|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
posted January 20, 2008 08:39 PM |
|
|
The Big Bang doesn't assume anything beyond the physical world. Since there is no evidence of anything beyond the physical world, there's no reason to assume it here.
As for Occam's Razor, let me give you a simple example. How was my house built? It could have been assembled on a nano-level by aliens from outer space, and then placed upon the earth, and everyone who saw it had their memories wiped. Now the aliens could be watching me from their nano-cameras. Or my house could have been built in the usual way, with workers putting one brick on top of another, and so on.
Which is more likely? Occam's Razor says it is the second scenario. Would you disagree?
As for that video, is Youtube really a reliable source? That could easily be an artist's rendition. And this video was posted by a guy called "Islamic Way". And I don't deny that there are things we don't know yet. But we would be giving up if we said, "God made it. That's it, problem solved." We should investigate and learn about the unknown, not sit down and give up.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
baklava
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Mostly harmless
|
|
posted January 20, 2008 08:42 PM |
|
|
Quote:
The Big Bang doesn't assume anything beyond the physical world.
But you can't really fully explain how it physically happened, right? 
____________
"Let me tell you what the blues
is. When you ain't got no
money,
you got the blues."
Howlin Wolf
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted January 20, 2008 08:42 PM |
|
|
Depends, and do I have to answer that? That would be subjective.
What I need is some kind of math formula to calculate this "more likeliness" (like a probability ranging from 0 (impossibility) and 1.0 (100% certainty)). As far as I know, any other answer apart from this formula is biased, so there's no need to follow such a biased answer, at least not in the "scientific" sense, because it would be biased.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 20, 2008 08:49 PM |
|
|
Quote:
But you can't really fully explain how it physically happened, right?
Yes, I can. All the matter of the universe was in an infinitely dense speck. Then it expanded rapidly.
There is no formula to find out likelyhood. But there is no reason to imagine something that no one's ever observed or something for which there is no evidence.
What's more likely?
1. Something with physical evidence.
2. Something that someone (no one really knows who) made up and for which no evidence exists.
Try applying your thoughts to other areas of your life. You don't stand in front of a bus with the thought, "A wall will spontaneously appear in front of the bus and save me!" You don't go to the store without money/a credit card, thinking, "The cashier will pay for it himself!" You don't make these kinds of assumptions in other areas of life. Why make one in this one?
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
baklava
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Mostly harmless
|
|
posted January 20, 2008 08:52 PM |
|
Edited by baklava at 20:57, 20 Jan 2008.
|
Quote:
As for that video, is Youtube really a reliable source?
Well, are you a reliable source?
The video was based on scientific evidence. If you read the video description, instead of drawing conclusions based on your prejudices about the poster's username, you'd see that:
"Hubble's Space Telescope Imaging Spectrograph (STIS) revealed this disk of young blue stars that were swirling around a black hole in M31".
You're acting like the medieval Church again.
If something is different than what you claim, that doesn't mean it's a lie. And if something is made by a Muslim guy that doesn't mean that it's untrue 
Quote:
Yes, I can. All the matter of the universe was in an infinitely dense speck. Then it expanded rapidly.
WOW.
The most complete physical explanation I've ever heard. It's all so clear now. 
Or how about this one then.
First, God existed (in an infinitely dense speck ), and he existed for eternity (infinite amount of time), and then he created everything.
Validity of this explanation is of the same value as the validity of yours
____________
"Let me tell you what the blues
is. When you ain't got no
money,
you got the blues."
Howlin Wolf
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 20, 2008 08:55 PM |
|
|
Quote:
The video was based on scientific evidence. If you read the video description, instead of drawing conclusions based on your prejudices about the poster's username, you'd see that:
"Hubble's Space Telescope Imaging Spectrograph (STIS) revealed this disk of young blue stars that were swirling around a black hole in M31".
All right. It's probably all right. But it's on Youtube. Those guys can make anything up.
Quote:
And if something is made by a Muslim guy that doesn't mean that it's untrue
But he does obviously have an agenda. He ends his description with "God is great".
All of that aside, assuming that video is real, well, we still have much to learn about the universe. But, as I said earlier, we can't just give up and leave everything to the supernatural powers. That's something the medieval Church would do.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted January 20, 2008 08:56 PM |
|
Edited by TheDeath at 20:59, 20 Jan 2008.
|
Quote:
What's more likely?
1. Something with physical evidence.
2. Something that someone (no one really knows who) made up and for which no evidence exists.
To be honest, I do not want to answer this, because then some 100% objective guy could get to me and yell "so like, where is the formula, you damn subjective weasel". And like I said, my answer would be biased.
Let's take artificial intelligence. If you want AIs to 'reason' about this you'll have to give them some "algorithm", and that algorithm needs a formula. So then, since computers are objective, you'll need to give me the formula so I can feed it into the AI and let it decide.
cause my answer would be biased.
Quote:
Try applying your thoughts to other areas of your life. You don't stand in front of a bus with the thought, "A wall will spontaneously appear in front of the bus and save me!" You don't go to the store without money/a credit card, thinking, "The cashier will pay for it himself!" You don't make these kinds of assumptions in other areas of life. Why make one in this one?
Well, then, think of it like this. You don't think of atoms, electrons, and all hidden forces of nature when you are at the same scenario (with the bus), because it's kinda pointless for your small logic (I am referring to all humans of course), since our brainz are limited.
but still, in some aspects (like when designing a particle accelerator), you need to think of these elements.
Get the idea?
EDIT:Quote:
All right. It's probably all right. But it's on Youtube. Those guys can make anything up.
Well then, scientists can also make anything up too.
do you think other webpages (with "scientific research") are more reliable? what makes you think they can't lie? Last I recall, you didn't perform tests with particle accelerators (you don't even "own" one), so all you get from that are 'scientific' sources and media much like youtube. (i.e newspaper, magazines, webpages, etc).
I doubt you witnessed and built the accelerator (so you know it functions properly and not biased by those who made it ).
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 20, 2008 08:59 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
Try applying your thoughts to other areas of your life. You don't stand in front of a bus with the thought, "A wall will spontaneously appear in front of the bus and save me!" You don't go to the store without money/a credit card, thinking, "The cashier will pay for it himself!" You don't make these kinds of assumptions in other areas of life. Why make one in this one?
Well, then, think of it like this. You don't think of atoms, electrons, and all hidden forces of nature when you are at the same scenario (with the bus), because it's kinda pointless for your small logic (I am referring to all humans of course), since our brainz are limited.
The reason I don't is because I have no reason to assume otherwise. If I ever see a wall materialize out of thin air, maybe I'd think differently. It has nothing to do with my limitations. I simply don't need to.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
baklava
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Mostly harmless
|
|
posted January 20, 2008 09:00 PM |
|
Edited by baklava at 21:03, 20 Jan 2008.
|
Quote:
But he does obviously have an agenda. He ends his description with "God is great".
Well he said "God", not "Allah", didn't he?
Besides, you obviously have an agenda too. Does that mean we should all stop listening you?
That aside, I'm not much of a believer, yet I'd still use the metaphoric phrase "God is great" to describe my overwhelming fascination of something so huge, so far away, so unknown to us, and yet so defiant to our attempts of understanding it. It's some sort of respect toward the unknown.
Quote:
But, as I said earlier, we can't just give up and leave everything to the supernatural powers.
Certainly. That's why we research all possibilities.
But what if it WAS created by supernatural powers? If you research on the matter of creation, you must have your mind opened for all possibilities, no matter how they seem to you.
____________
"Let me tell you what the blues
is. When you ain't got no
money,
you got the blues."
Howlin Wolf
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 20, 2008 09:05 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Well he said "God", not "Allah", didn't he?
"Allah" is the Arabic word for "God".
Quote:
Besides, you obviously have an agenda too. Does that mean we should all stop listening you?
Oh really? What kind of agenda do I have? What do I get from converting everyone away from religion?
There's no reason to respect the unknown. We should only seek to make the unknown known. And there's no reason to give the unknown a mystical quantity.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted January 20, 2008 09:08 PM |
|
|
Quote:
There's no reason to respect the unknown. We should only seek to make the unknown known. And there's no reason to give the unknown a mystical quantity.
You know, I'm getting kinda tired of the "there's no reason to blabla", because it's purely subjective.
I could also say "There's no reason to not believe in God", does this make it any more true than your statements?
the example with AI I gave is perfect for this as computers are not subjective and need some math formula to calculate something; either way, they do not think like us, it seems 
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 20, 2008 09:12 PM |
|
|
Quote:
You know, I'm getting kinda tired of the "there's no reason to blabla", because it's purely subjective.
You don't make these kinds of assumption in the rest of your life. Why make them here?
Quote:
I could also say "There's no reason to not believe in God", does this make it any more true than your statements?
You would have to back that statement up. And if you think that a more complicated and assumptive explanation is the best, then we just think very differently.
Computers don't think. They calculate.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted January 20, 2008 09:18 PM |
|
|
Quote:
You don't make these kinds of assumption in the rest of your life. Why make them here?
Like I said previously:
You don't think like colliding particles, energy received, and ALL the other complications of quantum physics in "the rest of your life" (apart from where you need them) either. Same thing.
Quote:
You would have to back that statement up.
Well you didn't back your "simplicity" either because it's subjective, and we can't "back up" subjective stuff, except when everyone agrees.
Quote:
And if you think that a more complicated and assumptive explanation is the best, then we just think very differently.
Firstly "complicated" and "simplicity" are subjective defined terms, like what's simple for me might be hard for you, and vice versa. Secondly, perhaps we do think differently, nothing wrong about that
Quote:
Computers don't think. They calculate.
Well yes because thinking is subjective.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 20, 2008 09:21 PM |
|
|
Quote:
You don't think like colliding particles, energy received, and ALL the other complications of quantum physics in "the rest of your life" (apart from where you need them) either. Same thing.
I don't think about it because I don't need to. I rely on my experiences. But I don't make any kinds of supernatural assumptions about the unknown, either.
Quote:
Quote:
You would have to back that statement up.
Well you didn't back your "simplicity" either because it's subjective, and we can't "back up" subjective stuff, except when everyone agrees.
You can present your evidence. I can present mine.
Quote:
Quote:
And if you think that a more complicated and assumptive explanation is the best, then we just think very differently.
Firstly "complicated" and "simplicity" are subjective defined terms, like what's simple for me might be hard for you, and vice versa. Secondly, perhaps we do think differently, nothing wrong about that
It's difficult to debate with someone who uses completely different logic.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
baklava
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Mostly harmless
|
|
posted January 20, 2008 09:21 PM |
|
Edited by baklava at 21:22, 20 Jan 2008.
|
Quote:
"Allah" is the Arabic word for "God".
Yes, but I don't know any Muslim who uses the word "God" instead of "Allah". "God" has become a rather Christian term over the ages.
Quote:
Oh really? What kind of agenda do I have? What do I get from converting everyone away from religion?
If a person is a theist or an atheist, and participates in these discussions as much as you do, it's quite obvious that person has an agenda
On a spiritual level, the world would be a far easier place for atheists if everyone was one, wouldn't it? Conversion is one of the goals of any religion, atheism included.
Quote:
There's no reason to respect the unknown. We should only seek to make the unknown known. And there's no reason to give the unknown a mystical quantity.
I agree with the Death about the "there's no reason" argument.
You really aren't getting anywhere with it.
Quote:
You can present your evidence. I can present mine.
Well wouldn't that be a nice change
____________
"Let me tell you what the blues
is. When you ain't got no
money,
you got the blues."
Howlin Wolf
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 20, 2008 09:27 PM |
|
|
Quote:
On a spiritual level, the world would be a far easier place for atheists if everyone was one, wouldn't it? Conversion is one of the goals of any religion, atheism included.
Atheism isn't a religion. (And... we're back to 3 pages ago.) I'm just tired of some theists (not all) making ridiculous claims. I'm tired of people in RL asking me if I hate God.
Quote:
I agree with the Death about the "there's no reason" argument.
You really aren't getting anywhere with it.
Neither of you has given any reason to assume supernatural phenomena. I have presented my case. Where's yours?
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted January 20, 2008 09:29 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Neither of you has given any reason to assume supernatural phenomena. I have presented my case. Where's yours?
Umm yes we did not give any reason, but neither did you.
Do you think that simply saying "There's no reason to xxx" presents your case? 
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 20, 2008 09:31 PM |
|
|
All right, I will restate my case. I have never seen any supernatural phenomena. I have never seen any evidence of supernatural phenomena. Why, then, should I assume that there is anything beyond the physical world?
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted January 20, 2008 09:35 PM |
|
|
Perhaps you shouldn't, personally I would (but that's just me).
But then why people built all kinds of stuff to "check for aliens" in outer space? Since they didn't experience aliens before, where's the reason to build such detectors (forgot how their name was)?
Further, as it is said, you have to be prepared for war in order to win it (even though the war isn't showing up yet). Of course we're not talking about something as pointless and destructive as a 'war', but I hope you get the idea.
|
|
baklava
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Mostly harmless
|
|
posted January 20, 2008 09:44 PM |
|
|
Well I haven't seen the Big Bang either (nor any real proof about it), but I still don't deny it happened
Anyways, I'll leave the rest to the_Death, have to go to sleep now...
First day of school tomorrow after the winter break 
Right, God (or Big Bang) bless you
____________
"Let me tell you what the blues
is. When you ain't got no
money,
you got the blues."
Howlin Wolf
|
| |
|
|
This Popular Thread is pages long: 
