We Live In An Electrical Simulation

[Hans Blaster]

I know. That was actually a few questions. I extended the question to include other things also. Wouldn't a scientist pick up on that? Doh! lol.

I know the stupid word games you were playing and I refused to fall for your trap.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Rocket surgeon? Is that new or did I miss that before?

Relatively new.

If you're a PHD in Physics then surely you heard of Bruce Lipton?

Nope, never heard of him.

WHat do you think of him?

Is he some sort of physicist?

 

[Hans Blaster]

Now that darwinism is already debunked, I am looking forward to reading Dr. Stephen Meyers new book:

Amazon.com

Stephen C. Meyer

Dr. Stephen C. Meyer received his PhD from the University of Cambridge in the philosophy of science. A former geophysicist and college professor, he now directs the Center for Science and Culture at…

www.discovery.org

.

Is Meyer also as ignorant and wrong about the topic of this thread as he is about biological evolution? (That would be pretty ignorant and wrong.)

 

[Hans Blaster]

You should defiantly get the book, instead asking me about what someone else wrote, how scientific is that....
The good news is you will be hearing a lot form him and other top Scientists in the near future.

"Meyer argues that theism—with its affirmation of a transcendent, intelligent and active creator—best explains the evidence we have concerning biological and cosmological origins. Previously Meyer refrained from attempting to answer questions about “who” might have designed life. Now he provides an evidence-based answer to perhaps the ultimate mystery of the universe."

I've heard his various specious arguments. I am not impressed. I would never send money to such a person.

 

[sjastro]

Well that's how you talk. So what. SO I responded in kind. Ok so now it's two ways, Lol!

Big deal. Can't take a ribbing? Lol. I'm a retired Plumber. Go ahead and make some plumber jokes, I don't care. I wont play the Victim card. You aint the first mathmetician I've ever made fun of. Grow a pair man.

You have a serious propensity for dishonesty.
If you are responding "in kind" my behaviour in this thread must be on par with yours as described in post #62.

Anyone reading this thread can judge for themselves you have turned this thread into personal attacks against @Hans Blaster and myself because we have used our knowledge of science which you seem to find distasteful to expose Missler's video at best being misleading at worst outright lying.

Creationists engaging in lying about science is nothing new as AIG can testify.

 

[Frank Robert]

Now that darwinism is already debunked, I am looking forward to reading Dr. Stephen Meyers new book:

Amazon.com

Stephen C. Meyer

Dr. Stephen C. Meyer received his PhD from the University of Cambridge in the philosophy of science. A former geophysicist and college professor, he now directs the Center for Science and Culture at…

www.discovery.org

.

The "Return-God-Hypothesis-Scientific-Discoveries" makes no testable hypothesis. Here is a review of the book by Puck Mendelssohn.

"...the book which announces in its title the "return of the God hypothesis" ends without a single hypothesis in its grasp. What Meyer ends with is at best a loose conjecture. It is, of course, every person's right to draw such inferences from facts as he wishes to draw, even when those facts are wrong and the inferences shoddy. But it is not science, and if it would not pretend to be science, there would be little to argue about."​

 

[Frank Robert]

Again with what someone else said ........... if that is how you guys do science, well good luck to you.

Puck Mendelssohn does not even exist.

He most certainly does exist. Puck (not his real name) is an attorney. You can personally interact with him at the Peaceful Science forum where he frequently comments. If you want to know more about him but don't care to interact with him, you can check out his comments there. My guess is that you won't.

 

[Frank Robert]

Thank you - you guessed right, why would I care about what someone else says about Dr. Meyers book, an attorney no less.

If you read his comments you would might realize that he is quite knowledgeable about science.

I am willing to bet Dr. Stephen Meyers has more certificates, credentials, than everyone put together who has posted in this thread.

That may very well be but you don't need to be a scientist to know that Meyers' book about an hypothesis does not contain a testable hypothesis. If you haven't bought the book you could spend the money on a book that contains real science.

 

[sjastro]

Thank you - you guessed right, why would I care about what someone else says about Dr. Meyers book, an attorney no less.

I am willing to bet Dr. Stephen Meyers has more certificates, credentials, than everyone put together who has posted in this thread.

Hilarious.
This appeal to authority fallacy backfires because he only has a BSc which according to the resident retired plumber is insufficient as only scientists with PhDs should respond.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Thank you - you guessed right, why would I care about what someone else says about Dr. Meyers book, an attorney no less.

Anyone can say something about it. It's not like his work is that sophisticated. His primary audience accepts the word of the DI.

I am willing to bet Dr. Stephen Meyers has more certificates, credentials, than everyone put together who has posted in this thread.

Do you like losing? SJ already responded, and I'm pretty sure you know his credentials are just as good as Meyer on a "degree level" basis. I've got the same trio of degrees as Meyer, undergraduate, masters, doctoral. I have no idea what his undergrad degree is in, but it's from some bible college. The post-graduate degrees in my closet are in Physics, Meyer's are in philosophy. He is no scientist and he never was. Perhaps the saddest thing about Meyer is that his "philosophy" material is regularly disassembled by well read amateurs on YouTube. (There are a few others floating around CF with more relevant Ph.D. in biology and geology, but I don't think they've been in this thread.)

 

[Frank Robert]

It is obvious that the atheist world view is falling apart (can no longer be supported even by their fake science) and that the truth will be known, why they seem a little more antagonistic than usual.

I am not an atheist but even a non-atheist knows that anyone connecting atheist with science or labeling science as fake don't know what they are talking about.

Another Professor that has been out and about recently, John Lennox:

"Although science with all of its power cannot address some of the fundamental questions that we ask, nevertheless the universe contains certain clues as to our relationship to it, clues that are scientifically accessible. The rational intelligibility of the universe, for instance, points to the existence of a Mind that was responsible both for the universe and for our minds. It is for this reason that we are able to do science and to discover the beautiful mathematical structures that underlie the phenomena we can observe. Not only that, but our increasing insight into the fine-tuning of the universe in general, and of planet earth in particular, is consistent with the widespread awareness that we are meant to be here."

If the "rational intelligence" you are referring to was not the proximate cause of the universe, etc but the ultimate cause. If he were the ultimate cause there would be no need for fine-tuning. You also wouldn't need to choose between modern science and biblical faith.

 

[Aaron112]

5 to 1 you didn't even watch the video where he explains it!

Ha Ha ... No....

The evidence already shows it to be fraudulent.

 

[Aaron112]

Idk if you are a christian, but scripture says that even now we are seated in heavenly places with the Lord. How can that be possible if we are here? Well it was the Matrix movie that gave us the clue.

Well, not "we" but the ones appointed , the ones Jesus identifies...
and
Jesus did not give us a clue - He said plainly - "The Words I Speak Are Spirit(?Yahweh's Breath?) , AND They are LIFE" ... i.e. neither seen nor heard nor understood by flesh man.

 

[Aaron112]

Possible? Yes.

Proven? No.

That's all we can say.

Possible? No.
Proven? Yes.
By hollywood or bollywood.....

anything else needed to be said ?

 

[Aaron112]

labeling science as fake

Proven? Yes.
Acceptable to the worldly ? No.

Why fake ? m o n e y
Trillions of dollars every year...
and of course power for the change-over happening...

 

[Larniavc]

Possible? No.
Proven? Yes.
By hollywood or bollywood.....

anything else needed to be said ?

I have no idea what you are trying to say.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Then with everything said, I still have to go back too:

Romans 1:22
Professing to be wise, they became fools,

Quoting sentence fragments is far less persuasive than you think it is.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Then with everything said, I still have to go back too:

Romans 1:22
Professing to be wise, they became fools,

There's a level of irony in quoting St. Paul here if one understands what Paul is saying.

I suspect, however, that you're interest wasn't to be concerned with a serious use of the Bible--i.e. in what it actually says and means--but rather using the Bible merely as bludgeon. Perhaps you should go back and learn what is meant when St. Paul in his instruction to St. Timothy says to "straight-cut the word of truth".

The Bible isn't a bludgeoning weapon used to puff oneself up and indulge the sinful passions.

But I suppose that's just how things are these days. Christians got tired of reading the Bible, and apparently decided it's a lot easier to just throw it at someone.

Call me old fashioned, and I know this isn't popular, but I still think the best way to use a Bible is to read it and learn from it.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Larniavc]

I will admit, I am not very persuasive and am at times a stiff necked person when interacting with others.

John Lennox is very persuasive, he argues the atheist has more faith than the theist. Similar to a quote from Lee Strobel:

View attachment 336319

In this recent interview with John Lennox explains why:

The REASON We Exist & Scientific PROOF Of God​

His first evidence is that words exist?

Then noticing that something exists: therefore God?

And the human genome is the longest word in the world? That’s ridiculous.

Then he just goes on about fine tuning? Arguments from incredulity?

Smh

 

[Divide]

Chuck Missler is no heretic. The article that Chuck refrenced in the video is from Scientific American June 2005 and that was wrotten by two scientist guys. A blurb:

/"The constants are a tantalizing mystery. Every equation of physics is filled with them, and they seem so prosaic that people tend to forget how unaccountable their values are. Their origin is bound up with some of the grandest questions of modern science, from the unification of physics to the expansion of the universe. They may be the superficial shadow of a structure larger and more complex than the three-dimensional universe we witness around us. Determining whether constants are truly constant is only the first step on a path that leads to a deeper and wider appreciation of that ultimate vista.../(Scientific American June 2005)

Inconstant Constants

Do the inner workings of nature change with time?

www.scientificamerican.com

Are these guys heretics also?!

There's even stuff to play with in the article for our Math Whiz. So...Psuedo Science? Really? Has Hans been published in Scentific American? This is real science, not something I made up. Or Chuck Missler! You have no clue.