Total Posts:30|Showing Posts:1-30
Jump to topic:

Ranting...

Pennington
Posts: 1,286
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/25/2013 4:21:54 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
How can we really suspect that God exist?

God is specifically the first cause deity. The most simple way to suspect this is because everything we know in our world and life is created and does not just appear or happen from nothing. If everything we see and know has need to have cause before it comes to be then why would we ever think something different started our life here on earth or in space? Even if people like the creators of ancient aliens are correct and we were seeded by other life forms living on another planet, they still have a need of creation themselves and so on and so on. This still leaves us to come back to a single cause. Simple math lets you know that it all begins with the number 1. Zero is the absence of numbers. But we have life and things exist so there is not absence of it and reasonable to assume it always has. To go back to the reasoning that something can not come from nothing because of just visual proof then there was 1 to begin with and 2 came from 1 and so on. This does not require alot of brains or much study but simple math and being vigilant. There was a single cause because there was never just nothing and that single cause caused all we are now.
DDO Debate Champion Forum
http://www.debate.org...
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/25/2013 4:46:49 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/25/2013 4:21:54 AM, Pennington wrote:
How can we really suspect that God exist?

God is specifically the first cause deity. The most simple way to suspect this is because everything we know in our world and life is created and does not just appear or happen from nothing. If everything we see and know has need to have cause before it comes to be then why would we ever think something different started our life here on earth or in space? Even if people like the creators of ancient aliens are correct and we were seeded by other life forms living on another planet, they still have a need of creation themselves and so on and so on. This still leaves us to come back to a single cause. Simple math lets you know that it all begins with the number 1. Zero is the absence of numbers. But we have life and things exist so there is not absence of it and reasonable to assume it always has. To go back to the reasoning that something can not come from nothing because of just visual proof then there was 1 to begin with and 2 came from 1 and so on. This does not require alot of brains or much study but simple math and being vigilant. There was a single cause because there was never just nothing and that single cause caused all we are now.

Virtual particles.

Also you are ignoring the possibility that the universe has always existed in some form or another.

Also life didnt come from nothing. Life came from pre-existing matter. This doesnt require a diety to create life from non-life matter.
Pennington
Posts: 1,286
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/25/2013 5:19:47 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/25/2013 4:46:49 AM, tkubok wrote:
At 2/25/2013 4:21:54 AM, Pennington wrote:
How can we really suspect that God exist?

God is specifically the first cause deity. The most simple way to suspect this is because everything we know in our world and life is created and does not just appear or happen from nothing. If everything we see and know has need to have cause before it comes to be then why would we ever think something different started our life here on earth or in space? Even if people like the creators of ancient aliens are correct and we were seeded by other life forms living on another planet, they still have a need of creation themselves and so on and so on. This still leaves us to come back to a single cause. Simple math lets you know that it all begins with the number 1. Zero is the absence of numbers. But we have life and things exist so there is not absence of it and reasonable to assume it always has. To go back to the reasoning that something can not come from nothing because of just visual proof then there was 1 to begin with and 2 came from 1 and so on. This does not require alot of brains or much study but simple math and being vigilant. There was a single cause because there was never just nothing and that single cause caused all we are now.

Virtual particles.:
Any reasoning? Just a blurt.

Also you are ignoring the possibility that the universe has always existed in some form or another.:
No I am not. At some point time did not exist, I mentioned that. Though you are ignoring the possibility that matter, space and time have just been created themselves in terms of eternity.

Also life didnt come from nothing. Life came from pre-existing matter. This doesnt require a diety to create life from non-life matter.:

You still must show how life arises from non-life. You can not just assume or take for granted that it can or does because you haven't seen it take place.
DDO Debate Champion Forum
http://www.debate.org...
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/25/2013 5:39:01 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/25/2013 5:19:47 AM, Pennington wrote:
At 2/25/2013 4:46:49 AM, tkubok wrote:
At 2/25/2013 4:21:54 AM, Pennington wrote:
How can we really suspect that God exist?

God is specifically the first cause deity. The most simple way to suspect this is because everything we know in our world and life is created and does not just appear or happen from nothing. If everything we see and know has need to have cause before it comes to be then why would we ever think something different started our life here on earth or in space? Even if people like the creators of ancient aliens are correct and we were seeded by other life forms living on another planet, they still have a need of creation themselves and so on and so on. This still leaves us to come back to a single cause. Simple math lets you know that it all begins with the number 1. Zero is the absence of numbers. But we have life and things exist so there is not absence of it and reasonable to assume it always has. To go back to the reasoning that something can not come from nothing because of just visual proof then there was 1 to begin with and 2 came from 1 and so on. This does not require alot of brains or much study but simple math and being vigilant. There was a single cause because there was never just nothing and that single cause caused all we are now.

Virtual particles.:
Any reasoning? Just a blurt.

Virtual particles come from nothing.

Also you are ignoring the possibility that the universe has always existed in some form or another.:
No I am not. At some point time did not exist, I mentioned that. Though you are ignoring the possibility that matter, space and time have just been created themselves in terms of eternity.

Just because time didnt exist, doesnt mean energy or matter did not. Time is simply a construct that we place to display change. Time can come from matter and energy if that matter and energy undergoes change. Youre talking about things like "Life" and "Everything", which means that you include matter and energy, which means that if matter and energy had always existed, time could be created.


Also life didnt come from nothing. Life came from pre-existing matter. This doesnt require a diety to create life from non-life matter.:

You still must show how life arises from non-life. You can not just assume or take for granted that it can or does because you haven't seen it take place.

No, im not claiming that i know how life arose from non-life. You were the one that said that life "Didnt appear or come out of nothing". And my point is that no one, not a single person, is claiming that life came from nothing.

But the problem here is that while i never claimed that life arose from non-life, and what i said was that this doesnt require a diety to create life from non-life matter, you are infact claiming that God created life from non-life, that he was the first cause and the cause of life. That is, as you said, something that you cannot assume or take for granted, because you havent seen that taken place either.
Pennington
Posts: 1,286
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/25/2013 5:58:56 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/25/2013 5:39:01 AM, tkubok wrote:
Are you trying to be confusing? You said,
" Virtual particles come from nothing."
Then said,
"No, im not claiming that i know how life arose from non-life. You were the one that said that life "Didnt appear or come out of nothing". And my point is that no one, not a single person, is claiming that life came from nothing."
Then said,
"But the problem here is that while i never claimed that life arose from non-life, and what i said was that this doesnt require a diety to create life from non-life matter,"

What are you actually saying then? Either life has always existed regardless of eternal matter or it hasnt. Ypu jumped from non-life to life, to life, to non-life to life. You sound very confused.
Just because time didnt exist, doesnt mean energy or matter did not.:
I will assume because we require all three that all three were either created at the same time or one after the other.
Time is simply a construct that we place to display change.:
Or because of time and rotation we age =/= change.
Time can come from matter and energy if that matter and energy undergoes change.:
Or vice versa.
Youre talking about things like "Life" and "Everything", which means that you include matter and energy, which means that if matter and energy had always existed, time could be created.:
Or that energy had a single source and our energy came from that source along with matter.

Also life didnt come from nothing. Life came from pre-existing matter. This doesnt require a diety to create life from non-life matter.:
So life came from dead dirt?
you are infact claiming that God created life from non-life, that he was the first cause and the cause of life. That is, as you said, something that you cannot assume or take for granted, because you havent seen that taken place either.
Well fact is that something comes from something. I have never seen something come to life from nothing that is alive. Maybe you have. Life exist so our life came from another life. That life probably made alot other lives then us. Things grow, things start, things begin and there was a beginning. The beginning of this life was started by another life. Common sense should take over here.
DDO Debate Champion Forum
http://www.debate.org...
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/25/2013 6:38:10 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/25/2013 5:58:56 AM, Pennington wrote:
At 2/25/2013 5:39:01 AM, tkubok wrote:
Are you trying to be confusing? You said,
" Virtual particles come from nothing."
Then said,
"No, im not claiming that i know how life arose from non-life. You were the one that said that life "Didnt appear or come out of nothing". And my point is that no one, not a single person, is claiming that life came from nothing."
Then said,
"But the problem here is that while i never claimed that life arose from non-life, and what i said was that this doesnt require a diety to create life from non-life matter,"

What are you actually saying then? Either life has always existed regardless of eternal matter or it hasnt. Ypu jumped from non-life to life, to life, to non-life to life. You sound very confused.

I was addressing different parts of your comment.

1. Virtual particles can exist, particles can come from nothing. Particles are not alive.

2. No one is saying that life can come from nothing.

3. A diety is not required to create life from non-life matter.

Those are the three points. They are separate, in that they are specifically addressing specific parts of your comments. In other words, i did a breakdown of your comment and replied to them one by one.

Also, what do you mean by "Either Life has always existed regardless of eternal matter or it didnt". Why are those two the only options. Why would life have to always exist. Why couldnt life have formed from matter, and that matter to have been eternal?

Just because time didnt exist, doesnt mean energy or matter did not.:
I will assume because we require all three that all three were either created at the same time or one after the other.

Why would you assume that they would necessariliy all have to be created one after the other?

You can have, for example, energy that has always existed, that turned to matter, that created time.

Time is simply a construct that we place to display change.:
Or because of time and rotation we age =/= change.

Sure. I never denied that we age because of time. The word "Age" is another description of time.

Time can come from matter and energy if that matter and energy undergoes change.:
Or vice versa.

What do you mean by vice versa. Matter and energy cannot come from time. What are you talking about.

Youre talking about things like "Life" and "Everything", which means that you include matter and energy, which means that if matter and energy had always existed, time could be created.:
Or that energy had a single source and our energy came from that source along with matter.

sure. Thats certainly one possibility.


Also life didnt come from nothing. Life came from pre-existing matter. This doesnt require a diety to create life from non-life matter.:
So life came from dead dirt?

It wouldnt be dead, because for something to be dead, it had to be alive. And you put it in extremely highly highly simplistic terms. It wasnt just "Dirt", it was much more than that.

A more apt description would be "So life came from inorganic chemicals interacting with each other"?

To which my answer would be, "Yes, that is what the evidence points to."

you are infact claiming that God created life from non-life, that he was the first cause and the cause of life. That is, as you said, something that you cannot assume or take for granted, because you havent seen that taken place either.
Well fact is that something comes from something. I have never seen something come to life from nothing that is alive.

Sure. But youre equating "Something" with "Alive" and "not alive". Both the "Dirt" as you call it, and a living organism, are both "Something". They are both made of matter, of molecules.

Maybe you have.

Again, this is something that is confirmed by science. Virtual particles.

Life exist so our life came from another life. That life probably made alot other lives then us. Things grow, things start, things begin and there was a beginning.

Sure. I agree with this.

The beginning of this life was started by another life. Common sense should take over here.

Well, no. By that logic, God isnt "Alive" in the same sense that you used in your sentence. Life comes from life. But HOW does life come from life? Via reproduction, a biological natural processes. Are you saying that God came down as a natural entity and gave birth or asexually reproduced the first single celled organism?

This is the problem with your argument. You can narrow it down as much as you like. Sure, life only produces life. Guess what? Birds only produce birds. Monkeys only produce monkeys. What you dont recognize, is that matter only produces matter too. And life and non-life are both matter. There isnt anything special in life that makes it beyond matter.
Pennington
Posts: 1,286
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/25/2013 9:00:45 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/25/2013 6:38:10 AM, tkubok wrote:
Also, what do you mean by "Either Life has always existed regardless of eternal matter or it didnt". Why are those two the only options. Why would life have to always exist. Why couldnt life have formed from matter, and that matter to have been eternal?:
Why couldn't matter not be eternal and made? Why couldn't life always existed before matter?
Why would you assume that they would necessariliy all have to be created one after the other?:
Because space was needed for matter and matter needed to rotate for time.

You can have, for example, energy that has always existed, that turned to matter, that created time.:
I know this is true. I call this energy God and you simplify Him.

It wouldnt be dead, because for something to be dead, it had to be alive. And you put it in extremely highly highly simplistic terms. It wasnt just "Dirt", it was much more than that.:
Like what?

A more apt description would be "So life came from inorganic chemicals interacting with each other"?:
What were they doing before interacting with each other?

To which my answer would be, "Yes, that is what the evidence points to.":
Does it? Seems like biased facts formed into a personnel theory.
Sure. But youre equating "Something" with "Alive" and "not alive". Both the "Dirt" as you call it, and a living organism, are both "Something". They are both made of matter, of molecules.:
There we go we need a living organism or energy to start life and we call it different things.

Again, this is something that is confirmed by science. Virtual particles.:
Everything is energy. That is a very basic meaning behind E=mc^2.

Well, no. By that logic, God isnt "Alive" in the same sense that you used in your sentence.:
Ahh..No..never made any jesture to that.
Life comes from life. But HOW does life come from life?:
Life is eternal but one confined in matter isnt.
Via reproduction, a biological natural processes. Are you saying that God came down as a natural entity and gave birth or asexually reproduced the first single celled organism?:
Who would think up things like that?

This is the problem with your argument. You can narrow it down as much as you like. Sure, life only produces life. Guess what? Birds only produce birds. Monkeys only produce monkeys.:
Yep, I am with you here.
What you dont recognize, is that matter only produces matter too. And life and non-life are both matter. There isnt anything special in life that makes it beyond matter.:
Except that life existed before matter and there is life outside of matter.
DDO Debate Champion Forum
http://www.debate.org...
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/25/2013 9:46:48 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/25/2013 6:38:10 AM, tkubok wrote:
At 2/25/2013 5:58:56 AM, Pennington wrote:
At 2/25/2013 5:39:01 AM, tkubok wrote:
Are you trying to be confusing? You said,
" Virtual particles come from nothing."
Then said,
"No, im not claiming that i know how life arose from non-life. You were the one that said that life "Didnt appear or come out of nothing". And my point is that no one, not a single person, is claiming that life came from nothing."
Then said,
"But the problem here is that while i never claimed that life arose from non-life, and what i said was that this doesnt require a diety to create life from non-life matter,"

What are you actually saying then? Either life has always existed regardless of eternal matter or it hasnt. Ypu jumped from non-life to life, to life, to non-life to life. You sound very confused.

I was addressing different parts of your comment.

1. Virtual particles can exist, particles can come from nothing. Particles are not alive.

Just curious, where does this "nothing" exist, from which particles create themselves??

2. No one is saying that life can come from nothing.

3. A diety is not required to create life from non-life matter.

Those are the three points. They are separate, in that they are specifically addressing specific parts of your comments. In other words, i did a breakdown of your comment and replied to them one by one.

Also, what do you mean by "Either Life has always existed regardless of eternal matter or it didnt". Why are those two the only options. Why would life have to always exist. Why couldnt life have formed from matter, and that matter to have been eternal?

Just because time didnt exist, doesnt mean energy or matter did not.:
I will assume because we require all three that all three were either created at the same time or one after the other.

Why would you assume that they would necessariliy all have to be created one after the other?

You can have, for example, energy that has always existed, that turned to matter, that created time.

Time is simply a construct that we place to display change.:
Or because of time and rotation we age =/= change.

Sure. I never denied that we age because of time. The word "Age" is another description of time.

Time can come from matter and energy if that matter and energy undergoes change.:
Or vice versa.

What do you mean by vice versa. Matter and energy cannot come from time. What are you talking about.

Youre talking about things like "Life" and "Everything", which means that you include matter and energy, which means that if matter and energy had always existed, time could be created.:
Or that energy had a single source and our energy came from that source along with matter.

sure. Thats certainly one possibility.


Also life didnt come from nothing. Life came from pre-existing matter. This doesnt require a diety to create life from non-life matter.:
So life came from dead dirt?

It wouldnt be dead, because for something to be dead, it had to be alive. And you put it in extremely highly highly simplistic terms. It wasnt just "Dirt", it was much more than that.

A more apt description would be "So life came from inorganic chemicals interacting with each other"?

To which my answer would be, "Yes, that is what the evidence points to."

you are infact claiming that God created life from non-life, that he was the first cause and the cause of life. That is, as you said, something that you cannot assume or take for granted, because you havent seen that taken place either.
Well fact is that something comes from something. I have never seen something come to life from nothing that is alive.

Sure. But youre equating "Something" with "Alive" and "not alive". Both the "Dirt" as you call it, and a living organism, are both "Something". They are both made of matter, of molecules.

Maybe you have.

Again, this is something that is confirmed by science. Virtual particles.

Life exist so our life came from another life. That life probably made alot other lives then us. Things grow, things start, things begin and there was a beginning.

Sure. I agree with this.

The beginning of this life was started by another life. Common sense should take over here.

Well, no. By that logic, God isnt "Alive" in the same sense that you used in your sentence. Life comes from life. But HOW does life come from life? Via reproduction, a biological natural processes. Are you saying that God came down as a natural entity and gave birth or asexually reproduced the first single celled organism?

This is the problem with your argument. You can narrow it down as much as you like. Sure, life only produces life. Guess what? Birds only produce birds. Monkeys only produce monkeys. What you dont recognize, is that matter only produces matter too. And life and non-life are both matter. There isnt anything special in life that makes it beyond matter.
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/25/2013 10:05:41 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
We suspect that god exists because we are superstitious creatures prone to seeing meaning and patterns in pure randomness and applying humanistic personifications to the decidedly inhuman world and universe around us. It is no coincidence that each person's conception of god is exactly what they expect/wish it to be and that god's sense of morality is exactly and precisely in line with their own.

Thankfully, we have rational intellect which, at least at the group level, can eliminate the nagging influence of such irrational influences when constructing a body of knowledge that accurately portrays reality.
Pennington
Posts: 1,286
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/25/2013 10:33:02 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/25/2013 10:05:41 AM, drafterman wrote:
We suspect that god exists because we are superstitious creatures prone to seeing meaning and patterns in pure randomness and applying humanistic personifications to the decidedly inhuman world and universe around us.:
Inhuman world? This is very much a humanistic world.
It is no coincidence that each person's conception of god is exactly what they expect/wish it to be and that god's sense of morality is exactly and precisely in line with their own.:
Well mine are not in line with my God's. I constantly fall short of my requirements.

Thankfully, we have rational intellect which, at least at the group level, can eliminate the nagging influence of such when constructing a body of knowledge that accurately portrays reality.:
It would be stupid to eliminate so called 'irrational influences.' To eliminate such things is to deny reality.
DDO Debate Champion Forum
http://www.debate.org...
wiploc
Posts: 1,485
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/25/2013 10:43:10 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/25/2013 4:21:54 AM, Pennington wrote:
...everything we know in our world and life is created and does not just appear or happen from nothing.

If everything we know has a cause, then why are you concluding that one thing doesn't? If everything has a cause, then we have an infinite regress, and no first cause.

If everything we see and know has need to have cause before it comes to be then why would we ever think something different started our life here on earth or in space?

If everything we see and know has a cause, why would you ever think that god was different?

Even if people like the creators of ancient aliens are correct and we were seeded by other life forms living on another planet, they still have a need of creation themselves and so on and so on.

You're right, based on our experience, it follows that everything---including any gods that happen to exist---have causes.

This still leaves us to come back to a single cause.

No, it doesn't. You've pointed out that everything we observe has causes. If you generalize from that observation, then everything---gods included, if they exist---has a cause.

On the other hand, if you reject that observation, and do not conclude that god has a cause, then you have rejected the observation: you can't generalize at all; you cannot conclude that anything has a cause unless it has already been observed to have a cause.

Simple math lets you know that it all begins with the number 1. Zero is the absence of numbers.

Christian mathematicians are crying, "Stay off my side!"

But we have life and things exist so there is not absence of it and reasonable to assume it always has.

"Always has." Infinite regress. No first cause.

... There was a single cause because there was never just nothing and that single cause caused all we are now.

Nothing we observe has a single cause. If you're into generalizing from observations, you cannot possibly conclude that there was a single cause.
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/25/2013 10:44:14 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/25/2013 10:05:41 AM, drafterman wrote:
We suspect that god exists because we are superstitious creatures prone to seeing meaning and patterns in pure randomness and applying humanistic personifications to the decidedly inhuman world and universe around us. It is no coincidence that each person's conception of god is exactly what they expect/wish it to be and that god's sense of morality is exactly and precisely in line with their own.

Thankfully, we have rational intellect which, at least at the group level, can eliminate the nagging influence of such irrational influences when constructing a body of knowledge that accurately portrays reality.

Quit trying to scare off the new guy, you big meanie-head.

By rational intellect you mean the ability to convince gullible people, through indoctrination of young kids, that things can create themselves from nothing, and that life can create itself from rock drippings, design dna, and evolve from a blob of protoplasm to an intelligent creature capable of determining it's own origins?? The Bible and Kent Hovind warned us there'd be guys like you. :)
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/25/2013 11:12:30 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/25/2013 10:44:14 AM, medic0506 wrote:
At 2/25/2013 10:05:41 AM, drafterman wrote:
We suspect that god exists because we are superstitious creatures prone to seeing meaning and patterns in pure randomness and applying humanistic personifications to the decidedly inhuman world and universe around us. It is no coincidence that each person's conception of god is exactly what they expect/wish it to be and that god's sense of morality is exactly and precisely in line with their own.

Thankfully, we have rational intellect which, at least at the group level, can eliminate the nagging influence of such irrational influences when constructing a body of knowledge that accurately portrays reality.

Quit trying to scare off the new guy, you big meanie-head.

By rational intellect you mean the ability to convince gullible people, through indoctrination of young kids, that things can create themselves from nothing, and that life can create itself from rock drippings, design dna, and evolve from a blob of protoplasm to an intelligent creature capable of determining it's own origins??

That'd be religion, what with it's dependence on indoctrination and a belief in ex-nihilo creation, life from dust, etc.
phantom
Posts: 6,774
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/25/2013 11:58:34 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Not everything we see now is causal actually.
"Music is a zen-like ecstatic state where you become the new man of the future, the Nietzschean merger of Apollo and Dionysus." Ray Manzarek (The Doors)
wiploc
Posts: 1,485
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/25/2013 12:05:22 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/25/2013 11:58:34 AM, phantom wrote:
Not everything we see now is causal actually.

True. I accepted his premise carelessly.

But it's still true that accepting his premise means we cannot accept his conclusion.
Polaris
Posts: 1,120
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/25/2013 1:36:51 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/25/2013 4:21:54 AM, Pennington wrote:
How can we really suspect that God exist?

God is specifically the first cause deity. The most simple way to suspect this is because everything we know in our world and life is created and does not just appear or happen from nothing. If everything we see and know has need to have cause before it comes to be then why would we ever think something different started our life here on earth or in space? Even if people like the creators of ancient aliens are correct and we were seeded by other life forms living on another planet, they still have a need of creation themselves and so on and so on. This still leaves us to come back to a single cause. Simple math lets you know that it all begins with the number 1. Zero is the absence of numbers. But we have life and things exist so there is not absence of it and reasonable to assume it always has. To go back to the reasoning that something can not come from nothing because of just visual proof then there was 1 to begin with and 2 came from 1 and so on. This does not require alot of brains or much study but simple math and being vigilant. There was a single cause because there was never just nothing and that single cause caused all we are now.

Isn't this just the cosmological argument?
TheAntidoter
Posts: 4,323
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/25/2013 2:40:25 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/25/2013 11:12:30 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 2/25/2013 10:44:14 AM, medic0506 wrote:
At 2/25/2013 10:05:41 AM, drafterman wrote:
We suspect that god exists because we are superstitious creatures prone to seeing meaning and patterns in pure randomness and applying humanistic personifications to the decidedly inhuman world and universe around us. It is no coincidence that each person's conception of god is exactly what they expect/wish it to be and that god's sense of morality is exactly and precisely in line with their own.

Thankfully, we have rational intellect which, at least at the group level, can eliminate the nagging influence of such irrational influences when constructing a body of knowledge that accurately portrays reality.

Quit trying to scare off the new guy, you big meanie-head.

By rational intellect you mean the ability to convince gullible people, through indoctrination of young kids, that things can create themselves from nothing, and that life can create itself from rock drippings, design dna, and evolve from a blob of protoplasm to an intelligent creature capable of determining it's own origins??

That'd be religion, what with it's dependence on indoctrination and a belief in ex-nihilo creation, life from dust, etc.

Dust vs rocks?

How about ice?
Affinity: Fire
Class: Human
Abilities: ????

Nac.

WOAH, COLORED FONT!
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/25/2013 3:20:49 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/25/2013 2:40:25 PM, TheAntidoter wrote:
At 2/25/2013 11:12:30 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 2/25/2013 10:44:14 AM, medic0506 wrote:
At 2/25/2013 10:05:41 AM, drafterman wrote:
We suspect that god exists because we are superstitious creatures prone to seeing meaning and patterns in pure randomness and applying humanistic personifications to the decidedly inhuman world and universe around us. It is no coincidence that each person's conception of god is exactly what they expect/wish it to be and that god's sense of morality is exactly and precisely in line with their own.

Thankfully, we have rational intellect which, at least at the group level, can eliminate the nagging influence of such irrational influences when constructing a body of knowledge that accurately portrays reality.

Quit trying to scare off the new guy, you big meanie-head.

By rational intellect you mean the ability to convince gullible people, through indoctrination of young kids, that things can create themselves from nothing, and that life can create itself from rock drippings, design dna, and evolve from a blob of protoplasm to an intelligent creature capable of determining it's own origins??

That'd be religion, what with it's dependence on indoctrination and a belief in ex-nihilo creation, life from dust, etc.

Dust vs rocks?

How about ice?

What about it? (Nothing medic said is even remotely scientifically accurate, btw)
natoast
Posts: 204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/25/2013 5:29:52 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/25/2013 4:21:54 AM, Pennington wrote:
How can we really suspect that God exist?

God is specifically the first cause deity. The most simple way to suspect this is because everything we know in our world and life is created and does not just appear or happen from nothing. If everything we see and know has need to have cause before it comes to be then why would we ever think something different started our life here on earth or in space? Even if people like the creators of ancient aliens are correct and we were seeded by other life forms living on another planet, they still have a need of creation themselves and so on and so on. This still leaves us to come back to a single cause. Simple math lets you know that it all begins with the number 1. Zero is the absence of numbers. But we have life and things exist so there is not absence of it and reasonable to assume it always has. To go back to the reasoning that something can not come from nothing because of just visual proof then there was 1 to begin with and 2 came from 1 and so on. This does not require alot of brains or much study but simple math and being vigilant. There was a single cause because there was never just nothing and that single cause caused all we are now.

Wait a minute. By this logic, god needs a creator.
TheAntidoter
Posts: 4,323
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/25/2013 5:31:05 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/25/2013 3:20:49 PM, drafterman wrote:
At 2/25/2013 2:40:25 PM, TheAntidoter wrote:
At 2/25/2013 11:12:30 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 2/25/2013 10:44:14 AM, medic0506 wrote:
At 2/25/2013 10:05:41 AM, drafterman wrote:
We suspect that god exists because we are superstitious creatures prone to seeing meaning and patterns in pure randomness and applying humanistic personifications to the decidedly inhuman world and universe around us. It is no coincidence that each person's conception of god is exactly what they expect/wish it to be and that god's sense of morality is exactly and precisely in line with their own.

Thankfully, we have rational intellect which, at least at the group level, can eliminate the nagging influence of such irrational influences when constructing a body of knowledge that accurately portrays reality.

Quit trying to scare off the new guy, you big meanie-head.

By rational intellect you mean the ability to convince gullible people, through indoctrination of young kids, that things can create themselves from nothing, and that life can create itself from rock drippings, design dna, and evolve from a blob of protoplasm to an intelligent creature capable of determining it's own origins??

That'd be religion, what with it's dependence on indoctrination and a belief in ex-nihilo creation, life from dust, etc.

Dust vs rocks?

How about ice?

What about it? (Nothing medic said is even remotely scientifically accurate, btw)

Just thinking of Norse mythology.
Affinity: Fire
Class: Human
Abilities: ????

Nac.

WOAH, COLORED FONT!
Pennington
Posts: 1,286
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/25/2013 7:30:05 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/25/2013 5:29:52 PM, natoast wrote:
At 2/25/2013 4:21:54 AM, Pennington wrote:
How can we really suspect that God exist?

God is specifically the first cause deity. The most simple way to suspect this is because everything we know in our world and life is created and does not just appear or happen from nothing. If everything we see and know has need to have cause before it comes to be then why would we ever think something different started our life here on earth or in space? Even if people like the creators of ancient aliens are correct and we were seeded by other life forms living on another planet, they still have a need of creation themselves and so on and so on. This still leaves us to come back to a single cause. Simple math lets you know that it all begins with the number 1. Zero is the absence of numbers. But we have life and things exist so there is not absence of it and reasonable to assume it always has. To go back to the reasoning that something can not come from nothing because of just visual proof then there was 1 to begin with and 2 came from 1 and so on. This does not require alot of brains or much study but simple math and being vigilant. There was a single cause because there was never just nothing and that single cause caused all we are now.

Wait a minute. By this logic, god needs a creator.

Nope. Perfectly logical for life to come from life and the first cause not needing a cause.
DDO Debate Champion Forum
http://www.debate.org...
Pennington
Posts: 1,286
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/25/2013 8:00:21 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/25/2013 10:43:10 AM, wiploc wrote:
If everything we know has a cause, then why are you concluding that one thing doesn't? If everything has a cause, then we have an infinite regress, and no first cause.:
No that is a false claim. God would be outside of time so only eternity exist. A first cause is not required to have a cause also. That would be the reason it is the first cause. There could be reason why that cause came to be as well. No one knows everything.

If everything we see and know has a cause, why would you ever think that god was different? :
Nice, a cause that can cause everything including this discussion can have a cause for being or not need one in being a first cause.

This still leaves us to come back to a single cause.

No, it doesn't. You've pointed out that everything we observe has causes. If you generalize from that observation, then everything---gods included, if they exist---has a cause.:
gods? Yes they have a cause. But there was first cause that is outside of time that is eternal forever. All things came from this cause. One comes before two and zero is nothing and we can see there is something so a first cause of life spawn all life. Im not the one trying to say or defend a front that life can come from non-life and that a original cause needs to have a cause for us. That cause created the position we are at then why need to know its cause or not cause?

On the other hand, if you reject that observation, and do not conclude that god has a cause, then you have rejected the observation: you can't generalize at all; you cannot conclude that anything has a cause unless it has already been observed to have a cause.:
You take basic math and throw it out the window for a fool proof theory. If there is substance then something exist. If there is not substance then something does not exist. We have substance and exist so something existed. We see in everything that life is birthed or formed from other life. This is not some coincidence it is a factor. The reason the first cause needs no cause is because all causes once were of that cause and are because of that cause. Regardless how hard you try to deny it I am right and a eternal cause needs no cause. You are just simply trying to demand the cause of your cause to have a cause also and it doesnt have to be that way.

Simple math lets you know that it all begins with the number 1. Zero is the absence of numbers.

Christian mathematicians are crying, "Stay off my side!":
Im crying about your intelligence.

But we have life and things exist so there is not absence of it and reasonable to assume it always has.

"Always has." Infinite regress. No first cause. :
Matter infintely regresses but all life does not have to be contained by matter.

... There was a single cause because there was never just nothing and that single cause caused all we are now.

Nothing we observe has a single cause. If you're into generalizing from observations, you cannot possibly conclude that there was a single cause.:
------
DDO Debate Champion Forum
http://www.debate.org...
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/25/2013 11:00:52 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/25/2013 9:00:45 AM, Pennington wrote:
At 2/25/2013 6:38:10 AM, tkubok wrote:
Also, what do you mean by "Either Life has always existed regardless of eternal matter or it didnt". Why are those two the only options. Why would life have to always exist. Why couldnt life have formed from matter, and that matter to have been eternal?:
Why couldn't matter not be eternal and made? Why couldn't life always existed before matter?

I never said it couldnt. You said "Either or". Im asking YOU why youve excluded the option of life come from matter, and matter be eternal.

Why would you assume that they would necessariliy all have to be created one after the other?:
Because space was needed for matter and matter needed to rotate for time.

Well, no, for example, singularities in things like black holes do not require space since it occupies a point, but still contains matter. Also, why do you keep saying that things need to rotate in order for time to exist? Even if all there existed was a rock that didnt rotate, time would still exist.

You can have, for example, energy that has always existed, that turned to matter, that created time.:
I know this is true. I call this energy God and you simplify Him.

No, you dont call this energy God. Because this energy doesnt exist on a supernatural plane, or is sentient, or anything other than being energy, anymore than the electricity in your computer is supernatural or sentient or can do anything other than power your computer.

It wouldnt be dead, because for something to be dead, it had to be alive. And you put it in extremely highly highly simplistic terms. It wasnt just "Dirt", it was much more than that.:
Like what?

Like chemicals. Methane, hydrogen, water, etc.


A more apt description would be "So life came from inorganic chemicals interacting with each other"?:
What were they doing before interacting with each other?

Not chemically interacting in any significant way.


To which my answer would be, "Yes, that is what the evidence points to.":
Does it? Seems like biased facts formed into a personnel theory.

What sort of biased facts?

Sure. But youre equating "Something" with "Alive" and "not alive". Both the "Dirt" as you call it, and a living organism, are both "Something". They are both made of matter, of molecules.:
There we go we need a living organism or energy to start life and we call it different things.

I agree, we do need energy to start life, its called electricity, a spark from lightning. Which exists in nature. So nature can provide these things to produce life from non-life.

Again, this is something that is confirmed by science. Virtual particles.:
Everything is energy. That is a very basic meaning behind E=mc^2.

Well, matter can be converted to energy, but it isnt energy itself.

Well, no. By that logic, God isnt "Alive" in the same sense that you used in your sentence.:
Ahh..No..never made any jesture to that.

Yes, you did. You said "Life only produces life" did you not?

Life comes from life. But HOW does life come from life?:
Life is eternal but one confined in matter isnt.

How do you know that life is eternal?

Via reproduction, a biological natural processes. Are you saying that God came down as a natural entity and gave birth or asexually reproduced the first single celled organism?:
Who would think up things like that?

This is the problem with your argument. You can narrow it down as much as you like. Sure, life only produces life. Guess what? Birds only produce birds. Monkeys only produce monkeys.:
Yep, I am with you here.
What you dont recognize, is that matter only produces matter too. And life and non-life are both matter. There isnt anything special in life that makes it beyond matter.:
Except that life existed before matter and there is life outside of matter.

How do you know that life existed before matter?
natoast
Posts: 204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/27/2013 11:50:50 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/25/2013 7:30:05 PM, Pennington wrote:
At 2/25/2013 5:29:52 PM, natoast wrote:
At 2/25/2013 4:21:54 AM, Pennington wrote:
How can we really suspect that God exist?

God is specifically the first cause deity. The most simple way to suspect this is because everything we know in our world and life is created and does not just appear or happen from nothing. If everything we see and know has need to have cause before it comes to be then why would we ever think something different started our life here on earth or in space? Even if people like the creators of ancient aliens are correct and we were seeded by other life forms living on another planet, they still have a need of creation themselves and so on and so on. This still leaves us to come back to a single cause. Simple math lets you know that it all begins with the number 1. Zero is the absence of numbers. But we have life and things exist so there is not absence of it and reasonable to assume it always has. To go back to the reasoning that something can not come from nothing because of just visual proof then there was 1 to begin with and 2 came from 1 and so on. This does not require alot of brains or much study but simple math and being vigilant. There was a single cause because there was never just nothing and that single cause caused all we are now.

Wait a minute. By this logic, god needs a creator.

Nope. Perfectly logical for life to come from life and the first cause not needing a cause.

Well then why can't the big bang be the first cause?
Pennington
Posts: 1,286
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/27/2013 2:10:08 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/27/2013 11:50:50 AM, natoast wrote:
At 2/25/2013 7:30:05 PM, Pennington wrote:
At 2/25/2013 5:29:52 PM, natoast wrote:
At 2/25/2013 4:21:54 AM, Pennington wrote:
How can we really suspect that God exist?

God is specifically the first cause deity. The most simple way to suspect this is because everything we know in our world and life is created and does not just appear or happen from nothing. If everything we see and know has need to have cause before it comes to be then why would we ever think something different started our life here on earth or in space? Even if people like the creators of ancient aliens are correct and we were seeded by other life forms living on another planet, they still have a need of creation themselves and so on and so on. This still leaves us to come back to a single cause. Simple math lets you know that it all begins with the number 1. Zero is the absence of numbers. But we have life and things exist so there is not absence of it and reasonable to assume it always has. To go back to the reasoning that something can not come from nothing because of just visual proof then there was 1 to begin with and 2 came from 1 and so on. This does not require alot of brains or much study but simple math and being vigilant. There was a single cause because there was never just nothing and that single cause caused all we are now.

Wait a minute. By this logic, god needs a creator.

Nope. Perfectly logical for life to come from life and the first cause not needing a cause.

Well then why can't the big bang be the first cause?:

It makes no sense.
DDO Debate Champion Forum
http://www.debate.org...
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/27/2013 3:01:45 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/27/2013 2:10:08 PM, Pennington wrote:
At 2/27/2013 11:50:50 AM, natoast wrote:
At 2/25/2013 7:30:05 PM, Pennington wrote:
At 2/25/2013 5:29:52 PM, natoast wrote:
At 2/25/2013 4:21:54 AM, Pennington wrote:
How can we really suspect that God exist?

God is specifically the first cause deity. The most simple way to suspect this is because everything we know in our world and life is created and does not just appear or happen from nothing. If everything we see and know has need to have cause before it comes to be then why would we ever think something different started our life here on earth or in space? Even if people like the creators of ancient aliens are correct and we were seeded by other life forms living on another planet, they still have a need of creation themselves and so on and so on. This still leaves us to come back to a single cause. Simple math lets you know that it all begins with the number 1. Zero is the absence of numbers. But we have life and things exist so there is not absence of it and reasonable to assume it always has. To go back to the reasoning that something can not come from nothing because of just visual proof then there was 1 to begin with and 2 came from 1 and so on. This does not require alot of brains or much study but simple math and being vigilant. There was a single cause because there was never just nothing and that single cause caused all we are now.

Wait a minute. By this logic, god needs a creator.

Nope. Perfectly logical for life to come from life and the first cause not needing a cause.

Well then why can't the big bang be the first cause?:

It makes no sense.

wanna reply to my comment?
Pennington
Posts: 1,286
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/27/2013 3:46:43 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/25/2013 11:00:52 PM, tkubok wrote:

I never said it couldnt. You said "Either or". Im asking YOU why youve excluded the option of life come from matter, and matter be eternal.:
Because matter is not eternal. Matter dies, matter erodes.

Well, no, for example, singularities in things like black holes do not require space since it occupies a point, but still contains matter.:
Show that black holes contain no space.

Also, why do you keep saying that things need to rotate in order for time to exist? Even if all there existed was a rock that didnt rotate, time would still exist.:
Show that it would.

To which my answer would be, "Yes, that is what the evidence points to.":
Does it? Seems like biased facts formed into a personnel theory.

What sort of biased facts?:
That interpretations of evidence clearly means this instead of that when really it could mean this and not that. You have predetermined endings.

I agree, we do need energy to start life, its called electricity, a spark from lightning. Which exists in nature. So nature can provide these things to produce life from non-life.:
No, not really. You need a source for energy as well.

Well, matter can be converted to energy, but it isnt energy itself. :
Can energy be coverted to matter?

Yes, you did. You said "Life only produces life" did you not?:
Sure did. We are in a secondary life but there is a first source that needs no beginning for our secondary life.

How do you know that life is eternal?:
Your worldlistic view prevents you from understanding. Not my problem. Get more diverse.

How do you know that life existed before matter?:
Because life exist outside of matter.
DDO Debate Champion Forum
http://www.debate.org...
natoast
Posts: 204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/27/2013 4:16:38 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/27/2013 2:10:08 PM, Pennington wrote:
At 2/27/2013 11:50:50 AM, natoast wrote:
At 2/25/2013 7:30:05 PM, Pennington wrote:
At 2/25/2013 5:29:52 PM, natoast wrote:
At 2/25/2013 4:21:54 AM, Pennington wrote:
How can we really suspect that God exist?

God is specifically the first cause deity. The most simple way to suspect this is because everything we know in our world and life is created and does not just appear or happen from nothing. If everything we see and know has need to have cause before it comes to be then why would we ever think something different started our life here on earth or in space? Even if people like the creators of ancient aliens are correct and we were seeded by other life forms living on another planet, they still have a need of creation themselves and so on and so on. This still leaves us to come back to a single cause. Simple math lets you know that it all begins with the number 1. Zero is the absence of numbers. But we have life and things exist so there is not absence of it and reasonable to assume it always has. To go back to the reasoning that something can not come from nothing because of just visual proof then there was 1 to begin with and 2 came from 1 and so on. This does not require alot of brains or much study but simple math and being vigilant. There was a single cause because there was never just nothing and that single cause caused all we are now.

Wait a minute. By this logic, god needs a creator.

Nope. Perfectly logical for life to come from life and the first cause not needing a cause.

Well then why can't the big bang be the first cause?:

It makes no sense.

I could say that that god doesn't make sense as the first cause, but that's no sort of proof.
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/27/2013 4:21:20 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/27/2013 3:46:43 PM, Pennington wrote:
At 2/25/2013 11:00:52 PM, tkubok wrote:

I never said it couldnt. You said "Either or". Im asking YOU why youve excluded the option of life come from matter, and matter be eternal.:
Because matter is not eternal. Matter dies, matter erodes.

No, matter doesnt "Die" nor does it erode. Objects erode. Matter does not. You cannot destroy matter.

Well, no, for example, singularities in things like black holes do not require space since it occupies a point, but still contains matter.:
Show that black holes contain no space.

Uh, its the nature of a singularity to occupy no space. This is why the singularity could exist at the beginning of the big bang, and how space didnt exist before the big bang.

Also, why do you keep saying that things need to rotate in order for time to exist? Even if all there existed was a rock that didnt rotate, time would still exist.:
Show that it would.

Comets. They dont rotate, but they age.

To which my answer would be, "Yes, that is what the evidence points to.":
Does it? Seems like biased facts formed into a personnel theory.

What sort of biased facts?:
That interpretations of evidence clearly means this instead of that when really it could mean this and not that. You have predetermined endings.

How does our ability to produce everything from self replicating artificial DNA to the building blocks of life from chemicals that exist in nature, all through natural and plausible means, evidence for the impossibility of abiogenesis?

I agree, we do need energy to start life, its called electricity, a spark from lightning. Which exists in nature. So nature can provide these things to produce life from non-life.:
No, not really. You need a source for energy as well.

Sure, i never said you didnt. Its called Lightning, which readily exists in nature. This is even more evidence that shows the plausibility of Abiogenesis.


Well, matter can be converted to energy, but it isnt energy itself. :
Can energy be coverted to matter?

Yes.


Yes, you did. You said "Life only produces life" did you not?:
Sure did. We are in a secondary life but there is a first source that needs no beginning for our secondary life.

Funny, first you say "No, i never said that" and now you say "Sure did".

What do you mean by "Secondary life".


How do you know that life is eternal?:
Your worldlistic view prevents you from understanding. Not my problem. Get more diverse.

I asked you how you know, not how i can understand. Tell me how you know this is true. Even if i cant understand it, ill still know how you know.


How do you know that life existed before matter?:
Because life exist outside of matter.

And how do you konw that life exists outside of matter?