Religion is a hypothesis.

So stu and his friends (like longshot) think if the physical universe imploded back into the magical nothing that it came from...that mathematical truths would vanish?

So from nothing we have the universe being exploded into existence, from non existence, into non existence (what was outside of the nothingness that the universe exploded into) and then collapses back into non existence...that all the laws of nature and mathematics did not precede this exploding of nothing into nothing creating something...all without causation...

...and these people think they are being rational?

My prediction:

The atheists will not be able to handle the rational criticism, so they will engage in strawman, ad hominem, or ridiculous "if" arguments...
 
A sample of the typical "if" arguments held by the humanist atheistic scientific so called "rationalists" below:

Possible space curvatures of the universe: Closed, Flat, Open The density of the universe also determines its geometry. If the density of the universe exceeds the critical density, then the geometry of space is closed and positively curved like the surface of a sphere. This implies that initially parallel photon paths converge slowly, eventually cross, and return back to their starting point (if the universe lasts long enough). If the density of the universe is less than the critical density, then the geometry of space is open, negatively curved like the surface of a saddle. If the density of the universe exactly equals the critical density, then the geometry of the universe is flat like a sheet of paper. Thus, there is a direct link between the geometry of the universe and its fate.

The simplest version of the inflationary theory, an extension of the Big Bang theory, predicts that the density of the universe is very close to the critical density, and that the geometry of the universe is flat, like a sheet of paper. That is the result confirmed by the WMAP science.

http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/universe/uni_shape.html
 
Quote from OPTIONAL777:

A sample of the typical "if" arguments held by the humanist atheistic scientific so called "rationalists" below
More...
Dude, aren't you working on your third (at least) religion? Didn't you used to be a Scientologist, and something else before that? If you're so right, why do you keep switching beliefs? Maybe you should try some humility instead of constantly trying to tear down the most productive knowledge builder ever found by man: science.
 
Quote from stu:

Making an argument that someone made a particular argument when they didn't, makes you look like the complete idiot.
More...

Kut said that nothing exists outside the physical. However optional corrected him by saying that mathematical truths exist outside the physical. Kut then made himself look like a complete idiot because he said that mathematical truths do not exist in the non-physical. It is about as dumb as saying that a tree that falls in a forest doesn't make a noise if no one can hear it. When you assume facts to be non-factual beliefs because it goes against your argument you deserve to be called an idiot.
 
My religion is not on trial, is it?

As expected, you have no defense of the irrationality of the atheists (who claim to be so reasonable) so you focus in on me?

Too predictable.

Oh well, the rat (you) in the lab did exactly as predicted...

Quote from kut2k2:

Dude, aren't you working on your third (at least) religion? Didn't you used to be a Scientologist, and something else before that? If you're so right, why do you keep switching beliefs? Maybe you should try some humility instead of constantly trying to tear down the most productive knowledge builder ever found by man: science.
More...
 
Quote from kut2k2:

Dude, aren't you working on your third (at least) religion? Didn't you used to be a Scientologist, and something else before that? If you're so right, why do you keep switching beliefs? Maybe you should try some humility instead of constantly trying to tear down the most productive knowledge builder ever found by man: science.
More...

No need to tear down science, just the fools who think it answers the questions of Cosmogony & abiogenesis.
 
Quote from OPTIONAL777:

My religion is not on trial, is it?
More...
No, your dogmatism is.

Quote from OPTIONAL777:

As expected, you have no defense of the irrationality of the atheists (who claim to be so reasonable) so you focus in on me?
More...
What irrationality?

Are you whining because science doesn't have ALL the answers, like your religion does? Nevermind that your faith is consisting of mostly wrong answers, just as long as they serve them up immediately.

You're like a 4-year-old: "I wannit, I wannit, I wannit! I wannit NOW! NOW, MOMMY, NOW!!"

Sorry, science doesn't work like that. It takes time to get at the truth. All the easy stuff was answered ages ago, now science is working on the hard stuff.

So your whine is that there are competing theories in science? This is news to you? What school did you flunk out of? Ever hear of phlogiston?

There are always competing theories in science, until the full evidence and reasoning winnows it down to the best one.

Stop whining, man up and admit that your faith hasn't produced even 1% of the true answers that science has.
 
Dude, you are like Pavolv's dogmatism with your reactions to criticism of the irrationality of science fiction like the big bang, something from nothing, etc....

Too freaking funny...

Quote from kut2k2:

No, your dogmatism is.

What irrationality?

Are you whining because science doesn't have ALL the answers, like your religion does? Nevermind that your faith is consisting of mostly wrong answers, just as long as they serve them up immediately.

You're like a 4-year-old: "I wannit, I wannit, I wannit! I wannit NOW! NOW, MOMMY, NOW!!"

Sorry, science doesn't work like that. It takes time to get at the truth. All the easy stuff was answered ages ago, now science is working on the hard stuff.

So your whine is that there are competing theories in science? This is news to you? What school did you flunk out of? Ever hear of phlogiston?

There are always competing theories in science, until the full evidence and reasoning winnows it down to the best one.

Stop whining, man up and admit that your faith hasn't produced even 1% of the true answers that science has.
More...
 
Quote from OPTIONAL777:

Dude, you are like Pavolv's dogmatism with your reactions to criticism of the irrationality of science fiction like the big bang, something from nothing, etc....

Too freaking funny...
More...
You're like a robot. You claim irrationality, then when challenged to point out the irrationality, you just repeat the accusation.

This is pointless. Enjoy your dogma.
 
I'll leave you now to continue to play with yourself...

Pavolv's dogmatism...

ROTFLMAO...

Quote from kut2k2:

You're like a robot. You claim irrationality, then when challenged to point out the irrationality, you just repeat the accusation.

This is pointless. Enjoy your dogma.
More...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top