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

originally posted by: neoholographic
You say the God I'm talking about doesn't exist, then you say if there is a Creator they might be nothing like the God I'm talking about. How do you know this? Also, it's more probable that god doesn't exist? What is this probability based on?

I don't know. That has been my point all along, nobody knows.

The probability is based on the fact that every other god turned out to not exist. Take that and add all the silly little stories, global flood, man in a whale, tower reaching heaven and the probability rises.

No, that's not the point. You said:

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

Guess you didn't understand it and yes, that was the point.

I'm simply asking you, how can the illogical give rise to the logical in a universe so large?

And I asked what is illogical and what is logical?

Implying that what you find illogical might not be illogical given all we don't know.

a reply to: daskakik

What??? You said:

I don't know. That has been my point all along, nobody knows.

In one breathe you say nobody knows, but then you claim to know:

Aside from that, it is even more probable that the god you are talking about doesn't even exist

So which is it? Nobody knows or it's more probable that the God I'm talking about doesn't exist? You're not making any sense. If nobody knows, how do you know the probability that God doesn't exist? Where are your calculations that show the God I'm talking about doesn't exist as you say?

Again I ask:

I'm simply asking you, how can the illogical give rise to the logical in a universe so large?

You didn't say this:

Implying that what you find illogical might not be illogical given all we don't know.

You said:

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

You were making a definite statement about how large the universe is so what seems illogical can be logical. You even said we can't wrap our heads around it.

I'm just asking to provide some evidence to support this. You said it.

What is this based on? Give me an example of the illogical giving rise to the logical because something is so large. My point is, you don't provide a shred of evidence to support what you're saying.

originally posted by: neoholographic
In one breathe you say nobody knows, but then you claim to know

No I said it makes it more probable.

Again I ask...

I already answered.

You were making a definite statement about how large the universe is so what seems illogical can be logical. You even said we can't wrap our heads around it.

Seems you keep asking because you can't wrap your head around it.

What is this based on? Give me an example of the illogical giving rise to the logical because something is so large. My point is, you don't provide a shred of evidence to support what you're saying.

It is based on what we don't know and that is something I can't give an example of because we don't know it.

a reply to: daskakik

End of debate:

It is based on what we don't know and that is something I can't give an example of because we don't know it.

You don't know it but I do.

I know that intelligence can encode a sequence of a storage medium with information.

I can say, if I split a piece of typing paper in two parts, meet me at Subway downtown on 4th St. at 4 PM. If the paper is split into 4 parts, meet me at Chipolte at 5 PM on MLK Drive.

My intelligence just encoded the sequence of a piece of typing paper with information that can be decoded by another intelligent mind or I can build machinary to decode the information in the sequence.

Nobody would think the typing paper encoded itself with information. The typing paper doesn't know about Subway or Chipolte. It's the same with DNA and this is why we can encode it with DVD's and PDF files.

You can't give me an example of how this is even possible with anything natural or random. So you just don't know, you don't have an idea how DNA can encode it's own sequence with information and build modular machinery to decode the information.

There's no debate here. I can show you how intelligence does the same thing. I can show you how intelligence has build civilizations encoding and decoding the sequence of storage mediums. You don't have a clue as to how this can occur naturally or with anything random.

originally posted by: neoholographic
You don't know it but I do.

No you don't, you can't even figure out what I am saying.

I know that intelligence can encode a sequence of a storage medium with information.

Nobody said it can't.

Nobody would think the typing paper encoded itself with information.

Of course not.

You can't give me an example of how this is even possible with anything natural or random.

No, but that doesn't mean it isn't possible and I am certainly not going to ask you to prove it isn't because you can't prove a negative. We are stuck on "we don't know".

So, in a nutshell, intelligence creates intelligence doesn't prove intelligence can't happen randomly.

We don't even know if we sprung up randomly or not. You have a creation story that you believe is the answer but it isn't because it can't be proven.

There's no debate here. I can show you how intelligence does the same thing. I can show you how intelligence has build civilizations encoding and decoding the sequence of storage mediums. You don't have a clue as to how this can occur naturally or with anything random.

The universe isn't a civilization. It is a bunch of matter just interacting and your OP is about the universe.

Then we have the god part, which is really the part I have been talking about, when you say it is a specific god and nobody can prove that being exists.

a reply to: daskakik

What are you talking about? You said:

No, but that doesn't mean it isn't possible and I am certainly not going to ask you to prove it isn't because you can't prove a negative. We are stuck on "we don't know".

How are we stuck on we don't know? You don't know. It's funny how you guys can't be satisfied with saying what you don't know. So nobody can know until you are ready to use common sense? That's absurd! What you said next would make Ted Kaczynski proud:

So, in a nutshell, intelligence creates intelligence doesn't prove intelligence can't happen randomly.

Sure it does. It's evidence of intelligent design unless you can provide how it's plausible for anything random or natural to encode it's sequence with information and build modular machinery to decode that information.

Show how this can randomly happen. Show me how it's even plausible. You said:

The universe isn't a civilization. It is a bunch of matter just interacting and your OP is about the universe.

If the universe is about a bunch of matter interacting, then tell me how is it plausible for a bunch of matter interacting to become aware of itself. How did a bunch of matter interacting encode it's sequence with information and build modular machinery to decode this sequence?

You can't even give me a plausible scenario. You said:

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

You keep making these statements that make no sense. You say because the universe is large what may seem illogical can be logical but that's a meaningless statement without an example of how this is the case.

a reply to: daskakik

Actually, unless you can provide an example it's highly improbable. It's easy to provide examples of encoding in nature that follows rules and laws suggesting design. If you can't provide a single example of complex systems forming without intelligent design then you have no basis for arguing against it.

originally posted by: neoholographic
What are you talking about?

That seems to be the theme.

How are we stuck on we don't know?

You don't know and can't prove if life/intelligence can spring up randomly or not.

It's evidence of intelligent design unless you can provide how it's plausible for anything random or natural to encode it's sequence with information and build modular machinery to decode that information.

It can be evidence of intelligent design but it doesn't exclude the possibility that it could have sprung up randomly.

Just because you can't believe it doesn't mean it isn't possible.

If the universe is about a bunch of matter interacting, then tell me how is it plausible for a bunch of matter interacting to become aware of itself. How did a bunch of matter interacting encode it's sequence with information and build modular machinery to decode this sequence?

What part of I don't know isn't getting through?

You keep making these statements that make no sense. You say because the universe is large what may seem illogical can be logical but that's a meaningless statement without an example of how this is the case.

I'm sorry, I don't have an answer for you. All I am doing is pointing out that in your rush for an answer you put your faith in a story that can't be proven about a being that more than likely doesn't exist.

And, it seems to me, that is because you are not able to wrap your head around the possibility that they were not needed for this to happen.

The go to question, from the atheist side, is who made god and the stock answer is they always were. If I asked you how that could be you would be giving me the same type of meaningless answers with no examples. What is the difference?

All I can take away from that is that neither of us really knows.

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: daskakik

Actually, unless you can provide an example it's highly improbable. It's easy to provide examples of encoding in nature that follows rules and laws suggesting design. If you can't provide a single example of complex systems forming without intelligent design then you have no basis for arguing against it.

Exactly!

It's simple, how can a storage medium encode itself with information and build modular machinary to decode that sequence? That's like a snowflake being encoded with information on how to build a snowman.

He can't even provide a plausible scenario on how matter just interacting became aware of itself!

a reply to: neoholographic

Of course he can't, it's impossible.

originally posted by: Grenade
Actually, unless you can provide an example it's highly improbable.

I don't think reality requires me to give an example to be what it is.

Besides what example can I give? If I say anything the answer is god did that. I mean that is the premise of the thread.

a reply to: daskakik

You said:

And, it seems to me, that is because you are not able to wrap your head around the possibility that they were not needed for this to happen.

Again, this goes back to you not understanding about probability and possibility.

If it's possible for this to happen without intelligence, you have to show how it's plausible. I can say hitting the Mega Millions is possible even with odds of 1 in 3,250,000 because limiting the numbers that can be played to 1-70 makes it plausible.

You can't even provide a plausible scenario LOL!

No, I can't wrap my head around the possibility because it isn't plausible.

originally posted by: neoholographic
If it's possible for this to happen without intelligence, you have to show how it's plausible.

No, you are wrong, I don't have to show how it is plausible for it to have actually happened.

I might have to show that to convince you but that is neither here nor there.

a reply to: daskakik

Intelligent design and religious belief aren't the same thing.

For all i know God could be a kid from a higher dimension switching on his quantum playstation. Would explain the big bang.

I don't know who designed the universe nor who set energy into motion, only that these two things are self evidently true.

Using your logic the universe could be a unicorn fart, i need no evidence or examples of how unicorn farts create matter, i can just speculate wildly and claim it's plausible.

originally posted by: Grenade
Using your logic the universe could be a unicorn fart, i need no evidence or examples of how unicorn farts create matter, i can just speculate wildly and claim it's plausible.

Exactly, just like saying a being that always was and always will be did it. Which, ironically, is what the OP posits.

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: Grenade
Using your logic the universe could be a unicorn fart, i need no evidence or examples of how unicorn farts create matter, i can just speculate wildly and claim it's plausible.

Exactly, just like saying a being that always was and always will be did it. Which, ironically, is what the OP posits.

What he said just went over your head like everything else.

He's saying that if you don't show something is plausible then you can claim anything is possible. You said:

So, in a nutshell, intelligence creates intelligence doesn't prove intelligence can't happen randomly.

Why should anyone have to prove intelligence can't happen randomly when you don't have a shred of evidence that it's plausible?

I can say, it's possible that pink elephants will fly you to the moon. You're making these vacuous statements without any plausible scenario to support anything you're saying. You said:

And, it seems to me, that is because you are not able to wrap your head around the possibility that they were not needed for this to happen.

Why should I wrap my head around something that you can't even show how it's plausible.

originally posted by: neoholographic
What he said just went over your head like everything else.

Not really. He kinda made my actual point.

Context:

For all i know God could be a kid from a higher dimension switching on his quantum playstation.

Notice the "for all I know"? That means we don't know.

The farty unicorn is mythical, just like your god.

So, we have you saying we need intelligence to create intelligence but you can't prove it exists. It might as well be a unicorn fart or a pink elephant getting ready to fly to the moon.

You wanted an example of intelligence coming from unintelligence? Life on earth.

You lose all your points if you say god to refute, because you can't prove they exist.

a reply to: daskakik

Sadly, you don't understand what he was saying. He's saying "For all I know" which is saying whether it's God or some kid in a higher dimension, it's intelligence.

The unicorn part was about what's plausible. He said:

Using your logic the universe could be a unicorn fart, i need no evidence or examples of how unicorn farts create matter, i can just speculate wildly and claim it's plausible.

Again:

i can just speculate wildly and claim it's plausible.

This is exactly what you're doing. TYour saying intelligence can come from non intelligence but how is that plausible? How can randomness encode the sequence of a storage medium with information. How is it plausible? You live in a fantasy world where particles interacting become aware of themselves without any plausible explanation.

originally posted by: neoholographic
Sadly, you don't understand what he was saying. He's saying "For all I know" which is saying whether it's God or some kid in a higher dimension, it's intelligence.

Some kid isn't your god though.

Your saying intelligence can come from non intelligence but how is that plausible? How can randomness encode the sequence of a storage medium with information. How is it plausible? You live in a fantasy world where particles interacting become aware of themselves without any plausible explanation.

Says the person who can entertain the idea of a being that always was and always will be.

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: neoholographic

Of course he can't, it's impossible.

Exactly, he's living in La La Land where you don't need a plausible explanation and anything is possible.