It's ILLOGICAL to think God didn't Create the Universe

a reply to: Grenade
You were also agreeing with coop.

a reply to: daskakik

Indeed, im quite pliable like that.

You both raise good points, i was trying to show their compatibility.

a reply to: cooperton
Since we have no way of knowing if a greater intelligent being even exists, we don't know.

If it doesn't exist and yet here we are, it doesn't matter what the probabilities are because it happened, just like the guy holding the wining lottery ticket.

If it does exist, and here is the crux of my point, who is to say it fits your description of it?

a reply to: Grenade
Fair enough. Actually, I'm not even really opposed to a creator. I just question if anyone knows who it is and what their thoughts actually are.

Of course the OP went all in on the bible and despite cooperton not citing scripture here, their posting history has a lot of that.

a reply to: daskakik

I think he uses them as metaphors not as proofs as such.

It's good if we can compromise and learn from each other, entrenched beliefs are rarely anything other than personal truths.

a reply to: Grenade

We have plausible theory to describe a beginning, don’t confuse that with fact.

Yes there is theory that cant be based on any scientific facts. They might as well have made a calkulation on the odds of randomnes. And they have done that.

When i was a teanager in the late 70s. We were told that two atoms randomly collided and created the big Bang. But the question our teacher coulden't explain was: Where or from what did the atoms come from.

We were shut down very quickly if we asked questiones they dident know the answer to.

Today there exist more answers then there are questions...... Right ?

a reply to: spy66

“The passion for finding the system in experience, replacing surprise with order, is a persistent part of human nature...Science came to mean the elimination of surprise. It outlawed miracles, because miracles are above all unexpected.”

Even science will always be dependant on one miracle, hence i don't invoke science in philosophical matters often as it's essentially nothing but attempting to rigidly frame observation and measurement, the nature of reality and it's beginning is and will always be beyond it's reach.

I blame Aristotle but that's a much longer conversation.

originally posted by: Grenade
It's good if we can compromise and learn from each other, entrenched beliefs are rarely anything other than personal truths.

I agree with this. That is why I have pointed out, in this thread and in a couple others, that religious people have no problem working in scientific fields. This is because a personal truth is one thing and objective truth, which science supposedly strives for and sometimes misses, are two separate things and it is probably a good thing to treat them as such.

a reply to: daskakik

I agree however science like any other field of natural study is open to exploitation and malfeasance. In some ways it has stagnated, controlled and shaped by academia and intransigently conventional.

a reply to: Grenade
That is why I said sometimes it misses.

Still, what is the alternative?

a reply to: daskakik

A little bit of both, a humble and open minded approach. Also corporate greed has a huge influence on suppressing advancements and knowledge.

Science has it's gatekeepers and directors.

originally posted by: daskakik

If it does exist, and here is the crux of my point, who is to say it fits your description of it?

For your case assume you believe the Creator exists.. This being must be logical if it created logical creatures. This logical being would be reasonably drawn towards happiness, health, prosperity, and so on, as any logical mind would lead a human in the direction that they suppose would generate this sort of beneficence.

Logically we can begin to understand what type of Creator the Creator would be, especially given the beauty of his masterpiece. Surely as he inputed beauty into the algorithm He is by no means ignorant of beneficence.

This Transcendent Omnipotence from which all things come has been called many names throughout history, yet no words can fully depict this Being's magnificence. So Don't get caught up in semantics, but instead use your rational mind that was implanted in us so that we may rationally come to know the Reason behind all things.

a reply to: Grenade
Of course, but context is important.

Things like the big bang, newton's laws, theory of evolution, spherical earth have little to no importance in the corporate manipulation of technology. Besides they have already implemented all the laws needed to patent and profit from what they chose to put out there.

We need to separate the stuff taught in classes from the corporate activities and acknowledge that, for the most part, they don't influence each other.

a reply to: cooperton
You are putting your POV into that. You don't know what the reason behind it all is.

I'll tell you this, if it is to make us all good little drones that do nothing but praise them for eternity? If I can, I will opt out, thank you.

That said, I have not seen anything that makes me believe that is the case, outside of some of the religious ideas that exist.

a reply to: daskakik

If you don't believe an answer can be found then stop wasting your time discussing it.

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: cooperton
Fact/opinion aside. What is more probable regarding the existence of an intelligent creature: that it was made by intelligence or unintelligence?

The improbability of something happening is meaningless if that is what actually happened.

The probability of wining the lottery makes no difference to someone holding a wining ticket.

You don't understand the difference between possibility and probability.

For instance, the odds of winning the Mega Millions is 1 in 302,500,000.

www.cnbc.com...

Why is winning the Mega Millions possible? It's because it was designed by intelligence. Intelligence determined what outcomes can occur therefore making it possible for someone to hit the Mega Millions.

Players may pick six numbers from two separate pools of numbers - five different numbers from 1 to 70 (the white balls) and one number from 1 to 25 (the gold Mega Ball) - or select Easy Pick/Quick Pick. You win the jackpot by matching all six winning numbers in a drawing.

www.megamillions.com...

So intelligence determined the outcomes that can occur which are the numbers 1-70 for the first five balls and 1-25 for the last ball. So the probability of someone hiting the Mega Millions is 1.

It's just like a pair of dice. Each dice game may be randomly played but the outcomes that can occur aren't random. They can roll the dice until the cows come home and they will only roll a 2-12 because that's how intelligence designed the dice. Because the outcomes that can occur are determined by intelligence, you can figure out the probability of rolling a 2 or a 7 because intelligence determined that these were possible outcomes that can occur when you roll the dice.

With the universe, materialist are in the area of fantasy. We see a fine tuned universe so scientist have to propose an infinite multiverse, eternal inflation, 10^500 false vacua or more and they still can't get a universe like ours occuring naturally.

Think about it, without intelligence determing what outcomes can or can't occur, you're in La La Land. The Cosmological Constant is fine tuned to 10^120. That's a number that's 120 decimal places!!

A materialist has to show that this value can naturally occur and they have to show the range of values that can occur. If it's infinite then you're in crazytown because you can get any value from 10^30, 10^120, 10^500, 2, 15, 5 billion. You then will have to show what natural combinations of constants can occur. Is it 11? This means you have 11 constants and each time a universe forms, it's in a combination of those constants. If not, then you can have a very large if not infinite event space. You can have a universe with 3 constants, you can have a universe with 8 constants, you can have a universe with 4 constants and all of the constants have even values. The list can go on and on. With materialist, we have no idea about the event space or sample space when it comes to constants and the laws of physics.

So, you have to ask yourself, what's logical. A universe where intelligence determined what outcomes can occur or the fantasy of our universe or any universe like ours arising with open ended possibilities?

Again, if I play a game of dice, it's only possible because intelligence determined that 2-7 is the outcomes that can occur. I could never play a game of dice if there's an infinity of outcomes that can occur each time I roll the dice.

A universe without God Creating it is ILLOGICAL!

Materialist have to show us why our universe is a possible outcome. Scientist always start from, our universe exist but they never tell us why our universe with our constants and our laws of physics is one of the outcomes that can exist. Our universe could never happen with infinite possibilities because there's no mechanism to say each outcome has to occur. You have values like this:

Gravitational constant 1 part in 10^34
Cosmological constant 1 part in 10^120
Mass density of universe 1 part in 10^59
Initial entropy 1 part in 10^ (10^123)

These are just 4 of the constants.

ILLOGICAL!!

originally posted by: cooperton
If you don't believe an answer can be found then stop wasting your time discussing it.

I believe an answer can be found, I just don't think you have found it. That is what I am wasting my time discussing.

originally posted by: neoholographic
A universe without God Creating it is ILLOGICAL!

The "God" part, or rather your idea of what it is is what I question.

What is logical and illogical in a universe so large we can't really wrap our heads around it?

"My human brain can't imagine it so it must be god" isn't a much better answer than random chance. The truth is we don't know.

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: neoholographic
A universe without God Creating it is ILLOGICAL!

The "God" part, or rather your idea of what it is is what I question.

What is logical and illogical in a universe so large we can't really wrap our heads around it?

"My human brain can't imagine it so it must be god" isn't a much better answer than random chance. The truth is we don't know.

Again, you don't understand the difference between possibility and probability. You said:

My human brain can't imagine it so it must be god" isn't a much better answer than random chance. The truth is we don't know.

Nope, I'm saying it's God because without intelligence determining what possible outcomes can occur, it makes no sense. Science doesn't even tell us why a universe is even possible. If there's endless possibilities, then why stars, planets, black holes, people with DNA, a storage medium more advanced than any supercomputer. We have no idea about the sample space, if there is one or the event space.

It's illogical!

To say it's so large is meaningless! Large doesn't mean every outcome has to occur.

a reply to: neoholographic

If the universe was illogical, then our logical minds wouldn't exist and we wouldn't have the ability to reason. But since we obviously have those abilities, it is self-evident that intelligence is a factor in the universe. If someone can't accept that, then they are forfeiting logical reasoning altogether and it's a waste of time to try to use logic to communicate with them until they can accept such a basic inherent truth of the logical world.