Topic: Why I'm an atheist - page 29. (Read 89029 times)

Ah! At last I found a scientist who knows math and physics, and who took a time machine back a million years, and did all the tests necessary to determine math and physics were the same back then... NOT.  

Where did I get that idea from? Read my post you quoted. It tells you right in there. Things were different back at the time of the BB. Why would you believe math and physics weren't different? How can you know? Maybe it's not even a good guess to say that math and physics were the same back then... considering that BB Theory, itself, acknowledges that the whole universe was so extremely different within at least the first 3 million years.

Because the laws of physics don't change. I have no idea what math has to do with anything.
It's borderline stupid to think 'we don't know' physics don't change when there's not a slightest indication it could be true.


That's untrue, it was always the same. We can only discover new laws that we didn't know before and that make things possible that were possible all along but we didn't know about it.
Time dialation for example.

Just because we discover new laws doesn't mean they didn't apply before. We just didn't know about them.


There were no changes.


We do.

All the planets&systems are expanding in a certain direction at a certain speed.
If we reverse the direction they're heading all the planets and all matter that we know off originate to 1 spot. To 1 singularity. From where all of them were propelled in their directions.

That's why it's called the big bang.


Where did you get that idea from?

I think you're not grasping the concept. We don't know that math and physics were the same. The universe following the BB was extremely different for millions of years. BB shows that it was. So, why would anybody think that math and physics operated the same back then, since the rest of the universe didn't. It's right in the BB Theory.

Our knowledge hasn't changed about BB. We still don't know if it existed or if it didn't.

Let me explain it like this. Imagine that our universe started, say, 5 million years ago. How did it start? Let's call the method XXXXX Beginning. And let's say that math and physics, and XXXXX, were extremely different. But they rolled along according to whatever path they were taking, all of them gradually changing.

Today we have our math and physics... which was very different than the math and physics of XXXXX beginning times.

We use our math and physics to try to determine what the beginning of the universe was like. We come up with BB, 13.5 billion years ago. We don't know any different, because we don't have a clue for a method for determining the what changes that naturally, slowly, came about in math and physics really were. There is no way to tell what math and physics changes might have been.

BB is a nice science fiction dream. Even if BB were completely true and real, we don't have any way of knowing. And BB Theory suggests that BB math and physics were different from today, just as the BB universe is different from today's universe.

I think you're not grasping the concept.
Math is the same. What you're near talking about is physics.

The laws of physics apply the same throughout the whole universe and throughout the entirety of time.
Eversince time existed the laws of physics were the same and they applied the same throughout the universe.

The thing you're missrepresenting is the Big Bang which set those laws in motion.
When the Big Bang happened time started existing and with it all the laws that apply in the universe.

There was no "before" the big bang because there was no "time" before it.
Time and laws of physics applied when the big bang happened.
It's when our universe became existing.

The Big Bang is the year 0, the beginning and the start.

Nobody can explain it. Why not? Because nobody has lived long enough ago to compare the differences that existed in prehistory with what exists now. The closest we can come is to show that our math and physics predicts that BB was extremely different. To be different means that math and physics were different. If they were not different, we could not predict a difference in BB even by using our math and physics.

In other words, the whole idea of BB doesn't even make sense.

Can you explain this?
How is our math&physics different than that during the BB  

You're thinking of the singularity and the non-existance of time?

Your first sentence is right and it is wrong. I will never be convinced by you, because you don't know enough to convince anyone. I will gladly be convinced by anyone who has proof.

Your second sentence fits you way batter than it fits me... or prove I am wrong.

I am afraid nothing will ever convince you that you are wrong in your assertions.

"No amount of evidence will ever persuade an idiot" - Mark Twain

It's only been a few hundred years since people knew that there were more elements that earth, air, fire, and water... and the ether, if you want to include space. But atheism goes way back into the past. So, how do we know that we won't find that there is something besides energy that everything is made out of.

For example. We now know that the Big Bang is false. How is it false? We used our modern day math to figure out that there was a BB in the first place. But the existence of such a BB as has been theorized, proves that BB math and physics were different than our modern math, just as the BB universe is different than our universe. We don't have any math or physics example from the way math an physics were even 20,000 years ago. So we certainly don't even know that 20,000 years ago existed in any recognizable way. So, how can we tell that there ever was 3.5 billion years ago... or a BB?

I do believe in God and I do believe in the wonderful things that the Bible and the religion teaches like love, respect, tolerance, etc. With all that said as an intellectual I do have some questions like where does God come from, is he some kind of energy and where that energy comes from? Our world is beautiful if you look it from the right eyes, of course there is evil in this world, but there are much more beautiful things and I might even say "wonders" that happen. There are so many stories of people in coma that returned and they tell how they've seen their dear ones and that light everyone is speaking about.

The point of what you are saying is that complexity of the universe is beyond mankind at present.

Consider the science that we don't know much of anything  about, the science of the soul/spirit and the science of the medium that we call empty space.

Why would anyone think that there isn't a science of the identity and soul/spirit of God? We can't even understand these two things - our personal identity and our soul/spirit - but we use them all the time. We are the essence of what they are. But we can't objectively get a handle on them scientifically.

Everything that we do in life, exists in a much greater doing in nature around us. Yet it is nature that is profoundly greater than what we do. In fact, everything we do exists as a thing in nature. In other words, the Doer of nature is as far greater than we are, as the doings of nature are far greater than our doings.

God is the basis for everything. He isn't the basis because we might apply that kind of basis in our lives. He is the basis because He exists as the basis. Proof is in the fact that we die, but nature goes on.

"God" is just a catch-all term for the truths that science hasn't yet uncovered. But there is science and maths there, underlying everything. There is no celestial overseer.
You can see this is true by looking at long timescales. God is shrinking over time, and will eventually disappear.

Thousands of years ago, God was everything. The Sun was God, Nature was God, Rain and Thunder were God.
Over time these became natural phenomena, but God was still there, albeit a smaller God: God moved the Sun and Moon around the Earth.
And then came Copernicus, Galileo et al - and God shrunk again. The Earth wasn't the centre of the universe, the sun was one star amongst many, the moon a simple ball of rock in continuous freefall around our own ball of rock, as we are in freefall around the sun.
Okay, but God still created the Animals, and still created Man, his chosen creature... and then came Darwin. Evolution by natural selection, with overwhelming evidence. God shrinks again.

God is simply the name for the science that we don't yet understand.

Science will slowly find that God exists, and that He is the One Who made all the science to work as it does.

One thing to note about religion is that it is something that fill sthe gaps in human understanding. If there is something that is not understood by scientists, the quick easy (and wrong!) answer is that God did it.

We can see that as science advances and explains more and more of existence, religion shrinks. It used to be that God created the Earth and the heavens around it. But then science proved that the Earth was just an ordinary planet orbitting an ordinary sun, not the centre of the universe. So religion retreated to 'well, we don't know how the universe was created, so that must be God'... and so on.

Religion will slowly disappear as science fills in the gaps.

^^^ You toss the words "flat earth" around like they are a religion.

^^^ You toss the word religion around like it's a frag grenade.

If you combine your belief in atheism and extraterrestrials, you only have one religion. If you don't, you have two religions.

I too am an atheist and I believe only in the existence of extraterrestrials

You can educate people to believe anything. Science educates by teaching people some real facts, and then extrapolating other potentially fake facts off the real facts. Examples of the potentially fake facts are: the scientific age of the universe; evolution of life; that cause and effect are philosophical rather than real; knowledge of what black holes really are; that stars are nuclear. When scientists teach like this, they are treating science like a religion.

When science says that there is no soul or spirit, or God for that matter, because they haven't technologically figured out a way to observe these things technologically, they are placing themselves into a position of admitted ignorance.

Just because science hasn't found soul/spirit memory that is distinctly separate from physical, brain memory, doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. After all, science would have to find the soul or spirit, first, and check it out for its memory. Science that claims these things don't exist, is claiming that cars and airplanes and computers and space rockets don't exist, because they are placing themselves into a class of people who have to know everything about something before they will admit to understanding that it exists.

What would Aristotle say if he had been introduced to cars and airplanes and computers and space rockets? Would he have said that they don't exist simply because he knew nothing about them? You are placing yourself into a position of self-maintained, self-desired ignorance when you talk the way you do.

Uneducated people believed and still believe in all kinds of things. Some are delusional, some are just uninformed.

The issue was that you personally think to have a memory of what happened to you before you and your brain was formed.  That is what is insane.  Some people believe they were Napoleon, Julius Caesar, etc.  There is no clinical distinction between your "before birth" memories and someone who has memories of being Napoleon.

Your "before birth" memories are just part of your religious delusion.  You have lost your marbles.