The universe is proof of god!

[Cheerful Charlie]

And then, the predictable when he realizes his arguments are 100% refuted... The prodigious topic leap in an effort to salvage a belief he desperately wants to hold, but sees that he cannot logically do...




Oh, ~jump!~


The answer: not with "intelligent design," sweetie.


Also chuckling at, "ID doesn't propose a god!"
Oh? What's the intelligence that you're imagining doing the designing,, then?
Mice?

When ID came out, IDists claimed that indeed, that the designer need not be the God of the Bible, and therefore was not religious and thus legally should not be thrown out of school classrooms for being religion in disguise. When the judge in the Dover case heard this, he asked if that was something they really wanted to teach in schools. Behe had to admit, that designer may bot even exist any more

This was a fig leaf for ID as far as arguing with critics. Years ago, in some postings to usenet talk,origins, there were some essays demonstrating that leading IDists, in talks, and media et al to groups supportive of creationism in schools, they sang a different song. The designer indeed was God and the God of the Bible at that.

This sort of behavior if one is proclaiming to be science amounts to bad cases of scientific fraud.

 

[bilby]

Maybe the proposal is that god's supernatural intelligent minions do all the design work. That god is just "the idea guy", in charge of thinking up the idea of creation and deciding on a list of sins. That god is just a given but that isn't what ID is about, it's about those fucking little supernatural intelligent minion designers.

Hmmm. You might be on to something there...

​

 

[Rhea]

Hah, that's what you guys are doing sweetie.

You think “us guys” have been changng to new topics with absolutley no connection? Can you provide a quote?

I mean, it’s okay, you can go from calcualting infinity to “how did life start” if you need to. I am neither offended nor surprised. It’s just not something you can truthfully say to us, “you did it, too” about, tho.

 

[Random Person]

Maybe the proposal is that god's supernatural intelligent minions do all the design work. That god is just "the idea guy", in charge of thinking up the idea of creation and deciding on a list of sins. That god is just a given but that isn't what ID is about, it's about those fucking little supernatural intelligent minion designers.

Hmmm. You might be on to something there...

View attachment 16133​

View attachment 16134

God must not want us to eat pineapples or coconuts.

 

[steve_bank]

The universe is proof that if god exists, he, she, or it did a lousy job. A more Disney cartoon like universe where stars do not explode and planets are not devastated by asteroids would have been nice.

 

[skepticalbip]

The universe is proof that if god exists, he, she, or it did a lousy job. A more Disney cartoon like universe where stars do not explode and planets are not devastated by asteroids would have been nice.

This reminds me of an old expression, "If god exists then she is one hell of a sadistic bitch."

 

[bilby]

The universe is proof that if god exists, he, she, or it did a lousy job. A more Disney cartoon like universe where stars do not explode and planets are not devastated by asteroids would have been nice.

This reminds me of an old expression, "If god exists then she is one hell of a sadistic bitch."

I also want to know, if natural disasters are god's punishment for sins, why do they happen so often on other planets and moons? What did the people of Jupiter do to deserve so many massive storms and meteorite strikes? How sinful were the inhabitants of Enceladus, to deserve ice volcanoes? I mean, even New Zealand doesn't get ice volcanoes, and we all know what they do with their sheep...

 

[Rhea]

Thread summary?

Christians claim that the existence of the universe is really mysterious to them and math is hard; therefore god.
Science says, that kind of claim doesn't hold up and moreover could be used to claim _anything_, even stuff the Christians know isn't true. Science helps you avoid these hopelessly flawed conclusions.
Christians: SQUIRREL!!
Science: yes. that is a squirrel.
Christians: did you know the existence of the universe is really mysterious and math is hard; therefore god?

 

[Lion IRC]

"...Christians say the existence of the universe is really mysterious to them

They do not.
See the 1st Chapter of Genesis.

 

[skepticalbip]

"...Christians say the existence of the universe is really mysterious to them

They do not.
See the 1st Chapter of Genesis.

But then that is not a reasoned argument. Genesis gives a very different story (actually two different stories) than the Chandogya Upanishad and both are very different than the Rig Veda and all are different from the many, many other creation myths which are different from the many science theories.

The fact that someone writes down their creation myth does not make it true. It only means that those who accept them "BELIEVE" it is what happened.

 

[Rhea]

"...Christians say the existence of the universe is really mysterious to them

They do not.
See the 1st Chapter of Genesis.

mysterious to them and math is hard; therefore god.

...”therefore god”.

“See the 1st Chapter of Genesis” = “therefore god”

 

[Rhea]

”Originally posted by Sock Puppet on Rheas hand”
...Christians say the existence of the universe is really mysterious to them

I just noticed this.

Do you know what a “sock puppet” means? (!) I started to say that I’m not pretending to be anyone but myself, but my daughter read over my shoulder and said, “mom, you should say...”

Yes, I’m totally a sock puppet. I’m actually a five year old pretending to be an adult and I’m still making more sense than you.

So. It’s either my answer or my daughter’s. Your pick, I guess.

 

[Wiploc]

Cosmologists don't know what they're talking about but you guys do? What a topsy turvy world you guys live in.

As near as I can tell, you don't know what cosmologists are talking about.

 

[Random Person]

Cosmologists don't know what they're talking about but you guys do? What a topsy turvy world you guys live in.

As near as I can tell, you don't know what cosmologists are talking about.

There is no evidence that you do, that's for sure.

 

[Rhea]

Cosmologists don't know what they're talking about but you guys do? What a topsy turvy world you guys live in.

As near as I can tell, you don't know what cosmologists are talking about.

There is no evidence that you do, that's for sure.

I didn't expect you to turn out to be this person. That's disappointing.

 

[Random Person]

There is no evidence that you do, that's for sure.

I didn't expect you to turn out to be this person. That's disappointing.

Not to me.

 

[Underseer]

Cosmologists don't know what they're talking about but you guys do? What a topsy turvy world you guys live in.

As near as I can tell, you don't know what cosmologists are talking about.

There is no evidence that you do, that's for sure.

Cosmologists don't know if there is such a thing as "before the universe" because that would mean the same thing as "before time." How can there be a "before" before time existed? If there is no such thing as "before the universe," how can anyone say that the universe has a cause?

Unlike cosmologists, you are claiming that there is such a thing as "before the universe" and further claiming to know that there was nothing before there was something.

Yes, there are a lot of hypotheses that claim to offer explanations in which the universe has a cause because of some other timespace continuum beyond our own spacetime, but those are called "hypotheses" precisely because they have no evidence backing them up and thus are not accepted as fact.

You are claiming to know things cosmologists do not claim to know, then insisting that your claims are backed up by science.

What published science can you point to that backs up your claims? What experiments have been done to prove that what you say is true?

 

[Random Person]

There is no evidence that you do, that's for sure.

Cosmologists don't know if there is such a thing as "before the universe" because that would mean the same thing as "before time." How can there be a "before" before time existed? If there is no such thing as "before the universe," how can anyone say that the universe has a cause?

Unlike cosmologists, you are claiming that there is such a thing as "before the universe" and further claiming to know that there was nothing before there was something.

Yes, there are a lot of hypotheses that claim to offer explanations in which the universe has a cause because of some other timespace continuum beyond our own spacetime, but those are called "hypotheses" precisely because they have no evidence backing them up and thus are not accepted as fact.

You are claiming to know things cosmologists do not claim to know, then insisting that your claims are backed up by science.

What published science can you point to that backs up your claims? What experiments have been done to prove that what you say is true?

I don't claim there was a before the universe began. My claim is that the universe had a beginning, which is what most cosmologists claim.

 

[Underseer]

There is no evidence that you do, that's for sure.

Cosmologists don't know if there is such a thing as "before the universe" because that would mean the same thing as "before time." How can there be a "before" before time existed? If there is no such thing as "before the universe," how can anyone say that the universe has a cause?

Unlike cosmologists, you are claiming that there is such a thing as "before the universe" and further claiming to know that there was nothing before there was something.

Yes, there are a lot of hypotheses that claim to offer explanations in which the universe has a cause because of some other timespace continuum beyond our own spacetime, but those are called "hypotheses" precisely because they have no evidence backing them up and thus are not accepted as fact.

You are claiming to know things cosmologists do not claim to know, then insisting that your claims are backed up by science.

What published science can you point to that backs up your claims? What experiments have been done to prove that what you say is true?

I don't claim there was a before the universe began. My claim is that the universe had a beginning, which is what most cosmologists claim.

That depends on what you mean by "beginning," to be honest, but go on.

Are you saying that the beginning has a cause?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

There is no evidence that you do, that's for sure.

Cosmologists don't know if there is such a thing as "before the universe" because that would mean the same thing as "before time." How can there be a "before" before time existed? If there is no such thing as "before the universe," how can anyone say that the universe has a cause?

Unlike cosmologists, you are claiming that there is such a thing as "before the universe" and further claiming to know that there was nothing before there was something.

Yes, there are a lot of hypotheses that claim to offer explanations in which the universe has a cause because of some other timespace continuum beyond our own spacetime, but those are called "hypotheses" precisely because they have no evidence backing them up and thus are not accepted as fact.

You are claiming to know things cosmologists do not claim to know, then insisting that your claims are backed up by science.

What published science can you point to that backs up your claims? What experiments have been done to prove that what you say is true?

I don't claim there was a before the universe began. My claim is that the universe had a beginning, which is what most cosmologists claim.

Something can only have a beginning if there is time.