LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksYou've never drank Maccabi or Goldstar? You heretic!Originally Posted by AlienTraveler
No seriously they're good beers.
You've never drank Maccabi or Goldstar? You heretic!
No seriously they're good beers.
None of which prove God exists. They prove (at best) that our universe is comparable to a living organism and that everything in it is subject to surrounding energy fields and vibrations. Cause and effect.
I don't know if you mean Pascol or Pascal (as in Blaise Pascal). Would you care to expand on your statement.
Please, spare us your energy field and vibration nonsense.
The fallacy in a purely atheistic world view is cause and effect. An infinite chain of causation is irrational. If the cause of some phenomenon lies somewhere at the end of an infinite chain of causation, then it is as if there is no cause.
Eventually, it MUST have come from some finite point. The advent of big bang cosmology only reinforces this argument.
Quantum physics is nonsense to you. OK.
Everything causes a reaction (regardless of the instigator). You will respond (or not) to my response to you. Whether that response is physical or mental is irrelevant because it will eventually manifest.
Your belief that the entire universe has been created by God because that only fits your world view is in fact a fallacy. It is insultingly arrogant to claim that nothing ever existed before our universe. The fact is we don't know. But to use the fact that we don't know as an argument for existence of God is illogical. That's something a scoundrel would do just to keep on the safe side.
No, you're use of quantum physics is nonsense.
Quantum physical interaction occur in very, very small scales -- the quanta. Cosmology (the study on the beginnings of the universe) is concerned with interactions in very, very large scales -- specifically, the cosmological fluid where entire galaxies are mere particles in comparison.
That you mix up scientific disciplines shows your entire argument as nonsense from the beginning.
Like this one right here. Missed the point by a mile.
If you accept causation, then you must accept that a chain of causation has to have a start -- the reason being that an INFINITE chain of causation is IRRATIONAL.
Now, if you say that the universe started from a finite point -- a space-time singularity -- that went bang, what scientific principle or evidence do you have for such a singularity to go bang -- IN DIRECT CONTRADICTION WITH THE LAW OF INERTIA, eh?
None, whatsoever.
Nonsense. It is that opinion that has no factual or logical basis.
I am merely using the laws of science to conclude the inescapable.
You see an object accelerating and you conclude that AN EXTERNAL FORCE ACTED ON IT (and rightly so) even if you never observed this force initially acting on the object. Is that logical enough for you?
Well, I got news for you. The universe is expanding at an ACCELERATING RATE???
What does your 'logic' prompt you to conclude, hmmmm? That it did so on its own -- the only possibility left when you're atheism stupidly asserted that there is nothing else outside the universe????
Duh?
I am sorry, I have not. I haven’t been in Israel either. What’s worse, I haven’t even seen a beer bottle with Hebrew letters on it.You've never drank Maccabi or Goldstar? You heretic!
No seriously they're good beers.
I am sorry to interrupt your pseudoscientific debate again, but quantum mechanics and relativity are not two different scientific disciplines, they both are parts of physics, and they both are employed in cosmology to their full extent. Please, stop your amateurish brawl, it has nothing to do with science and looks funny.
You're back for more ass-whopping, I see.
Unified field theory - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Gravity has yet to be successfully included in a theory of everything. Simply trying to combine the graviton with the strong and electroweak interactions runs into fundamental difficulties since the resulting theory is not renormalizable. Theoretical physicists have not yet formulated a widely accepted, consistent theory that combines general relativity and quantum mechanics. The incompatibility of the two theories remains an outstanding problem in the field of physics.
But then again, you are welcome to try and explain how quantum mechanics and relativity solves the cosmological riddles. Better yet, why don't you use what you think you know about quantum mechanics and answer my questions for res.
You wouldn't mind if I don't hold my breath, would you?
Your argument is that because we don't know what, how or when the "initial shove" occurred, it has to be the work of God. You get from A to Z without any proof and are insulted when I tell you you don't make sense.
