The Drake Equation Fallacy

originally posted by: Barcs
a reply to: cooperton

The question you should be asking is:

Which is more likely?

1. A super complex intelligent conscious being that just happens to exist, with no cause, from nothing, it's just there by default (wow so lucky)

2. The universe came from something else not as complex.

I go with #2.

God is Unbegotten meaning It has never been generated, is self-existent, and eternal.

That is how the Intelligent Force is described. It never had to come to be, because it always existed. So it is not "from nothing". You are thinking from a temporal perspective, but God inherently is above the limitations of time. This is the reason for the term "Alpha-Omega".

There are answers to the questions in your mind you just have to stop being so stubbornly opposed to the truth.

a reply to: Barcs

I found this a good summary of his life work:

I don’t know what he was if not a scientist, he certainly contributed to science.

Note to self: refer to all scientific contributions before 17th century as natural philosophy and always differentiate between them based on the method.


“Claudius Ptolemy



85?-165?
We know very little of Ptolemy's life. His name, Claudius Ptolemy, is of course a mixture of the Greek Egyptian "Ptolemy" and the Roman "Claudius". This would indicate that he was descended from a Greek family living in Egypt and that he was a citizen of Rome.

Ptolemy definitely made astronomical observations from Alexandria in Egypt during the years from 127 to 141. We suspect his teacher was Theon of Smyrna, who was both an observer and a mathematician who had written on astronomical topics such as conjunctions, eclipses, occultations and transits.

The earliest, and perhaps most important of Ptolemy's work that has survived is the Almagest, a treatise in 13 books. It gives in detail the mathematical theory of the motions of the Sun, Moon, and planets. Ptolemy made his most original contribution by presenting details for the motions of each of the planets. His theories were not superseded until a century after Copernicus presented his heliocentric theory in 1543.

Ptolemy first of all justifies his description of the universe based on the earth-centered system described by Aristotle. It is a view of the world based on a fixed earth around which the sphere of the fixed stars rotates every day, this carrying with it the spheres of the sun, moon, and planets. Ptolemy used geometric models to predict the positions of the sun, moon, and planets, using combinations of circular motion known as epicycles. Having set up this model, Ptolemy then goes on to describe the mathematics which he needs in the rest of the work. In particular he introduces trigonometrical methods based on the chord function.

Ptolemy devised new geometrical proofs and theorems. He obtained, using chords of a circle and an inscribed 360-gon, the approximation π = 3 + 17/120 = 3.14166. He used formulas for the chord function which are analogous to our formulas for sin(a+b), sin(a-b) and sin(a/2) to create a table of the chord function at intervals of 1/2 a degree. This occupies the first 2 of the 13 books.

Based on his observations of solstices and equinoxes, Ptolemy then found the lengths of the seasons and, based on these, he proposed a simple model for the sun which was a circular motion of uniform angular velocity, but the earth was not at the centre of the circle but at a distance called the eccentricity from this centre. This theory of the sun forms the subject of Book 3.

In Books 4 through 6, Ptolemy gives his theory of the moon. In Book 4 Ptolemy gives Hipparchus's epicycle model for the motion of the moon, but he notes that there are small discrepancies between the model and the observed parameters. In Book 5 he gives a model which improves markedly on the one proposed by Hipparchus. In book 6 he puts forth a theory of eclipses.

The next 2 books deal with the fixed stars, justifying his belief that the fixed stars always maintain the same positions relative to each other. He also discusses precession, and gives a star catalogue containing over 1000 stars.

The final 5 books of the Almagest discuss planetary theory. This is Ptolemy's greatest achievement in terms of an original contribution. Ptolemy combined the epicycle and eccentric methods to give his model for the motions of the planets. This theory is a masterpiece. He created a sophisticated mathematical model to fit observational data, which before Ptolemy's time was scarce, and the model he produced, although complicated, represents the motions of the planets fairly well.

Ptolemy published a major work Geography, written in 8 books, which attempts to map the known world giving coordinates of the major places in terms of latitude and longitude. It is not surprising that the maps given by Ptolemy were quite inaccurate. Another work on optics is in 5 books. In it Ptolemy studies color, reflection, refraction, and mirrors of various shapes. Ptolemy also wrote a popular account of his results for those knowing less mathematics, a book on astrology, a book on the construction of sundials, and a book about the stereographic projection of the celestial sphere onto a plane.

Because of systematic errors in his works, Ptolemy is accused by some of just correcting Hipparchus' data for precession. Indeed there is some evidence that Ptolemy is guilty of stealing and fabricating data. But he is still one of the most influential Greek astronomers and geographers of his time.“

www2.stetson.edu...

originally posted by: cooperton
God is Unbegotten meaning It has never been generated, is self-existent, and eternal.

Another empty claim and more dishonest BS. Again, you claim god just exists, which means intelligence does not necessarily have to come from intelligence. You've been completely debunked into oblivion here, but you are loyal to a lie and keep repeating the same fallacies. Why?

a reply to: toktaylor

This would be true if we had any ability to measure or explain consciousness and self awareness. Right now they are outside the realm of science and will most likely remain so. Since they are the only real tools of perception and observation until we understand the fundamental tool of measurement I would suggest our results could be way off target.

I have seen scientific ways of trying to understand these mysteries such as the work of Sir Roger Penrose and his books.

originally posted by: Barcs
Again, you claim god just exists, which means intelligence does not necessarily have to come from intelligence.

God never "had to come from". At all. God is the Intelligence from which all intelligible things come. Since God never had to come to be, God does not apply to the question below regarding the coming to be of intelligible things:

Do you think it is more likely that intelligible things come to be from something intelligent or unintelligent? Just answer the question.

a reply to: cooperton
If something must always exist then it must be the thing that exist. We have complete evidence the universe exist....no such evidence for a God

originally posted by: toktaylor
We have complete evidence the universe exist....no such evidence for a God

The universe is a prime example of the mathematically ordered universe implemented by an Intelligent Force. All things behave according to mathematical law, and are in a perfect equilibrium for us to persistently have life here on this planet. All ordered systems that act according to intelligible mathematical laws require an Intelligent Force to implement it. This is evidence of God - the Intelligent Creator.

God came manifest fully as a human to teach us all about the best way to be and then he conquered death to validate everything he was saying. What more would you want as evidence?

a reply to: cooperton
Randomness is an unavoidable notion when discussing the Universe. Nothing is ordered which is why its unique. We need the sun to survive yet we can also be exposed to its radiation which causes skin cancer. Life, but not as we know it, may very well exist on other planets, not depending on oxygen or carbon dioxide. Life on our planet took about one billion years to form, we are only experiencing a minute percentage of the existence of the universe. It is not about us....we have only evolve to be aware and to study our surroundings. Everywhere in nature, life is struggling for survival, a lion or any wild animals sees us as food nothing special.

a reply to: cooperton

God is just a comforting story we tell ourselves because the Universe IS indifferent, uncaring, cold and pointless.

originally posted by: toktaylor
Nothing is ordered

All of chemistry and physics relies on the ordered nature of all things. All molecules act according to precise intermolecular forces that are mathematically predictable to a degree.

Life on our planet took about one billion years to form

What's the empirical evidence for this statement?

life is struggling for survival, a lion or any wild animals sees us as food nothing special.

God is just a comforting story we tell ourselves because the Universe IS indifferent, uncaring, cold and pointless.

Yet the universal conditions are set very well to allow us to have a human experience with a sense of self living in a world that constantly has a habitable zone for us to comfortably live in. Seems very purposeful to me.

Yes there are people who blindly believe in God. There are people who blindly believe in evolution too. I came to my beliefs through a rigorous pursuit of truth. I didn't put a job, or woman, or family or friends first, it was always the pursuit of understanding what is the meaning of life. The contrived nature of this system we live in is undeniable.

Evolution has tricked many people into a nihilist perspective. But even the ability to think life is meaning shows we have meaning. A rock has no choice whether or not it has meaning, yet the rocks have meaning because they uphold the organic matter living on top of it and supply the soil with minerals. It is a beautifully implemented system meant for the perpetuation of life.

a reply to: cooperton
We could go at this all day however I have learned that by definition, beliefs do not rely on facts, let alone evidence. As a result, a belief is unassailable. Your belief of the God and the bible is a theory of everything, but what can you USE this theory for? Can you build a Boeing 777 using it? What percent of all we have learnt since the Bronze Age has NOT been actively HINDERED by interpretations of religion, God and the bible?
I will now desist from wasting a lot of time arguing about something that appears to be a rational, logical conclusion. I have always scoffed at naysayers who try to debunk science whilst using technology like a computer and the internet. The good thing is that the Science and the Universe is not bothered by what you believe.

originally posted by: Barcs
a reply to: turbonium1

Please get some help before you shoot up a school. Asking for a friend.

That really addresses the issues, like usual.

I could expect no more, so thanks a lot!

a reply to: toktaylor

You could argue since the separation of science and theology our world is a more dangerous place than ever.

Technological advancements based on scientific research now leave us at the precipice of extinction.

Nuclear war being just one example.

When we are returned to shadows and dust all that will remain is God.

a reply to: toktaylor

I disagree, these are not the impressions i get when looking into the eyes of my children.

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: toktaylor

You could argue since the separation of science and theology our world is a more dangerous place than ever.

Technological advancements based on scientific research now leave us at the precipice of extinction.

Nuclear war being just one example.

When we are returned to shadows and dust all that will remain is God.

Dinosaurs didn't have a god. Neither will the bugs that outlive us.

a reply to: TzarChasm

Unless you believe in creation.

Nothing to say a creator is still involved with the universe any longer.

More like a design and initial spark then watch it unfold.

There are many interpretations of creation, not all of which abide by the rules of mainstream religions.

a reply to: cooperton

The only person putting atheism and nihilism in the same sentence is you. Just because the universe is utterly apathetic doesn't mean we have to be.

a reply to: TzarChasm

originally posted by: toktaylor
a reply to: cooperton

God is just a comforting story we tell ourselves because the Universe IS indifferent, uncaring, cold and pointless.

I'm not so sure, there certainly seems to be some level of correlation.

You could argue our continued existence is an example of apathy. You know the astronomical coincidences which have allowed us to exist on this planet.

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: TzarChasm

originally posted by: toktaylor
a reply to: cooperton

God is just a comforting story we tell ourselves because the Universe IS indifferent, uncaring, cold and pointless.

I'm not so sure, there certainly seems to be some level of correlation.

You could argue our continued existence is an example of apathy. You know the astronomical coincidences which have allowed us to exist on this planet.

You are drawing a correlation by plugging information into a "if/then" equation. No one said you should do that, you arrived at that conclusion on your own.

I know that sometimes it takes a few million years but all species die eventually. But then again, the point was never to live forever. Make the most of your scrap of existence because it's precious and fleeting.

originally posted by: TzarChasm
Make the most of your scrap of existence because it's precious and fleeting.

There is hope man. Let go of the anchors of the old belief system.

originally posted by: toktaylor
Your belief of the God and the bible is a theory of everything, but what can you USE this theory for? Can you build a Boeing 777 using it?

The Christian philsophy has developed a peace of mind that has regenerated the world around me. All relationships with, friends, family, strangers and a woman. All traces of social anxiety have dissipated because I put nothing on a pedestal except God and that archetypal love that I wish to share with everyone. Lol @ a Boeing Jet. That's Garbage compared to what I've found.

I have always scoffed at naysayers who try to debunk science whilst using technology like a computer and the internet. The good thing is that the Science and the Universe is not bothered by what you believe.

Where have I ever denied science? I have expressed the beauty of science, and the descriptions of meticulous physical and chemical laws that uphold the material world. Maybe it is you who is bigoted towards an entire group of people - assuming us all to be thoughtless automatons. There are many people rising who no longer blindly believe in the hope, but instead have seen it and experienced it through the unbiased pursuit of understanding. I hope everyone comes to this peace some day, and leaves the hopelessness of the dead philosophy forced on us during our up-bringing.