FrostCloud Forums  

Go Back   FrostCloud Forums > Philosophy > Religion

Greetings!

Religion Discussions on religions, mysticism, and spirituality as well as opposing views such as agnosticism and atheism.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-05-2006, 06:45 AM
Mike Dubbeld Mike Dubbeld is offline
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 5,649
Do you believe in miracles? (aka Atheists are idiots)

Which would you rather believe - that the chances of winning the lottery being 1 in 100 million and you win it 7 times in a row as a result of pure dumb luck, or there is something funny going on here causing you to win?

That's what the odds are of our universe being capable of supporting life based only on ONE thing. If our universe expanded any more slowly it would have collapsed in on itself too soon. If it expanded to quickly, it would have meant hydrogen could not have coalesced into stars and again we would not be here. In fact the universe had to be within--
+-0.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000001%of what it is to avoid the above fates. This is called 'the flatness problem' in cosmology which atheists tend to attempt to sweep under the rug with more and more bizarre explanations. The number above is 10^-60. Atheists are getting more and more desparate. Traditionally there have been 3 categories of miracles to explain human existence or the existence of a "Watch Maker". (if one finds a watch and no one has ever seen a watch before so the argument goes, this is evidence of a Watchmaker. It is called 'The Cosmological Argument' in Philosophy. Before Darwin, life itself was evidence of God. But Darwin discovered evolution and natural selection. So out the door went the the miracle of life (even though science has never once produced life in the laboratory). But recent advances in cosmology and particle physics and Earth Science have added 2 other distinct categories of 'Watchmaker'. First the universe had to have the finely tuned set of physical laws and constants it has for any sort of life whatsoever. (No Darwinian equivalent here but I will return to this). And the Solar system itself and our planet are both quite miraculous all themselves but that's not my specialty all I can say is get The Privileged Planet by Guillermo Gonzalez and Jay W. Richards (search the web) and Michael Mallery's Our Improbable Universe. I am sure you will find it quite interesting how tiny changes in just about ANYTHING about the Earth would drastically alter life as we know it.

What I am doing of course is cosmology and quantum physics. So bent are atheists on no God that they are now like Creationists sticking their head in the mud/behaving in denial - atheist science is on the RUN. Here is the latest and greatest atheist idea on how to get rid of God. Invent a multiverse or megaverse with 10^500 individual universes and say ours is just one of them. There is nothing special about our universe. It just happens to be ours turned out that way. So we need to invent 10^500 universes to explain our universe. Lets see now, I thought these scientists were fond of Ockham's Razor which says that if something can be explained with 2 things instead of 3 the theory that uses 2 is superior to the one that needs 3. So I guess we can get rid of God as long as we can invent 10^500 (that is basically equivalent to winning the lottery 60 times in a row to explain our universe) as opposed to there being Intelligent Design. That sounds about as rational as a Creationist telling me the universe came into existence a few thousand years ago.

I should make it very clear right now, yoga has no need of any of the above to begin with. The soul and God are INDEPENDENT of the universe and where life arises in any multiverse is irrelevant. Nor does yoga deny Darwinian evolution. But I am writing this to show you the Atheist Creationists. How big of an idiot atheists are/how they run for denial in these matters inventing all sorts of wild scenarios to counter intelligent design.

Think these numbers are big? They are nothing compared to phase space that Roger Penrose came up with. Here the number of zeros in the number he comes up with are more numerous than there are particles in the entire universe.

See http://www.discovery.org/scripts/vie...ownload&id=847

Pages 53–111 of Science and Evidence for Design in the Universe.
The Proceedings of the Wethersfield Institute. Michael Behe,
William A. Dembski, and Stephen C. Meyer (San Francisco:
Ignatius Press, 2001. Ó 2000 Homeland Foundation.)
STEPHEN C. MEYER

Which includes 114 references to science based sources.

When you calculate probability - the probability a head will come up twice in a row is 1/4 because there is 1/2 chance of head and 1/2 chance of tails. So
1/2 x 1/2 = 1/4. Similarly the chances of a head coming up 4 times in a row is
1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 = 1/16.

The chances of winning the lottery I said were 1/100,000,000 or 1 in one hundred million. The chances of winning it twice in a row are
1/100,000,000 x 1/100,000,000 = 1/10^16 = 1/10000000000000000. If you multiply it out you will find that winning it 3 times is 1/10^24 and winning it 6 times is therefore 1/10^48. Winning it one more time is 1/10^56 still 4 zeros short of 1/10^60. The odds of getting a flat universe we can live in is 1/10^60.

David Peat a physicist says of the metaverse/multiverse in his book The Mind of God --

'‘In spite of the power of the many-universes theory to account for what would otherwise be considered remarkably special facts about nature, the theory faces a number of serious objections. The first of these I have already discussed in chapter 7 which is that it flies in the face of Occam’s razor, by introducing vast (indeed infinite) complexity to explain the regularities of just one Universe. I find this “blunderbuss” approach to explaining the specialness of our Universe scientifically questionable.' p218-219

He compares it to Fred Hoyle's idea of monkeys sitting down at a typewriter and banging out Shakesphere as a random chance.

How many universes can dance on the head of a pin....... desparation run amok among physicists due to the anthropic principle beating them over the head. They deserve it.

So much for your silly-ass 'is there any evidence for God'

Mike Dubbeld
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2  
Old 12-05-2006, 07:24 AM
frish's Avatar
frish frish is offline
Bright, VHEMT Volunteer
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: 90069
Posts: 4,489
Send a message via MSN to frish Send a message via Yahoo to frish
MD:
Regardless of your spewing all those meaningfree statistics and probabilities, regardless that serious attempts at replicating life have only been going on less than 60 years, there is IRREFUTABLE PROOF that life happened and evolution ensued.

We're here. (Pronounced, we're here PERIOD!)

Zero evidence for god, soul, spirit, spark of life, or anything other than electrochemical processes driven by Solar radiation and elements and compounds that occur here on Earth.

It wasn't an accident, it was what follows NATURALLY from the conditions that presented themselves here on Earth 3.5 to 4 billion years ago.

I fully acknowledge that your possession of cosmological knowledge far outweighs mine.

However, zero evidence is a lot lower number than all the probabilities you mention. Infinitely lower to be sure.

That life doesn't happen often is obvious, since we have yet to discover evidence of "aliens" out and about in the universe. Given how long things have been going on, that is somewhat interesting.

Are we alone in the universe? Does anything "higher" than bacteria live anywhere else?

I'll say this about that: If and when we discover extraterrestrial life, it will be just as dependent on the dynamics and conditions of the world it evolved from as life is on Earth.

Intelligent Design? Why do men have nipples, but male horses don't?

MD: It is simply a matter of perspective. From your perspective, looking back, it all seems so damnably unlikely. If you take the perspective of initial conditions of the solar system and an embryonic Earth, it isn't just a likely outcome, it is inevitable. (period)

Lucky? Nope. Just inevitable!
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-05-2006, 07:15 PM
Mike Dubbeld Mike Dubbeld is offline
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 5,649
I stated my sources atheist. You are in denial. Never once has science created any form of life whatsoever in the laboratory and not even remotely close. A single cell contains billions of atoms organized into something more complex than anything man has ever created or likely will ever create for a long time to come. You don't know the issues as you only parrot evolution which I explicitly said yoga does not deny.

We're here explains absolutely nothing. It is like saying what is this pain I have in my joints doctor? You have arthritis. That will be 50 dollars. Arthritis is the word for joint pain. It tells you nothing of how or why you got it. Further your doctor will tell you there are other people with arthritis and if you look around you will see this is true. But what if the doctor told you the chances of your finding another person with arthritis is 10^60? We're here by virtue of being the lucky winner of winning a lottery where your chances are 1 in 10^8 7 times in a row and another lottery with the odds being 1 in 10^4 on top of that.

(In general to figure any probablity of this sort the formula is Outcomes^tries. For example a coin has heads or tails what is the probability of a gettin a head 3 times in a row and rolling the dice and getting a 5 3 times in a row? The outcomes for the coin are 2. The tries are 3. 2^3 = 8 so your chances of getting a head 3 times in a row are 1 in 8. A die has 6 sides. You chances of getting any particular number on it are 1 in 6. The outcomes for the die are 6. The tries = 3 so the probability of getting a 5 3 times in a row are 6^3 = 6 x 6 x 6 = 216. Your chances are therefore 1 in 216. To get a head 3 times in a row and a 5 on a die 3 times in a row are 1/8 x 1/216 =
1/1728.

Statistical mechanics in quantum mechanics and thermodynamics calculates the density and temperature of the universe as a function of probability of elementary particle interactions with each other at time t with n degrees of freedom which is dimensions. Temperature is only a measure of kinetic energy of particles which means their velocity and mass in collisions with each other.

But that is only ONE parameter. If any of the forces of nature were even the tiniest fraction off, we would not be here because there would be no universe for us to be in. Same with all the constants of nature. I only used ONE of them and it was one associated with creation of the universe itself. Not with biology. Not with the probability of getting a planet with the characteristics the Earth has itself such that there is life on it. I have long known about the staggering odds against life arising due to random chance in the pre-Cambrian period on Earth. You might half-ass explain a few of these here and there (the very fact that there IS NO EXPLANATION is telling all by itself because if there was, idiots like you would be jumping up and down).

So we need a 10^500 universe's to explain our universe. Right. Sounds about your speed. I call that a non-explanation. The fact that we are here is due to design. Not chance. This is proof. Where is YOUR proof - 10^500 universe's is more believable than design? ha ha ha ha ha ha digging pretty deep atheist. We're here? You mean bodies arose. We are not our bodies. We are not our minds. We are consciousness in the universe and we are the reason living things strive to survive while shoes drop to the ground/strive for nothing whatsoever. All this anthropic debate is about body history by ignorant people. Yoga doesn't need or care about body history. God and the soul are not part of the universe at all so it is irrelevant whether there is a megaverse, universe, yourversehere and evolution is true and equally irrelevant. The point of my posting this post is to clearly show the ignorant arrogance of atheists acting in denial of irrefutable proof of design - much like the ignorant creationist tries to tell me the universe is a few thousand years old. Pretty funny. DENIAL. Atheists on the run.

Some day I am going to tally the specific evidence for ID but I am working out the equations of the Big Bang and Inflation now so I would rather wait until I can show the details of how the universe evolved (OUR universe at least). But I doubt very seriously anyone in any FC forum is going to talk about anything I could not answer off the top of my head in cosmology like the cosmological constant, Hubble constant, dark energy, dark matter. I am not claiming I can answer what dark energy and dark matter are but I can tell you how science knows they exist and what they are NOT. Much like God. Via negativa. What something is by what something is not to a mind.

It is important to notice that unlike the feeble atheist Darwinian idea of evolution as a means to deny God, particle physics is not directly related to biology. Similarly, the Earth is the only planet with life on it in the solar system and the closer you look at the characteristics of this planet the more amazing they are. If the Earth's tilt was 26 degrees instead of 23 degrees we would find vast deserts where there are no deserts. Climates would change. Ice Age periods would be changed, the Earth's crust (plate tetonics) would be altered if there was not an initially large amount of radioactive material to keep the core hot for billions of years, the distance from the sun, length of time it takes the earth to rotate on its axis/the period of a day - ALL these little things changed even a tiny bit would drastically alter life on earth.

You might think the moon is nice to look at and gives us the tides. Better think again. The moon plays a crucial role on the deep waters of the oceans. How far the moon is from the earth, the fact that the same side always faces the earth and many other things of the Earth-Moon system play critical roles in life on Earth. The atmosphere on Earth is not like Venus which is a green-house effect carbon-dioxide runnaway several hundred degrees hot. Mars mass was too small so it could not sustain an atmosphere or oceans. The Earth was slammed into by somehthing that gave it a moon and served to give the Earth the type of crust/mantel core we have today. Had not such a collision occured, it is doubtful whether life would have came about. Jupiter is not just a nice planet to read about but has nothing to do with the Earth. WRONG. Jupiter is NECESSARY for our survival. It acts as a shield with its massive gravitational field causing renagade comets, asteroids and meteors to prefer crashing into it instead of the Earth. It serves as means for the sun to loose its spin momentum as well along with the other gas giant planets. Had they not been there, the Earth would have to assume this momentum energy and would have been flung out of orbit long ago.

But this is not my area. Again The Privilged Planet explains the Earth-moon-sun/solar system in detail with highly technical references in its footnotes with proof in the form of references much of which is on the web in The Physical Reivew.

My area is cosmology and qunatum physics. I can tell you how much charge on an electron could be altered and life to come about in the universe or how much weaker or stronger gravity could be such that we did not get a stillborn universe of only hydrogen or the universe collapse back in on itself moments after the Big Bang or the probability of life if fusion in stars did not proceed according to a list of constants unique and unexplainable in this universe. I am currently calculating the details of the Big Bang which produced the relative abundance of the elements we see today along with star astrophysics/supernova explosions. I would rather make the changes to these constants and laws of physics in the equations myself and see what happens firsthand.

Insidentally, it is not a question of whether there was a Big Bang or not. The Big Bang is a fact for OUR universe. The only question is if there are 'pocket universe's' with a multiverse/megaverse with their own 'Bang's' and Inflation. Personally I believe there is a multiverse but since these other universe's are causally disconnected from our universe, there is not much you can say about them except with mathematical theorys. This belief I have in the multiverse has nothing to do with whether there was a Big Bang as opposed to a multiverse or not. Only non-science people talk like this/apparently never read even lay science books and magazines. The fact that there is a multiverse just means the Big Bang of OUR universe is part of it with its set of laws of physics being what they are. But I don't believe there are anything like 10^500 universes and God is even from a rational standpoint more believable than 10^500 universes to account for the laws and constants unique to our universe. It makes me believe atheists would rather believe in the tooth fairy than God if they believe that. It makes me believe that if they were brought up in a Creationist environment they would instead be telling me the universe is a few thousand years old. Another absurd point of view.

Mike Dubbeld
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12-05-2006, 07:21 PM
kyman's Avatar
kyman kyman is offline
snarf
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: limbo
Posts: 11,035
Blog Entries: 1
A universe full of atoms as small as they are compared to my form filled completely to something the size of the universe seems pretty amazing.

What's the ratio of the size of one atom vs the size of universe, compared to one universe and 500 other universes?
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 12-05-2006, 11:42 PM
Mike Dubbeld Mike Dubbeld is offline
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 5,649
Had to return to copy this post. The only thing on FC worth anything.

Mike Dubbeld
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 12-05-2006, 11:54 PM
madesta's Avatar
madesta madesta is offline
Openminded
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: California
Posts: 4,673
Blog Entries: 2
Send a message via AIM to madesta
Mike dubbels is Symptom. Wow. Okay, so MD is Symptom's 'rambling on about trying to sound smart, but lacks intuition' side.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 12-06-2006, 01:01 AM
MAD1 MAD1 is offline
Siksikawa at 45%,SOooo?
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Nations Capitol D.C. 20001
Posts: 2,810
Shame

Quote:
Originally Posted by madesta
Mike dubbels is Symptom. Wow. Okay, so MD is Symptom's 'rambling on about trying to sound smart, but lacks intuition' side.
Shame on you didn't you know I'd be watching it's 6:39 on 12/5/2006, so you can track what time I embarrass you again.
What do you have to say in regards to the mans math, notice he isn't whining about changing a damn thing..his science is going forward..you my wonderful idiot are growing stagnate..FC in finally getting into some real conversation but I'm not sure you know what that is...you prefer ASSHOLE instead of excuse me.Try this...asshole excuse me while I add to Mike Dubbeld's works (notice I said works..you learned something besides being a gleeb.)
Hello MDubb: One thing if you will...Our universe is as large outwardly as it is small inwardly..earlier formulas and therums were pre-occupied with leaving this planet but there are worlds within worlds right here and maybe easier to reach...implosion and nano science will give you the same results as discovery of distant phenomenon in the same fields...Your mini black hole experiment is awsome and I don't think our atheist folks are aware of the results of a controled black hole experiment...I mean it is so awsome I will buy any amount of stock just thread me where to purchase...(even G bonds or AAA will be the same)...To be able to produce a black hole the size of a buggar over a city the size of LA would corrupt the entire mass down to about the core level of the earth...and there would be NO TRACE of LA ...Now back to madesta the atheist...what cha got to match GOD's work in this.. 1 .

Real answers please or join in and spew something useful. How about Brane existance within a M string???
__________________
Before "Forever" there was "Never" after "Never" will be "Forever" again. 1
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 12-06-2006, 01:12 AM
*Yawn*...God?'s Avatar
*Yawn*...God? *Yawn*...God? is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Rua: Cons. Cunha e Sousa n:12
Posts: 8,344
Hahahahaha, kind of ridiculous, if I may say so myself.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 12-06-2006, 01:15 AM
fredcai's Avatar
fredcai fredcai is offline
Destroyer of Worlds, G
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Atlanta, Georgia
Posts: 1,224
Send a message via MSN to fredcai
If you are using probability, why didn't a simpler universe come into being? A four dimensional plane and quantum mechanics becomes quite a chore for something that accidentally comes to being.
__________________
You can do anything you set your mind to if you have a vision, determination, and an endless supply of expendable labor.

The only thing we learn from history is that we don't learn from history.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 12-06-2006, 01:45 AM
madesta's Avatar
madesta madesta is offline
Openminded
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: California
Posts: 4,673
Blog Entries: 2
Send a message via AIM to madesta
oooo, spicy! Should I be offended?

Nah, I understand you are only trying to defend your religion. Mind you that I'm not trying to offend your religion. Peace bro. And give credit where it's due. Thus, why I post.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 12-06-2006, 02:41 AM
MAD1 MAD1 is offline
Siksikawa at 45%,SOooo?
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Nations Capitol D.C. 20001
Posts: 2,810
Love you too..

Quote:
Originally Posted by madesta
oooo, spicy! Should I be offended?

Nah, I understand you are only trying to defend your religion. Mind you that I'm not trying to offend your religion. Peace bro. And give credit where it's due. Thus, why I post.
What good talking to your self..remember..An old Indian saying.

"ONCE YOU KNOW THE WHOLE STORY,THE STORY IS OVER".
__________________
Before "Forever" there was "Never" after "Never" will be "Forever" again. 1
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 12-06-2006, 06:47 AM
IamJoseph IamJoseph is offline
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 22,527
Thumbs up

Quote:
Originally Posted by frish
life happened and evolution ensued.
Evolution is not limited to life. It is a mechanism directly alligned with: GO FORTH AND MULTIPLY; A SEED SHALL FOLLOW ITS OWN KIND, LIGHT, SEPERATION, and a host of other factors. Evolution is not a free-standing independent phenomenon, but a process which is only seen in already pre-existing material, embedded with an elovution-friendly directive or program. The latter renders evolution a secondary process - not an Atheistic Deity it has become. The proof is: Darwin's plaguerised edition of Evolution is not seen outside this here planet - meaning its not a universal constant, but specific to this planet, subject to factors exactly as described in Genesis. Your chorusiung on without any commas is hardly a period.

Quote:
Zero evidence for god

That hardly backs your premise, which has less than zero: not even any evidence, NOTWITHSTANDING IT CONTRADICTS SCIENCE AND LOGIC. That there is no proof of God is in the given data of the OT - not a new brilliant observation by Atheistic Theologies, but one from another, predating theology over 3000 years old - one which introduced Evolution more correctly. Period.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 12-06-2006, 07:20 AM
frish's Avatar
frish frish is offline
Bright, VHEMT Volunteer
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: 90069
Posts: 4,489
Send a message via MSN to frish Send a message via Yahoo to frish
Quote:
I stated my sources atheist. You are in denial. Never once has science created any form of life whatsoever in the laboratory and not even remotely close. A single cell contains billions of atoms organized into something more complex than anything man has ever created or likely will ever create for a long time to come. You don't know the issues as you only parrot evolution which I explicitly said yoga does not deny.
Thanks for stating your sources...so what? Common sense destroys your argument, that's my source.

It is a matter of perspective. Glad to hear yoga is not denying whatever...

Life didn't start out as a single cell. It started out as self-replicating molecules. It probably evolved for a billion years before cells were formed. And, it has had several more billion to get to where we are today. How surprising that man's puny efforts haven't replicated it yet. Doesn't mean there is a designer, regardless!

If all the things weren't just the way they are, we wouldn't have life here, and we wouldn't have evolved. So sure, it seems fortuitous and unlikely, but since we're here, it only had to happen ONCE.

I'll try it another way, let's start at the beginning. Chemicals got together in the primordial soup on Earth and combined such that they created a compound that replicated itself. Now, stir for 4 billion years or so and here we are.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 12-06-2006, 07:22 AM
frish's Avatar
frish frish is offline
Bright, VHEMT Volunteer
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: 90069
Posts: 4,489
Send a message via MSN to frish Send a message via Yahoo to frish
Quote:
Originally Posted by MAD1
What good talking to your self..remember..An old Indian saying.

"ONCE YOU KNOW THE WHOLE STORY,THE STORY IS OVER".
You will find what you are looking for in the last place you look. Start there!
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 12-06-2006, 08:23 AM
IamJoseph IamJoseph is offline
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 22,527
Thumbs up

Quote:
Originally Posted by frish

Life didn't start out as a single cell.
Nope. Life started as a duality, derived from One, to form another cell containing a recepticle to another duality, repetitively. Exactly as per Genesis describes.

Quote:
It started out as self-replicating molecules.
A seed bearing its own kind, able to reproduce its own kind? (Genesis).

Quote:
It probably evolved for a billion years before cells were formed.
If 'TIME' is your only retreat, than earth is not the oldest rock in the universe: why did 'time' not produce life elsewhere - or is there another factor here?



Quote:
I'll try it another way
Yes, you'd better!

Quote:
let's start at the beginning. Chemicals got together in the primordial soup on Earth and combined such that they created a compound that replicated itself. Now, stir for 4 billion years or so and here we are.
Correction. Chemicals don't get together on mars - only on earth, right - because there was no 'natural selection' any place else, right, because conditions were not ideal, right - which means NS is bunk, right, or at least selective, and not a constant?

How about Heinze soup?
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Frostcloud's words of wisdom Dromiceius Humor 45 04-17-2008 04:24 AM
Why Atheists fail to convert Christians to Atheism Meme Virus Religion 344 10-19-2007 05:45 PM
Beware the harmful meme viruses Atheists have Meme Virus Humor 8 08-25-2007 05:54 PM
God does not die and atheists are immoral Mike Dubbeld General Philosophy 25 12-19-2006 02:07 PM
Miracles from the point of view of realised and unrealised souls anil Religion 0 12-07-2006 04:45 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:40 AM.



Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2008 Jelsoft Enterprises Limited
Hosted and Maintained by The IceStorm Network