Jump to content

Kevinb

Seeker
  • Content count

    265
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

47 Excellent

4 Followers

About Kevinb

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

693 profile views
  1. I have a level of confidence based on evidence and peer review. You don't observe scientific progress or understanding last 400 years? Or you also reject germ theory of disease... atom theory of matter... theory of gravity? Or you're alright with things right upto your particular God presupposition stuff? If not...supernatural makes us ill... best never take medicine then... did you see them doing the test? Intelligent failing or something instead? Again I've a degree of confidence based on theory..evidence and peer review. This isn't an argument from authority fallacy at all. You commit to one authority book... please provide evidence for bible claims ...people living for 100s of years... being turned into pillars of salt.. talking snakes. God poofing animals into existence etc. You do... like how? How have you ruled out it's just in your head? Ever seen the God cap experiments? Do you prayers always get answered? What does God say to you?
  2. A Simulation?

    The naturalistic non God explanations don't say stars or humans just assemble by blind coming together such like the house forming by blind chance. I know what you're trying to say but your analogy is an equivocation fallacy nonetheless.
  3. A Simulation?

    Hear you....however.. In terms of life vs a house in bits becoming a made house. We might have evidence bobs construction Ltd building it...we could watch them with others to corroberate...evidence supplying the parts ie wickes.. we have no evidence of houses appearing naturally under any physical law...houses don't reproduce and grow as life does . Common equivocation fallacy and analogy. Unless you can demonstrate God poofed things into existence or any causation in the same way?
  4. A Simulation?

    No need to apologise we all have a bit of Swiss cheese going on from time to time. You answered in terms of you think prayer works but my 1st point was how do you know he was possessed as opposed to anything else brain material medical or drug influenced etc
  5. I'd try an avoid ad hominem if I were you... doesn't reflect well on those who feel the need to use it in discussion. Scientists try and refute each other's experiments... can it be repeated... this is how peer review works. Remember the team that thought they'd discovered neutrinos travelling faster than light? They put it out for others to verify and found that they had made an error. This is how confidence is made and ideas are built upon or refuted. Rational thinking goes hand in hand with science whilst adding theory based on evidence... that's demonstrable and falsifiable. Ie big bang predicted prior to discoveries such as red shift and cmb. Committing to an authority is a logical fallacy btw...its called an argument from authority fallacy. What you need to back it up is evidence to back up your claim. Proven himself trustworthy? How do you get there? Like what?
  6. Well I'd agree we seem to exist but you need to demonstrate a God put us here. Unless you're just happy with faith?
  7. Is Time Infinite?

    Yes that statement.. God created time. Did he... how to demonstrate that before we get to conclusions. Logic says if your premises aren't true neither will your conclusions be. So we can't start with assertion only. Eternity of the universe..cosmos.. solar system... humans? Currently scientific understanding indicates... the universe is expanding and accelerating. Even atoms break down into the trillions of years after the heat and light death of the universe. Blackholes evaporate as observed and predicted.. see hawking radiation too. The sun will expand as it uses up its hydrogen..2 billion years earth will be too hot for us.. we may have or already be on mars or the other planets moon's or some other solar system. That's assuming we've not blown ourselves up in some horrific war or been destroyed by asteroid impact. The best way to safeguard the continuation of our species is to not put all eggs in one basket...ie earth.. we need to have colonies on other planets.. moon's...bases in orbit etc. Can we reach that level of tech before nuclear war or asteroid impact (we may have the ability to deflect any asteroid in the future) is the key. Andromeda galaxy and the milkyway are on collision course and will merge in a couple of billion years. I don't know what scripture says but that's what scientific evidence says. I fear we're too short sighted and ignorant as a species to avoid a nuclear war .. even if it's a generation or 2 away. The Pandoras box of tech development will not cease... eventually some really dangerous Islamic extremist country or group will be able to develop nukes.. unless N Korea v Trump manage to get war underway sooner.
  8. It verifies everything huh? Can you scientifically demonstrate talking snakes...people living to 100s of years...Lots wife turned into a pillar of salt? Genesis day 1 God separates day and night... yet he didn't create the sun till day 4. That's the tip of the tip of the iceberg btw.
  9. Indeed it would be cool and would help the non believer or seeker. Wouldn't need to drop to faith then as there would be evidence and God causation in reality. Many types of Gods out there in human history but we mean Yahweh in this instance. Demonstrable demonstration of God causation in reality is important.. indeed science can't do that currently. To say we only need the bible to accept the bible is true sounds dangerously like a circular reasoning fallacy and an argument from authority fallacy too. Such as?
  10. A Simulation?

    I don't need help no. I'm here to see peoples reasons and responses. I don't rule out changing my mind but I need good reason to do that. I appreciate you feel you've done that.... however from my point of view the pattern game is played all over in other books. The possessed guy thing... not sure you even answered my Qs. Saying my faith is analogous with yours with the wind vs your particular God claims...is a soft ball and a perfect example of an equivocation fallacy. I've always accepted evolution... not a creationist micro version. When I joined here I had notion of God created the universe ..i was expecting to have been swayed with good argument to believe deeper. However in discussion realised i had no good reason to think God did anything and so far that remains the case. I have been given other things like... it's just faith... well that can get me to every type of supernatural God claim. The other reason to believe recently was the bible stuff being logically consistent. Well I see inconsistency and even immorality.. the sanctioning of slavery stuff discussed elsewhere for example. Even if it was logically consistent... so is Harry potter but unless there is evidence in reality its all for nothing... this applies to alien involvement or simulation hence the thread. Many admit they can't prove.. I've been given the Pascals wager option. Another common tactic is to attempt to pick holes in the accepted science...ie evolution.. big bang...einstein. however the unqualified armchair deny just exhibits an argument from incredulity or ignorance ..hence gotta still prove your claim in reality as do the simulation peeps. Thanks for the discussion anyways i enjoyed it. All the best if you're done.
  11. Astronomic events that never happened?

    Maybe...i don't say there definitely isn't. How do we get to proving an author and linking causation to one? We can investigate the physical and natural but how do we leap to supernatural? I understand you don't see a reason to reject. My view is I don't see a reason to believe... the default position here being not to believe in an author till you can demonstrate one...however believing one on faith will get you there course but I need the evidence... one can believe anything on faith. That said I still see these events in our galaxy or others as amazing and completely fascinating.
  12. Astronomic events that never happened?

    Did you see very recently... was in news in UK last few days 2 neutron stars colliding? Observed and the gravitational waves measured on earth...as per Einsteinian prediction. Observation as corroborated all over and the world's telescopes pointed to it. https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.independent.co.uk/news/science/neutron-star-collision-gravitational-waves-gold-metal-precious-ligo-a8003146.html%3famp Everything so far discovered seems to be obeying physical law... we're yet to prove God made stars collide or supernova. These massive events throwing out material can cause new stars to be born in stellar nursery from triggering the collapse of material...new solar systems... planets and maybe life.
  13. A Simulation?

    That's your counter argument? You think the scientific method proves God and you've demonstrated that? Your so called evidence is an easy debunk. The code and math stuff is in the quran or any book if you're happy with confirmation bias or want to play pattern games. Plus god plays cryptic games in holy books rather than giving us irrefutable proof and evidence... magnificent claims require magnificent levels of evidence... that's not brill...especially if that game can be played in any other book if you look and presuppose.
  14. A Simulation?

    We can explore your previous equivocation fallacy again if you like. Really? You surely see the fallacy here. It's God did it coz scientists called it Adam and eve? Christianity is part of our culture..its a name label as theory of origins. Incidently we're in the realms of a hundred 1000 plus years or 2 right I assume you're old earth creationist too citing this link? You also understand mitochondria being a symbiotic bacterial relationship with cells.. this being accepted by evolution. Feel free to demonstrate God put it there btw. I dismiss it because it's not evidence..as I said there are masses of silly patterns if you're willing to presuppose. Patterns can be found all over if you want to commit confirmation bias... Unfortunately for Drosnin and others easily amazed, there is nothing astonishing about it. Using a computer (as he did), you can find similar results in just about any large text you care to try. Moby Dick, for example, contains interconnected ELS’s of “Kennedy”, “head”, “shot”, and “had been so killed”. War and Peace predicts the Chicago Bull’s miraculous 1998 NBA championship by interconnecting “Jordan”, “Chicago”, and “Bulls”. Because of the ease with which seemingly meaningful messages can be found in any text if you’re allowed to play fast and loose with the math, serious Bible scholars and mathematicians have denounced codes as nonsense. Dr. Barry Simon, an Orthodox Jew and the IBM Professor of Mathematics and Theoretical Physics at Cal Tech, is “certain that all the evidence presented [for the codes] has no legitimacy” Also search for hidden codes in the quran that prove its the word of God too. They commit the same confirmation bias. I'll not copy paste but search if interested.. you get what I'm saying I hope. Anyways... this stuff would be some of our God evidence.. what a bizarre game of hide and seek on poor evidence. When I say poor I mean none...except faith. Or burn in hell forever if you don't buy this. What about African tribes who've never heard of your particular God version through no fault of their own... burn in hell forever? Hardly seems fair or moral. Aside from demonstrable naturalistic explanations of course. here we go on the latest round of equivocation fallacies. I can measure the wind using an anemometer.. the composition can be tested.. and has been as.. By volume, dry air contains 78.09%nitrogen, 20.95% oxygen, 0.93% argon, 0.04% carbon dioxide, and small amounts of other gases. Air also contains a variable amount of water vapor, on average around 1% at sea level, and 0.4% over the entire atmosphere. This is demonstrable and falsifiable.. you understand this right? Please demonstrably demonstrate bible claims... talking snakes..animals poofing into existence.. etc etc. This equivocation you attempt to assert is a fallacy again. Plus I don't need to appeal to magic and supernatural which isn't proven.
  15. Seventh day adventist church

    The problem is by what demonstrable mechanism do you refute one and accept another? Have you come across the logical fallacy special pleading? It helped me.
×