Heaven & Hell (Open to Everyone)

[IBDaMann]

The Big Bang left evidence in the form of the cosmic microwave background.

You're not going to like me for saying this, but that's totally bunk. That's the same as a geologist claiming to "read" a rock and divine knowledge of the unobserved, distant past, to include specific temperatures in specific far away places at very specific times. Absolutely no cosmic background radiation that you or anyone else observes comes with little HTML tags that specifies its origin. Some person looking to sell a book and go on the lecture circuit socialized the idea that he was a prophet who could read "cosmic background radiation"... and unfortunately many people such as yourself fell for it.

Any information about how the universe was, at the point in time that you mention, shot away at the speed of light outward with a several billion-year head start and no human will ever be able to catch up to it, i.e. no human will ever know that information. There is nothing else that serves as "evidence."

There is no "meaning" to creation. It just is.

My perspective shares your lack of any "why" except for the value "42" and only speculates on "how."

Just because someone can't explain something DOES NOT MEAN GOD IS REAL.

Cypress is committing a version of the "attempt to shift of the burden of proof" fallacy, specifically "If you can't answer my question, your argument is therefore false and you must accept my argument as true." This fallacy flows from the violation of the axiom that anyone proposing an affirmative argument bears the full burden to support it. Cypress argues affirmatively that God is the prime mover, but he can't even begin to support his affirmative argument, so he immediately attempts to shift the burden of support for his argument onto you to prove it false. Neither you nor anyone else is required to prove his affirmative argument false. Cypress bears the full burden of support for his affirmative argument.

So yes, Cypress blows chunks once again and you win.

Not that you would know what bad logic looks like.

Logic is totally alien to Cypress. He cannot think for himself. He is relegated to posting what other people say about things, correct or otherwise, wise or otherwise, relevant or otherwise, interesting or otherwise. He cannot respond to posts. He can only pretend to mock responses he doesn't understand with what he was told is a brilliant response, i.e. "", and can only attack people who contribute to his threads because other people's independent contributions reveal the totally vacuous, superficial nature of his posts.

 

[IBDaMann]

You're wrong, as usual, Into. Agnosticism is the belief that the question of God's existence is unknown and likely cannot be answered.

I grew tired of back-chaining to find out what you and Into the Night were each saying specifically, but it appears on first glance that you are each arguing different sides of the same coin.

Agnosticism is a position on the knowability of the supernatural (that which is outside nature), specifically that it cannot be known and, of course, applies to the Christian God among other deities, spirits and supernatural entities. I don't want to speak for Into the Night but if I read correctly, he seems to be saying the same thing, i.e. agnosticism holds that where supernatural entities are presumed, you can't know anything about them.

What am I getting wrong? Anybody?

 

[Lightbringer]

She don't like me either. The whole pussy posse don't like me. Ask me if I care...

She ain't part of the pussy posse.

 

[Matt Dillon]

One post? Sure. However, over multiple posts a pattern forms and they should be held accountable for that pattern of behavior.

Disagreed that the Internet is not part of the real world. Is what drunk says in a bar part of the real world? Yes, it is. Like a single post, what a drunk says once is one thing. What a drunk says all the time is another.

Additionally, like drunks where they are often speaking emotionally and uninhibited, the anonymity of the Internet allows people, drunk, drugged or sober, to speak freely and uninhibited except for forum rules. Something said once can be a typo, bad hair day or something else. Something posted repeatedly isn't fiction, it's them. Their true nature.

You gonna be doing the accountability holding, you deranged fucktard?



You may wish you could, but fuck you! You ain't shit!

 

[RB 60]

She ain't part of the pussy posse.

Oh, but she is.

 

[Matt Dillon]

Yes, but isn't that indicative of the type of person they are? Cruel, mean, angry people spreading hate while venting their spleen regardless of the harm it does to others?

Consider ExpressLane, a self-proclaimed medical doctor, who spurned masks and vaccinations while not only supporting an anti-CDC stance, but prescribing HCQ and Ivermectin as COVID cures. Not once but continuously. Does it matter if he truly believes it or if he's just a sadist seeking to get people killed when the results are the same?

Projection and jealousy.

 

[PostmodernProphet]

An ultimatum is not a choice.

if you don't believe there is a god, what ultimatum are you thinking of?........

 

[PostmodernProphet]

Two fifths rule. Every thread has two people talking and three people trolling.

are you all three?.....

 

[PostmodernProphet]

Yes, an ultimatum is a type of choice. Did you never learn what a "choice" is? Having to choose between the lesser of two evils is still choosing, as is choosing between any things you really don't like.

So, answer the question.

your photoshops take up a lot of space......

 

[Dutch Uncle]

You gonna be doing the accountability holding, you deranged fucktard?



You may wish you could, but fuck you! You ain't shit!

I have no idea that that meth-induced rant means, Matt. What are you going to hold me accountable for?

 

[Cypress]

Hmm. I would call that "curiosity," and maybe even "science." We've gotten where we are as a species at least partly for our insatiable curiosity and drive to know.

I think the good scientist is humbled by how much we don't know. The ordinary matter and energy we can detect only comprise five percent of the universe. We really don't know what the other 95 percent is.

The fine tuning of the universe and it's physical constants is either a remarkable coincidence, or it points to a teleological explanation. And I just accept being agnostic about it.

 

[Saint Guinefort]

The fine tuning of the universe and it's physical constants is either a remarkable coincidence, or it points to a teleological explanation.

Why?

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

I think the good scientist is humbled by how much we don't know. The ordinary matter and energy we can detect only comprise five percent of the universe. We really don't know what the other 95 percent is.

The fine tuning of the universe and it's physical constants is either a remarkable coincidence, or it points to a teleological explanation. And I just accept being agnostic about it.

To clarify this point, this doesn't mean that the "missing" 95% has a mystical, supernatural explanation. It merely means that we have yet to devise methods of finding it.

As to the existence or not of god/gods, all I can say is that I've seen no proof or evidence, but that doesn't mean that they don't exist. Such beliefs bring people comfort. They also bring mischief. To me pondering their existence is less interesting than examining how our beliefs change our behavior, for better or for worse.

 

[NiftyNiblick]

The fine tuning of the universe and it's physical constants is either a remarkable coincidence, or it points to a teleological explanation.

I'm not so sure.

In an infinite universe
over the course of eternity.
every physical possibility will eventually manifest itself.

Some of them will appear to be amazingly fine tuned
when they are actually totally random.

Remember, 1-2-3-4-5-6

has just as good of a chance to win the national lottery

as any other six digit combination

and if we have the lottery long enough

it definitely WILL eventually win.

 

[Cypress]

Why?

Widely discussed in scientific journalism, books, and articles.

Mathmatically, the chances are infinitesimally small that the values of the universal physical constants would line up presicely to allow for matter, energy, chemistry in the way they exist.

This is either a coincidence, or it suggests some higher organizing principle underlying the cosmos we don't percieve.

 

[Saint Guinefort]

Widely discussed in scientific journalism, books, and articles.

Agumentum ad populum.

Mathmatically, the chances are infinitesimally small that the values of the universal physical constants would line up presicely to allow for matter, energy, chemistry in the way they exist.

That is true for ANY given random arrangement of said physical constants and laws. Sounds like you are bordering on the anthropic principle.

This is either a coincidence, or it suggests some higher organizing principle underlying the cosmos we don't percieve.

Not necessarily an explanation of why so much as a guess based on the "mystery". I disagree with the "mysteriousness" of it all.

 

[Cypress]

To clarify this point, this doesn't mean that the "missing" 95% has a mystical, supernatural explanation. It merely means that we have yet to devise methods of finding it.

As to the existence or not of god/gods, all I can say is that I've seen no proof or evidence, but that doesn't mean that they don't exist. Such beliefs bring people comfort. They also bring mischief. To me pondering their existence is less interesting than examining how our beliefs change our behavior, for better or for worse.

You are right. Dark energy and dark matter are just placeholder names for phenomena we don't understand, but we may have a viable theory for in 50 years.

The gods, higher truths, or universal spirits of human language are just constructs of the human mind standing in for the unexplainable, the mysteries of the infinite. God, Brahman, The Dao are just words that don't have any independent existence outside of human language and custom. Just my two cents

 

[Cypress]

Agumentum ad populum.



That is true for ANY given random arrangement of said physical constants and laws. Sounds like you are bordering on the anthropic principle.



Not necessarily an explanation of why so much as a guess based on the "mystery". I disagree with the "mysteriousness" of it all.

Anyone is free to believe that the fine tuning of the physical constants, the critical density, the mathmatical scaffolding of the cosmos are just a random coincidence.

When I see patterns or coincidences, I generally think it means something, even if I don't know what it is.

 

[Cypress]

I'm not so sure.

In an infinite universe
over the course of eternity.
every physical possibility will eventually manifest itself.

Some of them will appear to be amazingly fine tuned
when they are actually totally random.

Remember, 1-2-3-4-5-6

has just as good of a chance to win the national lottery

as any other six digit combination

and if we have the lottery long enough

it definitely WILL eventually win.

My sense is the universe isn't infinite, but that depends on the four dimensional geometry of spacetime.

Even in an infinite universe, the conservative scientific assumption is that the universal physical constants are the same everywhere, and that leaves the exacte same question: why are they finely tuned to allow for matter, energy, biology.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

My sense is the universe isn't infinite, but that depends on the four dimensional geometry of spacetime.

Even in an infinite universe, the conservative scientific assumption is that the universal physical constants are the same everywhere, and that leaves the exacte same question: why are they finely tuned to allow for matter, energy, biology.

One theory is that they all have to balance out to ZERO. Like matter and anti-matter....although some research indicates there is more matter than antimatter.