The Drake Equation Fallacy

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: Jay-morris

It's not even a debate. More like when my children throw their toys out of the pram when they don't get what they want.

Seriously! Just admit you are religious. Why are you pretending not too! Most of this debate has been the God of the bible! I have asked for evidence that the God from the bible is real, which no one can answer! Whst I cannot stand is people pretending not to be religous, to prove some sort of point!

Ok, I will ask you what every one on here ignores. Is there any evidence that the God from the bible is real?

a reply to: Barcs

Apologies, you're correct it is a hypothesis.

Please show me the experiment which detects Gravitons.

I stated the logic of Godels Ontological argument was mathematically sound. Which it is.

Believing in creation does not render your logic or arguments irrelevant.

Again i will repeat, all science does is discover the underlying design of the universe. Key word being design.

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: Jay-morris

There's no such thing as absolute proof. Evolution, relativity etc are just theories as well.

I guess you don't even grasp what a scientific theory is. JUST A THEORY? You mean like germ theory, gravity, atomic theory, cell theory, etc? Yeah they are all just theories, but nobody's going around saying germs, atoms, cells or gravity doesn't exist. Evolution, however, people are programmed to hate.

I have looked into the argument. It holds as much verifiable evidence as something like dark matter or dark energy. Even gravity is a ficticious force which can't be directly measured.

www.space.com...

I'm sorry but comparing an apologetic argument to scientific hypotheses is beyond absurd. Hypotheses are at least testable and have SOME supporting evidence. We don't know what causes dark energy, but we observe the effects of it, just like dark matter. It's called "dark" because we don't know what causes it. Ontological argument is not testable in the slightest and there are ZERO observations and tests supporting it. Pretending that not being able to confirm dark matter makes the ontological argument viable is complete nonsense.

What I'm stating is that he was a top mathematician and pioneer of his field. Someone who knows a more about math and logic than anyone in this thread that's for sure.

Appeal to authority fallacy. That doesn't make his arguments valid. It's not a math based argument. It's literally a what if statement and nothing more.

Essentially I'm stating you can't dismiss god for lack of evidence while at the same time accepting other scientific theories which are just as full of holes.

I'm not dismissing god for lack of evidence, I just lack belief in the claim that he exists since it has no supporting evidence whatsoever. If evidence is presented my position will change. I don't assert there is no god.

Scientific theories are well substantiated explanations for observations that have been rigorously tested. What holes are you talking about? They don't know everything, sure, but that's not a hole. In science, theories are sound, solid and testable.

a reply to: Jay-morris

Why would i admit to something that isn't true.

I believe in creation, not a religious god.

My understanding of my reality can be better described and have more meaning by describing it in spiritual terms rather than numbers.

Please show me the equation which shows me how much i love my children.

a reply to: Jay-morris

Does not matter what you think. I proved my point!

You haven't even made a point. Keep em comin tho. Cause
you're a funny guy.

a reply to: Barcs

The evidence of design is all around you.

Again, why has the universe always obeyed the laws of mathematics since its inception?

a reply to: Barcs

Yes, they are just Theory, with varying degrees of probability.

Anyway i've had enough of the vitriol and grandstanding in this thread.

Not to mention the arrogance.

originally posted by: Jay-morris

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: Jay-morris

It's not even a debate. More like when my children throw their toys out of the pram when they don't get what they want.

Seriously! Just admit you are religious. Why are you pretending not too! Most of this debate has been the God of the bible! I have asked for evidence that the God from the bible is real, which no one can answer! Whst I cannot stand is people pretending not to be religous, to prove some sort of point!

Ok, I will ask you what every one on here ignores. Is there any evidence that the God from the bible is real?

No, if you're referring to the God described in the bible there is absolutely no evidence of his existence. I don't believe the word of the bible as i previously stated i think it holds some truth hidden in it's metaphors.

I believe in creation and universal design.

a reply to: Grenade

Oh no here comes Barc Barc he's really gonna turn things
around. Just watch him work.

a reply to: carsforkids

I can't wait for the inevitable, confrontational, anger filled retort that anyone could dare have an opinion outside of orthodoxy.

originally posted by: carsforkids
a reply to: Grenade

Oh no here comes Barc Barc he's really gonna turn things
around. Just watch him work.

You hear that! Your new hero grenade does not believe in the God in the bible. Why? Because there is no evidence!

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: Barcs

Apologies, you're correct it is a hypothesis.

Please show me the experiment which detects Gravitons.

I stated the logic of Godels Ontological argument was mathematically sound. Which it is.

Believing in creation does not render your logic or arguments irrelevant.

Again i will repeat, all science does is discover the underlying design of the universe. Key word being design.

You are still confusing it. Graviton is hypothetical. Gravity waves are not. Gravity itself is not. Are you going to break down the math you claim is sound or not??? You keep referencing math but won't demonstrate it.

I will repeat. All religion does is make unfalsifiable claims like "design" of the universe, which is then believed blindly by indoctrinated followers.

a reply to: Jay-morris

I've stated i didn't believe in religion all along.

I believe in intelligent design and creation.

Not the same thing.

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: Barcs

The evidence of design is all around you.

Again, why has the universe always obeyed the laws of mathematics since its inception?

LOL! Your arguments are terrible. Please go back to school and learn basic logic. Evidence is all around, yet you can't cite any of it and instead rely on outdated apologetic arguments and assumptions based on complexity.

Yes, they are just Theory, with varying degrees of probability.

Varying degrees? Yeah like 99+% for most scientific theories. Sorry you can't compare scientific research to apologetic arguments from the past. It's laughably absurd.

Anyway i've had enough of the vitriol and grandstanding in this thread.

Not to mention the arrogance.

Then make a real argument instead of repeating nonsense. You literally ignored every point I made, just like the carsforkids clown. You guys literally do nothing but spew ignorance. It's sad.

a reply to: Grenade

You hear that! Your new hero grenade does not believe in the God in the bible. Why? Because there is no evidence!

Like that's supposed to bother me! lol

And where did I say you were my hero? What a loon.

He's obviously upset.

BTW we pretty much believe the same way.

Gravity waves are real? Really, please show me the study or references which indicate directly measurable gravity waves.

Please read my posts properly, i did not say i gave Godels Proof any weight, i simply used it to show you can spin equations and make a logical argument.

To me, in my opinion, which i'm entitled to i believe the universe shows many indicators of design.

Why is it such a problem?

I have a BSc in computer science, so please stop talking to me like i'm some scientific heretic monk that lives in a cave.

You would get a lot further and maybe learn to compromise if you actually listen to people.

originally posted by: carsforkids
a reply to: Grenade

You hear that! Your new hero grenade does not believe in the God in the bible. Why? Because there is no evidence!

Like that's supposed to bother me! lol

And where did I say you were my hero? What a loon.

He's obviously upset.

BTW we pretty much believe the same way.

I never said i was your hero pal. He inferred that.

I actually find your arguments more consistent than the emotionally charged rhetoric being slung in the other direction.

Never thought i'd say it but the scientific zealots are starting to sound like the religious authority of old. Don't accept the universe is a random sequence of events and life is just a result of chemistry and biology then you're a heretic.

I really am done with this thread now. The arrogance is ridiculous.

a reply to: Grenade


link

A gravitational-wave observatory (or gravitational-wave detector) is any device designed to measure gravitational waves, tiny distortions of spacetime that were first predicted by Einstein in 1916.[1] Gravitational waves are perturbations in the theoretical curvature of spacetime caused by accelerated masses. The existence of gravitational radiation is a specific prediction of general relativity, but is a feature of all theories of gravity that obey special relativity.[2] Since the 1960s, gravitational-wave detectors have been built and constantly improved. The present-day generation of resonant mass antennas and laser interferometers has reached the necessary sensitivity to detect gravitational waves from sources in the Milky Way. Gravitational-wave observatories are the primary tool of gravitational-wave astronomy.
A number of experiments have provided indirect evidence, notably the observation of binary pulsars, the orbits of which evolve precisely matching the predictions of energy loss through general relativistic gravitational-wave emission. The 1993 Nobel Prize in Physics was awarded for this work.[3]
In February 2016, the Advanced LIGO team announced that they had detected gravitational waves from a black hole merger.[4][5][6] The 2017 Nobel Prize in Physics was awarded for this work.

originally posted by: Grenade

originally posted by: carsforkids
a reply to: Grenade

You hear that! Your new hero grenade does not believe in the God in the bible. Why? Because there is no evidence!

Like that's supposed to bother me! lol

And where did I say you were my hero? What a loon.

He's obviously upset.

BTW we pretty much believe the same way.

I never said i was your hero pal. He inferred that.

I actually find your arguments more consistent than the emotionally charged rhetoric being slung in the other direction.

Never thought i'd say it but the scientific zealots are starting to sound like the religious authority of old. Don't accept the universe is a random sequence of events and life is just a result of chemistry and biology then you're a heretic.

I really am done with this thread now. The arrogance is ridiculous.

Good! You are not making any sense! Goodbye!

a reply to: Jay-morris

I said direct measurement. Don't cherry pick words.