No, that makes no sense at all. You are commiting the fallacy known as an Argument from ignorance - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia . "I don't know" does not mean "God did it". It never has.
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.
In other words, would not the fact that the greatest minds of our day not being able to do something that supposedly took no intelligence to do the first time therefore require the existence of a far superior intelligence to do that same something?
Really? That's the one thing you pull from my post? You want to argue the usage of one word over the entirety of my post? This just shows you have nothing to offer in defense of what I said."Perfectly"? What is this "perfect" that you speak of? "Perfect" doesn't occur in life.
No, that makes no sense at all. You are commiting the fallacy known as an Argument from ignorance - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia . "I don't know" does not mean "God did it". It never has.
Really? That's the one thing you pull from my post? You want to argue the usage of one word over the entirety of my post? This just shows you have nothing to offer in defense of what I said.
No, to think that unintelligence made intelligence is unintelligent. That is no fallacy.No, that makes no sense at all. You are commiting the fallacy known as an Argument from ignorance - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia . "I don't know" does not mean "God did it". It never has.
The elements that make up the universe are either infinitely existing or there was a time when there was nothing. Do you agree or disagree? If you disagree, what is another option?First, you have not shown that our universe had to come from nothing in order to be natural.
'A Universe From Nothing' by Lawrence Krauss, AAI 2009 - YouTubeThe elements that make up the universe are either infinitely existing or there was a time when there was nothing. Do you agree or disagree? If you disagree, what is another option?
No, to think that unintelligence made intelligence is unintelligent. That is no fallacy.
To think that nonlife made life is as unintelligent to believe that unintelligence brought about intelligence.
In Christ, GB
The elements that make up the universe are either infinitely existing or there was a time when there was nothing.
The first atomic nuclei to form were mostly hydrogen, and most of what was left was mostly helim. They existed as a plasma and were too hot to bond the electrons in orbitals. The universe eventually cooled by expansion to the point that hydorgen and helium gases could form and from the unequal concentration of these two gases, gravity caused the formation of stars. The fusion reactions of the stars formed elements other than hydrogen and helium, largely oxygen and carbon but with quantities of other elements all the way up to iron. Some stars became supernovae and these extremely violent explosions produced, and continue to produce elements of higher atomic weight than iron, all the way through the trans-uranics. So you see some of the elements are considerably younger than the universe, and are still being produced today.The elements that make up the universe are either infinitely existing or there was a time when there was nothing.
For the above reasons I disagree, but also because of this: Even in "empty" space particles pop into and out of existence. But these extremely short-lived particles make up most of the mass of the universe. Most of the mass of subatomic particles is not quarks and gluons but a quantum foam of extremely short lived, extremely small particles, that form what we call "empty" space. So there is no "nothing", and there can be no "nothing". "Nothing" does not exist.Do you agree or disagree? If you disagree, what is another option?
First of all did you watch the whole video? secondly do you understand Dirac's equation? Thirdly in quantum physics; Something and nothing are not meaningful concepts and if you do not understand this then I do not blame you as you do not have the required erudition to understand such concepts.LOL - you guys are a hoot! So, do you think the stuff that makes up the universe is infinitely existant or was there once nothing? If neither, what is your take?
Response #1: Post of a 1hr long video with a request for an example of nothing.
Response #2: False Dichotomy declaration (even though my questions allowed for unlimited response options) followed by a statement that affirms infinite existance belief.
Response #3: "Something and nothing are not meaningful concepts"
Response #4: A description of the conditions during the Planck Epoch
================
I didn't realize that was such a tough opinion request. Do you think everything that makes up the universe has always been here or not? If you think all the stuff has not always been here but always has, then explain
I don't think all the stuff is infintely existant. I think there was a time when there when the stuff didn't exist and that it was all created by a creator. Just curious about what you believe and why?
Yeah, I think so. You're trying to tell me that I don't have the necessary education to comprehend your answer to the question: "Do you think everything that makes up the universe has always been here or not?"I hope you understand what I am trying to tell you!
That is a very good question that begs to be answered. Whatever I or anyone believes will not make a difference nor will it suffice as an answer.Yeah, I think so. You're trying to tell me that I don't have the necessary education to comprehend your answer to the question: "Do you think everything that makes up the universe has always been here or not?"
10 to the 100th power? Talk about miracles. Oy Vey. You guys really need some new material and some new heroes to worship. Krauss's claims are utter nonsense.Roger Penrose considered all the possible configurations of the inflaton and gravitational fields. Some of these configurations lead to inflation … Other configurations lead to a uniform, flat universe directly –without inflation. Obtaining a flat universe is unlikely overall. Penrose’s shocking conclusion, though, was that obtaining a flat universe without inflation is much more likely than with inflation –by a factor of 10 to the googol (10 to the 100) power!”[98]
Your's and other's answer does make a difference in this discussion. If you believe the 'stuff' is infinitely existing or at one time didn't exist and now does gives participants a 'reference point', so to speak, in this discussion of "How did we get here?"That is a very good question that begs to be answered. Whatever I or anyone believes will not make a difference nor will it suffice as an answer.
I was not aware Krauss had been debunked many times now. Who has debunked him, and could you provide a link?Gah. You guys really need some new material. Krauss has been debunked so many times now, it's downright pathetic you haven't found a better rap yet.
Krauss's "something from nothing" claim not only defies the laws of physics, it ignores the release of energy over time. Considering how much his personal "religion" is dependent upon a "flat" universe, it's irrational he even puts any faith in the concept of inflation at all. It turns out that it's a greater *miracle* that the universe is "flat" *with* inflation, than it would be without it.
Inflation (cosmology) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
10 to the 100th power? Talk about miracles. Oy Vey. You guys really need some new material and some new heroes to worship. Krauss's claims are utter nonsense.
First of all did you watch the whole video?
Hmm. Well, as much as one might as an amateur I suppose.secondly do you understand Dirac's equation?
It's the something *from* nothing claim that is bogus. QM simply describes a universe filled with energy.Thirdly in quantum physics; Something and nothing are not meaningful concepts and if you do not understand this then I do not blame you as you do not have the required erudition to understand such concepts.
It's not really all that tough to comprehend actually. The first law of thermodynamics insists that energy cannot be created or destroyed, and the universe is absolutely filled with energy. You can feel that energy when the sunshine hits your face.Quantum physics is not for the layman and even most quantum physicists break a sweat when dealing with the quantum world.
The problem is that Kruass's claims (Guth's free lunch claims warmed over) never actually "flew" in the first place. It was DOA when Guth was peddling that nonsense, and it's still dead on arrival today some 30 years later. And by the way, inflation is "Dead in the lab too". It turns out Guth's dead sky deity is more impotent on Earth than your average concept of "God".One does not need to be an aeronautical engineer to ascertain whether aeroplanes actually fly but one does indeed need to have an understanding of the workings of aeroplanes and aeronautics if one is to comprehend how an aeroplane flies.
I hope you guys realize just how silly it is to be peddling the same debunked material over and over again. It's no better now than it was several months (a year?) ago when I commented on it then. What makes you think that the same debunked material has gotten any better with age?I hope you understand what I am trying to tell you!
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?