Total Posts:133|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Did everything come from nothing?

rogue
Posts: 2,325
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2011 11:43:56 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Well, I don't think so. I have never met and atheist who believes that either. I am so sick of hearing theists say that atheists think everything came from nothing. I have never experienced this. No definition of naturalism, atheism, or the Big Bang Theory says that. Atheists and naturalists do not even have to believe in the Big Bang Theory!
tvellalott
Posts: 10,864
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2011 5:11:32 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/24/2011 5:07:29 AM, Cliff.Stamp wrote:
This is the accepted current scientific view so yes a lot of people would assert it is true.

What is? That everything came from nothing?
"Caitlyn Jenner is an incredibly brave and stunningly beautiful woman."

Muh threads
Using mafia tactics in real-life: http://www.debate.org...
6 years of DDO: http://www.debate.org...
Cliff.Stamp
Posts: 2,169
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2011 5:16:20 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Yes, and that there still is nothing including no energy in the universe. Laurence Krauss has a popular lecture on YouTube where he discusses it in detail.
tvellalott
Posts: 10,864
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2011 5:21:59 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/24/2011 5:16:20 AM, Cliff.Stamp wrote:
Yes, and that there still is nothing including no energy in the universe. Laurence Krauss has a popular lecture on YouTube where he discusses it in detail.

I must see.
"Caitlyn Jenner is an incredibly brave and stunningly beautiful woman."

Muh threads
Using mafia tactics in real-life: http://www.debate.org...
6 years of DDO: http://www.debate.org...
DATCMOTO
Posts: 6,160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2011 5:46:46 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/23/2011 11:43:56 PM, rogue wrote:
Well, I don't think so. I have never met and atheist who believes that either. I am so sick of hearing theists say that atheists think everything came from nothing. I have never experienced this. No definition of naturalism, atheism, or the Big Bang Theory says that. Atheists and naturalists do not even have to believe in the Big Bang Theory!

Try reading some Biology text books; they pretty much ALL say that NOTHING exploded.

God dodgers EITHER believe that nothing exploded OR they believe in eternity, now WHICH is it?
The Cross.. the Cross.
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2011 6:14:42 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/24/2011 5:07:29 AM, Cliff.Stamp wrote:
This is the accepted current scientific view

no it's not.

not Came from nothing...
Time itself only exists with the big bang.. so the big bang didn't come about from nothing..

without time there's no "coming" or "going" or developing, or degrading....
and "Nothing" never existed from which "something" later came.

it seems as if they just don't have the ability to understand why there was a "singularity"

I doubt any would say it "came from nothing" and if they did I would think they were for the most part simply not being as precise in their Language as they could be, and Mean that it Just existed, or existed first, or was w/o cause.. Not that it literally CAME from nothing.

so yes a lot of people would assert it is true.

no. I really don't think many would.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2011 6:18:09 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/24/2011 5:46:46 AM, DATCMOTO wrote:
eternity

Eternity.

but not in your "I wanna live forever"... Platonic, Soully, way :P
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
Meatros
Posts: 1,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2011 7:06:21 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/23/2011 11:43:56 PM, rogue wrote:
Well, I don't think so. I have never met and atheist who believes that either. I am so sick of hearing theists say that atheists think everything came from nothing. I have never experienced this. No definition of naturalism, atheism, or the Big Bang Theory says that. Atheists and naturalists do not even have to believe in the Big Bang Theory!

All of this is true. I think what is typically understood is that the cosmic inflation originated in 'nothing' or whatever. I think this involves the wrong view of time, personally. I think that the b theory of time makes more sense then the a theory. The b theory, of course, postulates an eternal 'time'.
Meatros
Posts: 1,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2011 7:06:58 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/24/2011 5:16:20 AM, Cliff.Stamp wrote:
Yes, and that there still is nothing including no energy in the universe. Laurence Krauss has a popular lecture on YouTube where he discusses it in detail.

I'm not sure that it is, actually, although I'm sure there are some physicists that hold to it I suppose.
Meatros
Posts: 1,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2011 7:08:11 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/24/2011 5:46:46 AM, DATCMOTO wrote:
At 6/23/2011 11:43:56 PM, rogue wrote:
Well, I don't think so. I have never met and atheist who believes that either. I am so sick of hearing theists say that atheists think everything came from nothing. I have never experienced this. No definition of naturalism, atheism, or the Big Bang Theory says that. Atheists and naturalists do not even have to believe in the Big Bang Theory!

Try reading some Biology text books; they pretty much ALL say that NOTHING exploded.

Sure.

It's obvious that you are getting this line from a Hovind lecture.


God dodgers EITHER believe that nothing exploded OR they believe in eternity, now WHICH is it?

This isn't actually true. There are lots of cosmological models to choose from. An eternal entity using Magic need not be one of them.
Cliff.Stamp
Posts: 2,169
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2011 7:12:04 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/24/2011 7:06:58 AM, Meatros wrote:
At 6/24/2011 5:16:20 AM, Cliff.Stamp wrote:
Yes, and that there still is nothing including no energy in the universe. Laurence Krauss has a popular lecture on YouTube where he discusses it in detail.

I'm not sure that it is, actually, although I'm sure there are some physicists that hold to it I suppose.

Krauss is presenting the accepted view so few would oppose it as it is verified to the highest agreement of any empirical result.
askbob
Posts: 7,254
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2011 7:14:30 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/23/2011 11:43:56 PM, rogue wrote:
Atheists and naturalists do not even have to believe in the Big Bang Theory!

Considering the Big Bang Theory is the current scientifically accepted theory they pretty much have to accept it as it's science!
Me -Phil left the site in my charge. I have a recorded phone conversation to prove it.
kohai -If you're the owner, then do something useful like ip block him and get us away from juggle and on a dofferent host!
Me -haha you apparently don't know my history
Kohai - Maybe not, but that doesn't matter! You shoukd still listen to your community and quit being a tyrrant!
Me - i was being completely sarcastic
Kohai - then u misrepresented yourself by impersonating the owner—a violation of the tos
Cliff.Stamp
Posts: 2,169
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2011 7:18:11 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/24/2011 5:21:59 AM, tvellalott wrote:
At 6/24/2011 5:16:20 AM, Cliff.Stamp wrote:
Yes, and that there still is nothing including no energy in the universe. Laurence Krauss has a popular lecture on YouTube where he discusses it in detail.

I must see.

The lecture is "A universe from nothing", it is a wonderful presentation both in content and delivery he also talks about ow due to the expansion of the universe that we are in a very unique time to understand its nature as if it was much later in the future or example we would be too far away from anything to ever be able to understand it. Of course that is often used as an argument for God who specifically created us at this time to allow us to see the wonder of his creation.
askbob
Posts: 7,254
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2011 7:18:39 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/24/2011 7:06:21 AM, Meatros wrote:
The b theory, of course, postulates an eternal 'time'.

A. Time is a device invented by intelligent beings
B. Intelligent beings have not existed eternally
C. Therefore Time cannot exist eternally without an eternal cognizance.
D. Therefore if time is eternal, some form of god exists.
Me -Phil left the site in my charge. I have a recorded phone conversation to prove it.
kohai -If you're the owner, then do something useful like ip block him and get us away from juggle and on a dofferent host!
Me -haha you apparently don't know my history
Kohai - Maybe not, but that doesn't matter! You shoukd still listen to your community and quit being a tyrrant!
Me - i was being completely sarcastic
Kohai - then u misrepresented yourself by impersonating the owner—a violation of the tos
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2011 7:21:26 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
I have a hard time answering this question when debating theists.

"So if God doesn't exist, then where'd the universe come from. It couldn't have come from nothing."

My response to this is that God can't come from nothing either.

But then we're left at an impasse. Of course, Gods of the gaps arguments aren't compelling enough for these theists, they want a concrete answer where the universe came from.
askbob
Posts: 7,254
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2011 7:22:12 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/24/2011 7:21:26 AM, Nags wrote:
I have a hard time answering this question when debating theists.

"So if God doesn't exist, then where'd the universe come from. It couldn't have come from nothing."

My response to this is that God can't come from nothing either.

But then we're left at an impasse. Of course, Gods of the gaps arguments aren't compelling enough for these theists, they want a concrete answer where the universe came from.

Unmoved mover theory.
Me -Phil left the site in my charge. I have a recorded phone conversation to prove it.
kohai -If you're the owner, then do something useful like ip block him and get us away from juggle and on a dofferent host!
Me -haha you apparently don't know my history
Kohai - Maybe not, but that doesn't matter! You shoukd still listen to your community and quit being a tyrrant!
Me - i was being completely sarcastic
Kohai - then u misrepresented yourself by impersonating the owner—a violation of the tos
Thaddeus
Posts: 6,985
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2011 7:28:10 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/24/2011 7:22:12 AM, askbob wrote:
At 6/24/2011 7:21:26 AM, Nags wrote:
I have a hard time answering this question when debating theists.

"So if God doesn't exist, then where'd the universe come from. It couldn't have come from nothing."

My response to this is that God can't come from nothing either.

But then we're left at an impasse. Of course, Gods of the gaps arguments aren't compelling enough for these theists, they want a concrete answer where the universe came from.

Unmoved mover theory.

Or to clarify; causality only contigently applies to things within the universe and time
Illegalcombatant
Posts: 4,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2011 7:42:20 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/24/2011 7:29:40 AM, Nags wrote:
At 6/24/2011 7:22:12 AM, askbob wrote:
Unmoved mover theory.

Flimsy as paper.

Wanna debate that ? :)

Also a problem with the standard theism answer is that the universe if "caused" by God, also came from nothing in a certain sense.

In this case God didn't create the universe/matter from pre existing matter nor did God create matter from spirit or Gods self or something prior, hence creation ex nihilo.

God at best is regarded here as the "efficient" cause, but never the less its still the universe/matter coming from nothing eh ?
"Seems like another attempt to insert God into areas our knowledge has yet to penetrate. You figure God would be bigger than the gaps of our ignorance." Drafterman 19/5/12
Meatros
Posts: 1,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2011 8:26:06 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/24/2011 7:12:04 AM, Cliff.Stamp wrote:
At 6/24/2011 7:06:58 AM, Meatros wrote:
At 6/24/2011 5:16:20 AM, Cliff.Stamp wrote:
Yes, and that there still is nothing including no energy in the universe. Laurence Krauss has a popular lecture on YouTube where he discusses it in detail.

I'm not sure that it is, actually, although I'm sure there are some physicists that hold to it I suppose.

Krauss is presenting the accepted view so few would oppose it as it is verified to the highest agreement of any empirical result.

I haven't read Krauss (to my recollection). I know that Gott had a cosmological theory where the early history of the universe 'ate' itself via a time warp.

It was more complicated then that and I had trouble following along, but it seemed interesting.
Meatros
Posts: 1,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2011 8:28:11 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/24/2011 7:14:30 AM, askbob wrote:
At 6/23/2011 11:43:56 PM, rogue wrote:
Atheists and naturalists do not even have to believe in the Big Bang Theory!

Considering the Big Bang Theory is the current scientifically accepted theory they pretty much have to accept it as it's science!

I wouldn't go this far - atheists don't have to subscribe to science, but most western atheists do. A prominent atheist, Richard Carrier, for years was skeptical of the Big Bang. He has since come around, here's his article:
http://www.infidels.org...
Meatros
Posts: 1,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2011 8:30:27 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/24/2011 7:18:39 AM, askbob wrote:
At 6/24/2011 7:06:21 AM, Meatros wrote:
The b theory, of course, postulates an eternal 'time'.

A. Time is a device invented by intelligent beings
B. Intelligent beings have not existed eternally
C. Therefore Time cannot exist eternally without an eternal cognizance.
D. Therefore if time is eternal, some form of god exists.

This presupposes an A theory of time. You are thinking 'eternal time' means that time is infinite, meaning that it stretches back forever (there are an infinite number of events, for instance). This is not what I'm suggestion when I say that time is eternal. I'm positing the B theory of time.
Cliff.Stamp
Posts: 2,169
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2011 8:50:32 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/24/2011 8:26:06 AM, Meatros wrote:

I haven't read Krauss (to my recollection).

Very basically what we think of creation is just a splitting of nothing into positive and negative energy. Nothing is every created in the strictest sense so the universe came from and still is nothing. There is a lot of math gibber that goes along with that but that is the basic argument.
Meatros
Posts: 1,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2011 9:02:07 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/24/2011 8:50:32 AM, Cliff.Stamp wrote:
At 6/24/2011 8:26:06 AM, Meatros wrote:

I haven't read Krauss (to my recollection).

Very basically what we think of creation is just a splitting of nothing into positive and negative energy. Nothing is every created in the strictest sense so the universe came from and still is nothing. There is a lot of math gibber that goes along with that but that is the basic argument.

I might give it a look, I'm always curious about cosmological theories. It sounds like his theory is trying to conserve energy.

I'm sympathetic to the view that if the universe did come from nothing it could not have had a cause. This is because there would have been nothing for an agent to act upon. Further, contra craig, I agree with Hume in the sense that we have no experience with anything remotely like what the 'beginning' of the universe. In otherwords, I do not agree with Craig that the 'cause' in the Kalam is sufficiently similar to the cause of the universe.

To explain; every effect in this universe (with the exception of quantum fluctuations, which go against Craig's point anyway) is a result of a change in energy or material within a temporal space. An agent acts upon something, during some time, at some place, with some energy and changes that something into something else. This is what we are familiar with when we speak of causation.

When Craig speaks of causation this is not what he means. He cannot mean this because there is no place, no time, no thing to act upon.
Cliff.Stamp
Posts: 2,169
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2011 9:08:23 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
It isn't his theory he is just a very popular speaker and is also very active in the evolution vs creation wars. But yes one of the key points is that there is zero energy in the universe, this has a major impact in cosmological theory in general.
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2011 12:28:53 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/24/2011 9:08:23 AM, Cliff.Stamp wrote:
It isn't his theory he is just a very popular speaker and is also very active in the evolution vs creation wars. But yes one of the key points is that there is zero energy in the universe, this has a major impact in cosmological theory in general.

*waits for it*
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp