You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Disproving atheists in 82 seconds
- Thread starter peilthetraveler
- Start date
Don't sweat it. It's not your shot to give. He's the one with the "hypothesis," so the onus is on him to come up with a valid way to test it, aside from his "thought experiments" that would make even a pretzel blush.Quote from futurecurrents:
I never said no possible evidence could exist. I gave it a shot. I just can't think of any. Apparently you can't either.
there is evidence our universe is designed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine-tuned_Universe
if the universe is fine tuned... you would say that is evidence of a tuner. Maybe not conclusive evidence... but evidence.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine-tuned_Universe
if the universe is fine tuned... you would say that is evidence of a tuner. Maybe not conclusive evidence... but evidence.
Quote from jem:
there is evidence our universe is designed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine-tuned_Universe
if the universe is fine tuned... you would say that is evidence of a tuner. Maybe not conclusive evidence... but evidence.
Counter argument to religious viewsVictor Stenger argues that "... The fine-tuning argument and other recent intelligent design arguments are modern versions of God-of-the-gaps reasoning, where a God is deemed necessary whenever science has not fully explained some phenomenon".[12]
The argument from imperfection suggests that if the Universe were designed to be fine-tuned for life, it should be the best one possible and that evidence suggests that it is not.[35] In fact, most of the Universe is highly hostile to life.
Quote from Brass:
The appearance of design is not evidence of design. "Thought experiments" don't qualify as evidence.
1. Science seems like a thought experiment to those ignorant of the science.
2. As you can see from the article, Stenger is one of the few who do not admit the universe appears designed. But, his counter arguments are thought experiments... at least the last time I read what he was writing.
Physicist Paul Davies has stated that "There is now broad agreement among physicists and cosmologists that the Universe is in several respects âfine-tuned' for life".[2]
from the wikipedia article.
Note. I can easily bring in quotes from 20 top scientists talking about the appearance of design. Hawking, Penrose, all the names. As the article in wiki states some of the scientists - propose the appearance might no be evidence of a tuner... if there are almost infinite other universes.
Quote from Brass:
You're running on fumes, jem. It's over. You lost. Move on.
You have no idea who to defend your anti science view point... so you use the old lawyer trick and start banging on the tables when the science and the facts are not on your side.
here is the pied piper of atheism...
explaining to you all the appearance of fine tunings and the possible explanations.
<object width="640" height="360"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube-nocookie.com/v/mlD-CJPGt1A?version=3&hl=en_US&rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube-nocookie.com/v/mlD-CJPGt1A?version=3&hl=en_US&rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="640" height="360" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object>
here is Penrose... he is as big as you get in cosmology and math.
<object width="480" height="360"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube-nocookie.com/v/WhGdVMBk6Zo?version=3&hl=en_US&rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube-nocookie.com/v/WhGdVMBk6Zo?version=3&hl=en_US&rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="480" height="360" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object>