke God. But he still necessarily acknowledges God by that very statement doesn't he? I've read this article a few more times now and I still interpret that he has phrased it like a true agnostic and unbiased scientist. He states that the need for God to get involved in creation is redundant when assuming a big bag model of creation and considering the inherent forces involved in regard to his new calculations. But that's really all I see him saying here, he takes it no further to offer a conclusion for or against God. Redundancy is not exclusion, and still allows for both possibilities though only one be strictly required. It seems very obvious now that he is a firm agnostic, because he had a great opportunity to actually say "I no longer believe in God" but he didn't, that wasn't even his point I don't think. It sounds like some atheistic UK reporter tried to spin his statement for all it was worth, lol.

    Have you read Hawking's new book yet to validate the contextual fidelity of this Reuters article?

    I dont think that the point of the article was to refute god, but to say its presence is not necessary for creation as we know it.

    In essence, our existence is not proof of a divine being. At least thats how I interpeted it
    Controlled Labs Head Board Rep
    adam @ ControlledLabs.com
    CONTROLLED LABS products are produced in a GMP for Sport certified facility
  37. Registered User
    DR.D's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  228 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    6,779
    Rep Power
    307851

    Quote Originally Posted by Flaw View Post
    ... Roger Penrose, a famous British mathematician and a close friend of Stephen Hawking, wondered about the probability of life coming into existence by chance and tried to calculate the probability.

    He said the chance of life coming by chance was 1 in 10(50) which equals "zero probablity" I couldn't write a 50 above the 10. ...
    This is a critical point that is purposefully ignored, just like everyone ignored every scientific point I wrote earlier. With odds this bad, why has spontaneous creation been pushed so hard as the most likely scenario?! This anti-god bias corrupts fundamental common sense.

    With odds like 1 in 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,00 0,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000 it's just absurd to ignore the overwhelming likelihood of a creator, isn't it? Atheists have more faith than they might care to admit if they'd bank on statistics like that. It's like a little kid putting his fingers in his ears, refusing to listen to the lesson he doesn't wanna accept.
  38. Registered User
    Flaw's Avatar
    Stats
    5'11"  240 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    Posts
    1,278
    Rep Power
    1400

    Quote Originally Posted by DR.D View Post
    This is a critical point that is purposefully ignored, just like everyone ignored every scientific point I wrote earlier. With odds this bad, why has spontaneous creation been pushed so hard as the most likely scenario?! This anti-god bias corrupts fundamental common sense.

    :
    It is definetly purposely ignored. Basically a number taken out of a equation. What a lot of people don't realize is there are many scientists who either believe in God or believe in a supreme being that had a part in creation.

    April 03, 2007|By Dr. Francis Collins

    "I am a scientist and a believer, and I find no conflict between those world views.

    As the director of the Human Genome Project, I have led a consortium of scientists to read out the 3.1 billion letters of the human genome, our own DNA instruction book. As a believer, I see DNA, the information molecule of all living things, as God's language, and the elegance and complexity of our own bodies and the rest of nature as a reflection of God's plan.

    I did not always embrace these perspectives. As a graduate student in physical chemistry in the 1970s, I was an atheist, finding no reason to postulate the existence of any truths outside of mathematics, physics and chemistry. But then I went to medical school, and encountered life and death issues at the bedsides of my patients. Challenged by one of those patients, who asked "What do you believe, doctor?", I began searching for answers.

    I had to admit that the science I loved so much was powerless to answer questions such as "What is the meaning of life?" "Why am I here?" "Why does mathematics work, anyway?" "If the universe had a beginning, who created it?" "Why are the physical constants in the universe so finely tuned to allow the possibility of complex life forms?" "Why do humans have a moral sense?" "What happens after we die?"

    I had always assumed that faith was based on purely emotional and irrational arguments, and was astounded to discover, initially in the writings of the Oxford scholar C.S. Lewis and subsequently from many other sources, that one could build a very strong case for the plausibility of the existence of God on purely rational grounds. My earlier atheist's assertion that "I know there is no God" emerged as the least defensible. As the British writer G.K. Chesterton famously remarked, "Atheism is the most daring of all dogmas, for it is the assertion of a universal negative."

    But reason alone cannot prove the existence of God. Faith is reason plus revelation, and the revelation part requires one to think with the spirit as well as with the mind. You have to hear the music, not just read the notes on the page. Ultimately, a leap of faith is required.


    For me, that leap came in my 27th year, after a search to learn more about God's character led me to the person of Jesus Christ. Here was a person with remarkably strong historical evidence of his life, who made astounding statements about loving your neighbor, and whose claims about being God's son seemed to demand a decision about whether he was deluded or the real thing. After resisting for nearly two years, I found it impossible to go on living in such a state of uncertainty, and I became a follower of Jesus.

    So, some have asked, doesn't your brain explode? Can you both pursue an understanding of how life works using the tools of genetics and molecular biology, and worship a creator God? Aren't evolution and faith in God incompatible? Can a scientist believe in miracles like the resurrection?

    Actually, I find no conflict here, and neither apparently do the 40 percent of working scientists who claim to be believers. Yes, evolution by descent from a common ancestor is clearly true. If there was any lingering doubt about the evidence from the fossil record, the study of DNA provides the strongest possible proof of our relatedness to all other living things.

    But why couldn't this be God's plan for creation? True, this is incompatible with an ultra-literal interpretation of Genesis, but long before Darwin, there were many thoughtful interpreters like St. Augustine, who found it impossible to be exactly sure what the meaning of that amazing creation story was supposed to be. So attaching oneself to such literal interpretations in the face of compelling scientific evidence pointing to the ancient age of Earth and the relatedness of living things by evolution seems neither wise nor necessary for the believer.

    I have found there is a wonderful harmony in the complementary truths of science and faith. The God of the Bible is also the God of the genome. God can be found in the cathedral or in the laboratory. By investigating God's majestic and awesome creation, science can actually be a means of worship."
    “Lord, whom shall we go away to? You have sayings of everlasting life"- John 6:68

    WHAT has science offered?
  39. Running with the Big Boys
    Board Sponsor
    AE14's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  200 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    12,329
    Rep Power
    922354

    Quote Originally Posted by DR.D View Post
    This is a critical point that is purposefully ignored, just like everyone ignored every scientific point I wrote earlier. With odds this bad, why has spontaneous creation been pushed so hard as the most likely scenario?! This anti-god bias corrupts fundamental common sense.

    With odds like 1 in 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,00 0,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000 it's just absurd to ignore the overwhelming likelihood of a creator, isn't it? Atheists have more faith than they might care to admit if they'd bank on statistics like that. It's like a little kid putting his fingers in his ears, refusing to listen to the lesson he doesn't wanna accept.
    So in essence its this particular scientist v. Hawking?
    Controlled Labs Head Board Rep
    adam @ ControlledLabs.com
    CONTROLLED LABS products are produced in a GMP for Sport certified facility
  40. Registered User
    DR.D's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  228 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    6,779
    Rep Power
    307851

    Quote Originally Posted by AE14 View Post
    So in essence its this particular scientist v. Hawking?
    No, not at all. They're actually buddies.

    You gotta understand how it is in England though, AE. They are a growingly more non-religious and hedonistic peoples. There's a lot of peer pressure to be an atheist there, especially in top level academia. I'm sure his fellows are not pleased with his ambiguity concerning God, but he's walking the fine line. Penrose is just the same it seems, he doesn't insert his opinion either, just as Hawking didn't. They offered the facts as best they can calculate, and let you draw a conclusion from them.

    Are there overwhelming odds that suggest spontaneous creation is wrong? Yes. Does that prove there is a God? No. It just establishes the gross unlikeliness that there is not one.

    Would god be redundant if the force of gravity allows for spontaneous creation in a big bang construct? Yes. Does that prove there is no God? No. You're building on assumption right from the beginning, as the big bang is no given fact either.

    Do you see what I mean? It just is what it is, no more and no less. To try and apply it to some theological or atheistic political agenda is just detestable IMO. Truth is the only God, whether it's what one hoped it would be or not.
  •   

      
     

Similar Forum Threads

  1. Mdrol 53426 Oct.2012
    By Nova1723 in forum Anabolics
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-05-2010, 08:49 AM
  2. Replies: 292
    Last Post: 01-21-2010, 11:41 AM
  3. Ordering A Pizza In 2012
    By purebred in forum Politics
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 09-28-2009, 07:08 AM
  4. Best Sunglass Face Catching Ever !!!
    By anabolicrhino in forum General Chat
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 05-14-2007, 09:41 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Log in

Log in