Archaeopteryx
Wanderer
Obviously you consider it evidence, but it's not.
This is obviously a strawman; indeed it appears to be your favourite strawman.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I don't see ignorance, i see evidence.
Appear to ignorance is for the Atheists which believe RANDOMNESS NOTHINGNESS AND LUCK, these 3 are the definition of ignorance since they don't provide a cause.
Dr. Eugene V. Koonin, who is a Senior Investigator at the National Center for Biotechnology Information, National Library of Medicine, at the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Maryland, USA. Dr. Koonin is...
I'm asking for his exact words. As in, a link to where I can read his word unfiltered. You have read his stuff, right?
Obviously you consider it evidence, but it's not.
This is obviously a strawman; indeed it appears to be your favourite strawman.
I'm asking for his exact words. As in, a link to where I can read his word unfiltered. You have read his stuff, right?
If the values of the Constants and the laws of physics are not evidence then they are subjective so science is like art, subjective but of course you don't believe that, you believe that Science gives answers therefor Science MUST be objective. The objectivity of Science gives us the Fine Tuning and that as you already know destroys the Atheistic belief that we are purposeless mistakes that nothingness spewed.
If you believe that there is no God inevitably you believe in randomness
If the values of the Constants and the laws of physics are not evidence then they are subjective so science is like art, subjective but of course you don't believe that, you believe that Science gives answers therefor Science MUST be objective. The objectivity of Science gives us the Fine Tuning and that as you already know destroys the Atheistic belief that we are purposeless mistakes that nothingness spewed.
Of course its not.
If you believe that there is no God inevitably you believe in randomness, if i throw you a rock you will not blame the rock neither the laws of physics, you will blame my action, not even me as an entity since you can't be biased with me without a reason. If something wasn't intended it is by definition random but randomness exists only as a definition, there is nothing random in Nature.
That doesn't make any sense. No one here is saying that science is subjective.
No atheist here is asserting that "we are purposeless mistakes that nothingness spewed" that I have seen.
Science does not give us the Fine Tuning argument, as that is a product of philosophy (or, rather, theology).
I believe in unplanned natural processes. Whether those processes involve randomness or not is another issue.
Why?
If Science isn't subjective then it follows Determinism and Ηierarchy therefor these Constants are objective for the Universe to exist. Even if they are proven subjective they must be subjective to the objectivity of something else above them but this chain cannot continue forever. That's why the Multiverse scenario doesn't solve the fine tuning because Multiverses also need fundamental constants and laws to exist.
Since the Universe had a beginning inevitably you will go to the second scenario that the Universe magically popped into existence from absolute Nothingness (and no, quantum vacuum is not nothing).
Of course it does, its called Evolution.
Something prior to something else must exist to determine it, if etc the value of one Constant was different we would have different results, its not philosophy its science because it makes predictions.
the natural processes cannot continue forever in the past since everything Natural began to exist.
You need an Ultimate cause and that cause is transcendent since everything physical including time and space began.
You can't hide yourslef behing Natural phenomena anymore.
Plus to that, if i throw you a rock and i have a plan to hit you but i am standing behind a tree so you cannot see me you will not blame the rock nor the laws of physics, you will think that there is a conscious being that throw you the rock to hit you without seeing me, you will not think that the rock somehow had infinite past causes and there was no intention behind.
Randomness doesn't exist
Why? Because most atheists don't accept your false dichotomy: they don't believe in "randomness" and "nothingness" in the way in which you've described it.
I can't make much sense out of the above.
Inevitably? I have never taken that position, and never would.
Evolution isn't a fine tuning argument.
That has nothing to do with evolution.
The universe could have started with something physical that was uncreated by anything transcendent.
It existed to begin with, instead of popping into existence out of nothing. Only afterwards -- through natural change -- does everything "begin to exist".
It's far preferable to hiding behind non-existent transcendent entities.
Don't tell me what I will or will not think. I would not rule out options in which unplanned events could cause a rock to come my way, such as meteors, volcanic eruptions, landslides, earthquakes, or other natural events. There are many examples of unplanned natural events.
Tell that to quantum physicists. It could be the case that something more deterministic, such as pilot wave theory, is true, but so far it does seem as if there is such a thing as natural randomness as found in quantum phenomena when they decohere. However, that doesn't have a great deal to do with the macro-world.
Of course they believe it, something that was not intended it is by definition a random event. Without Consciousness there is no intention.
So why is there such a lack of life in the Universe?Some of the evidence that supports my certainty that God produced and sustains the universe is that it is finely tuned all over to allow even the existence of atomic matter, let alone life and consciousness. If one of the fundamental constants (the weak atomic force for example) was off by a scale of a hair, molecular existence would not form at all.
What is the fine-tuning of the universe, and how does it serve as a pointer to God? | BioLogos
Fine-Tuning and Pointers to God
Fine-tuning refers to the surprising precision of natures physical constants and the beginning state of the universe. Both of these features converge as potential pointers to a Creator. To explain the present state of the universe, scientific theories require that the physical constants of nature like the strength of gravity and the beginning state of the Universe like its density have extremely precise values. The slightest variation from their actual values results in an early universe that never becomes capable of hosting life. For this reason, the universe seems finely-tuned for life.
So why is there such a lack of life in the Universe?
Ken
So why is there such a lack of life in the Universe?
Ken
Loudmouth said:For your claims of impossibility to be supported, you need to show that this universe is the only universe or one of a limited number of universes. Where is that evidence?
However, with many universes it would be expected that one of them would win, just as with the Powerball lottery.
Do we have to set the order of the balls in the Powerball lottery so that someone wins?
GoldenBoy89 said:In fact, about a hundred years ago, people thought the Milky Way Galaxy was the entire universe. Then, one day Edwin Hubble discovered "another universe" when he turned his telescope to the Andromeda Nebula.
Either way you have to have faith, whichever position in the argument you take.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?