Methodological naturalism is the bedrock of the scientific method.
As soon as you make any reference to the supernatural you have abandoned the quest for knowledge.
Not all believers in a creator are dumb, may be deaf, so accomplished atheist explain this:--
by prologos 43 Replies latest forum tech-support
-
-
adamah
A said-
Or perhaps God is not as complicated as we think. Atheists typically claim that belief in a God is less simple than belief in a chance universe, but they have absolutely no basis for this assertion.
Saying "God Dun It!" to everything is intellectually lazy, since the next question is, "So where did this omnipotent, omniscient being that didn't have a beginning and an ending come from"? It's a non-answer that temporarily kicks the can down the road, and answers nothing.
It ALSO coincidently relies on the well-known-tendency of the human brain to question the merely improbable, but to be shocked-and-awed by the totally and completely impossible, allowing the latter to be accepted as a distinct possibility (when all the known laws of thermodynamics would have to be violated for such a being to exist).
Adam
-
yadda yadda 2
There's more evidence for UFO's than a big silent metaphysical sky daddy. If you wanna believe in some higher intelligence then why not believe we are the progency of aliens? I'd sooner believe Erich von Daniken than the Pope.
-
Captain Obvious
But WHY? If owl done concedes to your idea of a benefactor, how long till you're trying to steer that person towards the god of the bible?
Besides... The oxygen/carbon ratios have changed many times through history. Just because our air is food for us now doesn't mean if air was a bit different, we couldn't have evolved to breathe that air perfectly. How things fit together is not evidence of any creator, just of our evolution working properly. Evolution didn't need someone to help it start, because by its very nature it makes things work out or die.
In summary, your question is pointless. Good try, keep thinking and searching. The truth is right under your nose
-
mrhhome
adamah...Are you saying that the first and second laws of thermo dynamics don't apply to biochemistry?
-
Farkel
:Not all believers in a creator are dumb, may be deaf, so accomplished atheist explain this:--
How does one get to be an "accomplished" atheist? Is there an apprentice phase, where they are not quite "accomplished" and then they learn their "trade" and become "accomplished?" If so, where do they learn that trade? Who teaches that trade?
Is that sort of like being an "accomplished" true-believer, with the attendant apprentice-in-training phase before becoming such?
Or are you being a jerk with a pejorative statement like that to create a viceral response when you have no real evidence?
Curious minds like mine need to know.
Farkel, "Accomplished" Jerk (Did my training in the Watchtower religion)
-
Farkel
Ishmael (Mad Giant):
You wrote:
: As a matter of fact, in collage...
As a self-proclaimed engineer, I find it amusing that you cannot even spell the type of school where you received your education.
Then you said,
: and must of us are atheists.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Farkel, Hoo Allso Wunt tu skool, an itty bit
-
adamah
adamah...Are you saying that the first and second laws of thermo dynamics don't apply to biochemistry?
No, I never said that; where'd you get the idea I did? God is supposedly immaterial (yet material in order to assume perceptible form, carry out miracles, etc); biochemistry is definitely part of the material World, and has to obey the laws of matter.
I said that God's existence would require a boatload of "special pleading" exceptions from all known rules of the physical World in order for this "perfect being" to exist, to always have just been that way, and without a creator of His own. There's no possibility of continuous process improvement like there is in evolution/natural selection, at all, since God is "perfect".
God just so happens to be the most-powerful AWESOME being any human has ever imagined, which in itself, tells you more about the motives of those who fantasize of such a being.
Adam
-
mrhhome
Folks...read the thread about coffee with mouthy...and you will see love and grace in action.
Read the thread about no one telling a women that her sister died...and you will see evil in action.
You can debate the existence of God all day long, but in those two threads, you see the Gospel in action. Does that prove the existence of God? No, but it works.
Speaking as an engineer, a great deal of expensive high tech equipment was designed with empirical models only loosely based on physics, but they worked.
-
Apognophos
As soon as you make any reference to the supernatural you have abandoned the quest for knowledge.
Incorrect. As soon as one relies on the supernatural for an explanation and lets that stop him from searching for a scientific answer, one has abandoned the quest for knowledge. References and idle speculation do no harm. Surely you can see the distinction.
Saying "God Dun It!" to everything is intellectually lazy, since the next question is, "So where did this omnipotent, omniscient being that didn't have a beginning and an ending come from"? It's a non-answer that temporarily kicks the can down the road, and answers nothing.
You're right. That's completely different from believing that a timeless field with enough energy potential to create the universe sprang into being on its own and then perturbed itself into an ordered universe. What was I thinking.
It ALSO coincidently relies on the well-known-tendency of the human brain to question the merely improbable, but to be shocked-and-awed by the totally and completely impossible, allowing the latter to be accepted as a distinct possibility (when all the known laws of thermodynamics would have to be violated for such a being to exist).
You should know better than to use those bold words. Now who's being intellectually lazy? You've decided something is impossible with no basis in knowledge, simply because science can't currently describe such a thing. Also, the fact that you think God would exist inside the universe he himself created, and thus be subject to the laws he created, is rather odd.