- + New Debate
- Debate News
- About
- Debra AI More
frame
Best Great argument Content
-
Is Atheism A Belief?
If you have the indecency to go to a thread on a completely different topic and talk about red meat again - then please, at least, have the decency to not slander people in the process. I have never said that "meat is ok in moderation". I do not know what it even means: "ok" in what sense?
-
Does the fine-tuning of the universe suggest that God exists?
just_sayin said:I think you are making a mistake in missing the 1,000 executioners firing their loaded guns and all missing, by focusing exclusively on the reaction of the observer. You seem to be missing the obvious. While it is true that the guy who pulls off his blindfold can say he is still alive, and therefore everyone missed, he has failed to explain why everyone missed. Given the astronomical odds of everyone missing, it seems that something more is going on, and if everyone missed, he should suspect that the reason is because, their shots were not accidental, but that they all deliberately missed. While he can conclude he lives in world where the odds worked out in his favor and he is alive, he has failed to recognize that their was some intelligence and intentionality that was behind that, that tinkered with things to bring about that outcome..Well, first, I would poke a hole at the analogy by pointing out that the observer in question remembers what happened before he opened his eyes: he saw the executioners lining up and pointing their guns at him. This is very different from him waking up, remembering nothing from his past, and just seeing the smoke coming out of 1,000 guns pointing at him - which is closer to "appearance" of the Universe. Your analogy would describe a different scenario: someone witnessing a random number generator continuously generating random values for multiple constants - then waking up in this Universe and finding that the constants are aligned just right. That might suggest that something interfered with the random process.In statistics, whether the prior is known or not seriously affects the evaluated probability. If I see 10 coin flips resulting in 7 heads and 3 tails, and then the same coin is flipped 100 times in a row showing only heads - then I must suspect that the coin flipper uses some technique to only get heads. On the other hand, if all I see is the 100 coin flips resulting in heads, it will be more reasonable to assume that the coin is double-headed.Another issue here is that we are assuming that the generation of constant values is somehow uniformly random. But why? Perhaps the distribution of constants is heavily centered around the values that we observe: the more the values are removed from it, the less the resulting "Universe" makes sense. Like generating random sequences of characters and hoping to produce a compilable code: it will take an exorbitant amount of rolls to produce something that runs, but only code that runs will show anything on the screen.Finally, even if I grant you that something must have interfered with the "natural" process, that something does not have to be intelligence. In fact, the assumption that it has to be intelligence is very strange, given that the vast majority of processes we see around us are not directly induced by intelligence. In case of the 1,000 executioners missing, it could be just that high powers of 10 are magical numbers that lead to weird interference patterns that significantly increase the probability of altering certain expected outcomes - but the effect is so rarely encountered in reality that no one has ever considered the possibility, so we are completely in the dark.However I look at it, I just do not see how intelligent intervention is favored versus many other possible explanations.just_sayin said:Nobel Prize winner, Roger Penrose pointed out that the initial conditions of low entropy in the universe were incredibly unlikely and that the odds of them happening randomly were 1 in 10 ^10 ^ 123rd power. Since there is no known reason in physics why these numbers must be this low, it demands an explanation, as he argued. Your argument seems to be - 'since we are alive, let's forget about the explanation altogether about how we have such an improbable universe.' That seems like the opposite of the scientific approach to me. Mind you that Penrose is an atheist. and that Penrose also posited the notion of consciousness being the result of the collapse of the wave function whereby there is time travel into a brief moment in the past (just a side note since you went off topic onto consciousness). A key difference I see in his response, is that he knows, something is off and it demands more than 'Let's just forget about it and go on'.
The fact is, there are a limited number of scenarios where a life permitting universe is generated - I'm not talking about one that fits just our type of life right now, but just one where the universe doesn't immediately collapse upon itself, or where the fundamental forces aren't too weak and thereby no atoms can form. A parameter that I did not mention was the amount of matter in the universe. If there was too much matter, then the universe would collapse on itself before stars and planets could form. If there was too little matter then the stars and planets couldn't form. This number must be finely tuned to 1 part in 10 ^60th power. That means that a dimes worth of difference in the matter in the universe and it would not exist. Go outside and take a look at the sky - if you added or removed 1 millimeter from what you see in the sky - your universe wouldn't exist. Again, please look up above at my initial post for many other examples. The odds are not just astronomical they are impossibly improbable. To claim that since we live in an environment that permits life, then we shouldn't concern ourselves with the odds - is naive and unscientific.Penrose used one of the existing cosmological models that led him to this conclusion. Aside from that model not having any empirical basis (most models in theoretical physics are like that, especially in cosmology), again, as I pointed out above, failing to consider the absence of the prior is a serious logical error - which even the most prominent physicists sometimes make. Penrose later on numerous occasions emphasized that this does not imply any kind of divine intervention. He merely proposed it as a mental experiment within the confines of the model.I am not advocating for forgetting anything, but the way the question is formulated - "why is the Universe so finely tuned?" - does not make sense to me. "Can we derive the values of these constants from more fundamental principles?" - now this is a good question, one on which a couple of my friends are working as we speak.The concept of probability itself is frequently misunderstood. Aside from some quantum weirdness (which can be explained without invoking probability still, but that is more nuanced and outside of the scope of this discussion), there is no real "probability" as far as we know. We assign probabilities to events which we cannot reasonably predict due to the limited amount of knowledge and computing power we have. I cannot, for instance, predict whether the next coin flip will produce a tail or a head, and in the lack of absolutely any knowledge that seems to favor either, I will say that either outcome has the probability of 50% of happening. But someone with high-precision cameras and a powerful super-computer at their disposal can measure the initial angle of the coin flying up and predict with near-100% certainty the outcome of the flip. "Probability" here is a product of my ignorance, the next best thing to saying simply "I do not know".Here we are talking about something very abstract: Universe being "sampled" from some unknown distribution. There was no observer, no uncertainty: whatever happened had to happen by definition. Trying to put it in terms that we routinely apply in very different domains is bound to run into some issues, and I have pointed out some of them.
-
Jesus Tempted by Satan
@just_sayin
I would imagine that Jesus relayed the story to them
You do realize that means your opinion has no worth then in a world of x's and o's don't you? One can imagine the wind is an upset god and that would be meaningless as well.
-
Is Atheism A Belief?
@just_sayin
Thought this guy put it both perfectly and truthfully in the best perspective: "All religions are correct, except yoursMechanism unknown, therefore it must be God.
It's always the same, and always we eventually find an answer based in the physical, not the supernatural.
Past examples include lightning bolts previously attributed to Zeus are now attributed to differences in voltage potential, earthquakes previously attributed to Taniwha are now attributed to plate tectonics, malaria previously attributed to bad air is now attributed to a plasmodium using a mosquito vector, etc.
"We don't know, so it MUST BE GOD", is a weak and outdated response; It is an excuse to stop looking for real answers"
Seriously, how does a grown man in the 21st century believe in fairytales? Atheism is unbelief in them, nothing more.
-
The Irish are Racists
-
Judas Had A Bad Deal.
Matthew 5:44. But I say unto you, Love your enemies.Matthew 5:39. Turn the other cheek.Luke 6:27. Love your enemies, do good to them which hate you.Ephesians 4:32. Forgiving one another, even as God for Christ's sake hath forgiven you.Ephesians 1:7 In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, in accordance with the riches of God’s grace.Matthew 6:12-14 And forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive them that trespass against us......................and on and on it goes, love and forgive, love and forgive. . That is until we get to Judas, where we read from the lips of Jesus god himself his dire warning of vengeance.:"BUT WOE TO THE MAN BY WHOME THE SON OF MAN IS BETRAYED! GOOD WERE IT FOR THAT MAN IF HE HAD NEVR BEEN BORN". [ now hurry up and betray me Judas,quickly] Mark 14:21We can just feel and see the warm compassion and forgiveness in those words of vengeance can't we? We can also see all those verses about Love and forgiveness go flying clean out of the window too.Acceptable to Christians that this vengeful warning may be, and as contradictory to the fluffy nature that the scriptures attempt to portray Jesus to be, Christians have to realise that everything that Judas did, was all preordained by god himself , if we are to believe all the prophecies were being carried out. According to Christians and the Bible, this is what " must" happen and Jesus "spoke plainly " about what "must"happen too. Mark 8:31-32. So why the vengeful threat towards Judas, who didn't seem to flinch at the thought of the woe's that awaited him?We can pick up the story at the last supper where Jesus announces in his usual cryptic fashion that he is about to be betrayed by one of those that dips his bread in the dinner bowel. Which at that point could have been any of them considering this is how a meal was eaten in those times, ie. everyone dipping bread into the same bowl of what ever was on offer.The protests of "not me Lord" "who is it Lord" and " I would never do that to you Lord " are aplenty . Then-we read that Satan entering Judas and Jesus instructing Judas to go do what he is about to do and to do it quickly.John 13:27. All preordained see. So why the vengeful threat to his betrayer?As an aside:Odd isn't it that no one present asked why Judas was leaving the party at night in the dark. There are various excuses made for Judas' sudden disappearance but as usual they simply don't stack up. It is said some thought he was going to buy supplies for the supper, ....that they had already eaten.But among those things that should stand out is the fact that Satan has entered Judas...... and no one recognised it!? Do the heavily relied on Old Testament for prophecies mention anything about Satan being involved in Jesus' betrayal? NO. The only 'prophecy' that is said to foretell of the betrayal that has been latched onto is Zechariah 11:12-13.So here we have Judas being warned about doing what he is about to do, and on Jesus` word he goes out into the night to do what he had been instructed to do. But he will wish he had never been born when he does so.Why hadn't a single one of those present recognized a demon when they seen one and cast him out? nearly 100 of his disciples had only recently been bragging about how they had cast out demons after being endowed with superpowers.Luke 10:17And nowhere, in the whole of the scriptures will anyone read of anyone praying for love and the forgiveness of Judas...............Or Satan, come to think of it. -
Examples of Deplorable Christian Bible Morality!
.
DEPLORABLE BIBLE MORALITY NUMBER FIFTEEN
This Religion Forums "4 Stooges of Bible Stu-pidity," of which are RickeyHoltsclaw, Just_LYING, Marke, and Bogin, have to biblically accept that their wives or girlfriends are second class citizens to the superior man, of which said women are to follow the their rules to the letter!
"Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands IN EVERYTHING" (Ephesians 5:22-24)
As the JUDEO-Christian bible predicates, if these said women of the aforementioned "4 Stooges" ever become "shameless" in not biblically following the mens rules, then these women are to be considered A DOG herewith:
"A shameless woman shall be counted as a dog; but she that is shamefaced will fear the Lord." (Eccles.26:25)
JESUS AS GOD SAID IT BEST IN THIS PASSAGE BELOW REGARDING 2ND CLASS WOMEN:
“I find more bitter than death the woman who is a snare, whose heart is a trap and whose hands are chains. The man who pleases God will escape her, but the sinner she will ensnare.” (Ecclesiastes 7:26). Whoopsie! LOL!
When are the "4 Stooges of Bible Stu-pidity" ever going to realize that Christianity is a TOTAL MYTH?!!!
MARKE, ADDRESS THIS IMAGE BELOW AND TRY AND REMAIN INTELLIGENT
LOOKING IN THE AFTERMATH!
BEGIN:
. -
Uhh... Correction: Make POLIO Great Again
@MayCaesar
Interesting way of looking at it. I alluded to that perspective in my first response to @Phite when I asked him if he'd gotten a polio vaccine and had he noticed a benefit one way or the other? The thing is we may never know if a vaccine did us any good and so I can see being tempted by the idea that chances are small either way of getting sick. And as bad as the polio epidemic was, most people in the birds eye view as you pointed out, didn't get sick or if they did it was like having a cold or a flu and then they were fine. But enough still suffered some of the most horrible of symptoms that led to miserable outcomes, including paralyzed patients and deaths. And that was sufficient to motivate everyone to get the vaccine and low and behold it worked. Polio was eradicated from American populations. Now with people choosing not to vaccinate and the virus is still alive and well in the world, nonvaccinated people are at risk again.
Of course it's the unvaccinated who are effected more than the vaccinated because as mentioned vaccines work and prevent a lot of illness. Though it can be rather like trying to figure out how many crimes were prevented by gun ownership. Not an easy task. We may never know because most non crimes will not ever be reported. Measles often thought of as a childhood disease, yet we still get vaccinated for it because it's one of those diseases like the pox, that's simply deadlier if you contract it as an adult so why not just get the shot? It was no problem for me as my hmo actually keeps records and if I am due an immunization of some type they give it to me the next time I come in for something like a routine check up anyway. No appointment necessary and only if I wanted it. That being the case I don't see much point in analyzing the pro/con factor as in dept as you are doing. Back to my point on crime, we can buy a home security system and we may never know if it prevented a crime or not, but would that prevent you from buying one as a layer of protection if you had a family at home?
In closing that's how I see it. Mandates should not be the go to when discussing vaccines as once those become accepted norms it's hard to turn back but I would highly recommend vaccinations as they work most of the time and we will always have those anomalies where something goes wrong. However the overall good they do overwhelmingly out weighs some of the bad they may have inadvertently caused do to an imperfect existence we have. -
Christians are HYPOCRITES if they have a Christmas tree!
Joeseph said:@MayCaesar
Their standard of argumentation dreadful they actually deny what Jesus said and claim he meant otherwise, Marke is actually saying Jesus never meant what he said about feeding the poor and anyone who posts up verses saying otherwise is actually " twisting " his words.
How do you even reason with such nuts? I agree the few Muslim debaters we had would put these ignorant buffoons to shame.I do not think "reason" is a word in their vocabulary... I was just listening to a debate between agnostic Alex O'Connor and theist Francis Collins. The latter is a highly accomplished scientist in multiple fields, yet on this topic his arguments were mostly along the lines of "I feel like" and "There is no 100% certainty in" - something that any of his employees during his tenure at the National Institutes of Health would be immediately fired for if they tried to base their research on it. Inconvenient passages in the Bible? "Well, it is complicated. We just lack the wisdom to understand what Jesus meant there".If you decide on what your conclusion is before arriving there logically, then you are often going to be stuck with defending the indefensible - and then you have to do what Francis does. He would not do it in science, no. But science also does not expect him to take anything on faith, so... -
Why Must The US Keep School Lunch Debt?
@marke
So we shouldn't feed poor children for free? I want to remind you, the "Son of God" you believe in was a strong proponent of feeding the poor and lifting them up, and what better way to do that than insure a proper, free education for all children? I really don't understand how someone who believes in the religion of charity and equality can be against feeding children?
