Intelligent first cause: why it must exist

page: 9
18
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 25 2013 @ 05:47 PM
link   
reply to post by jiggerj
 


Or do I?




posted on May, 25 2013 @ 05:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by HarryTZ

Originally posted by MichaelPMaccabee

Yes. Specific observable phenomena would be the very FIRST place to start. Let me look at the glass of whisky sitting next to me on my desk.

How does it's existence point to your Intelligent First Cause?


The fundamental mathematics (which must exist for any principle or property to exist in relation to another) that preceded the existence of the subatomic particles, which ultimately make up the glass and the whiskey.
edit on 24-5-2013 by HarryTZ because: (no reason given)


Nothing you have stated points to Intelligent First Cause. Had the fundamental mathematics been different, something ELSE would be in my glass, not whisky.

How do you go about proving that an intelligence created the universe? Pointing out the limited order in the chaos that we have been able to deduce with our limited sensory organs and primitive logical understand through mathematics and science isn't evidence of a God.

Science continues to push God out of the Universe by showing humanity were he -isn't-. All 'God' would have to do is show us where he -is-.

That isn't happening, not in this thread.



posted on May, 25 2013 @ 05:59 PM
link   
reply to post by MichaelPMaccabee
 


You appear not to understand what I was saying. All phenomena in the universe, no matter how simple, are based on infinitely complex fundamental mathematics which precede them. If this was not so, nothing could exist. These mathematics aren't 'just there' for no reason. They were caused. This really shouldn't be that difficult a concept to grasp.

Again, I say they are infinitely complex because they are literally based on nothing. The math wasn't just floating there for God to make something out of. Each infinitesimal aspect had to be defined individually, from absolute scratch.

Where has science shown where God 'isn't'? The way I see it, science is God's most obvious form.
edit on 25-5-2013 by HarryTZ because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 25 2013 @ 06:38 PM
link   
I want to take you approach you point by point.


Originally posted by HarryTZ
reply to post by MichaelPMaccabee
 


You appear not to understand what I was saying. All phenomena in the universe, no matter how simple, are based on infinitely complex fundamental mathematics which precede them. If this was not so, nothing could exist.


All phenomena in this universe play by the rules of this universe. I agree, but if these rules were different, we would be playing by -different- rules. This is not evidence of an Intelligent Design. This is evidence of the potential of this specific set of rules being in place.

Everything that can happen within this universe can happen within this universe, and nothing that cannot happen within this universe can happen within this universe.


These mathematics aren't 'just there' for no reason. They were caused. This really shouldn't be that difficult a concept to grasp.


Reason and causality are too separate things entirely. Reason denotes purpose. What is the purpose of the Universe?


Again, I say they are infinitely complex because they are literally based on nothing. The math wasn't just floating there for God to make something out of. Each infinitesimal aspect had to be defined individually, from absolute scratch.


Yeah, and you don't need to believe in God to understand that idea.

"If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe." - Carl Sagan.

What you are saying is that an intelligence created everything. You say this because you can't fathom that it may happened for no reason, no purpose.


Where has science shown where God 'isn't'? The way I see it, science is God's most obvious form.


If Science is God's most obvious form, then why isn't it obvious for all to see God in the form?



posted on May, 25 2013 @ 06:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by NorEaster
 

...that infinity does not exist, that the physical world is finite, that God doesn't exist, what?
Maybe even to prove that the theory of evolution is even finite and evolution mysteriously stops when man becomes a greedy fat pig?
edit on 25-5-2013 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)


Oh sure....all of that.

Actually, it's just one of a series that's being constructed to address a variety of existential staples. It's part of a contractual agreement. By the way, the quantum of physical existence and the quantization of action (absolutely proven to be true, by the way) completely debunked the validity of the concept of physical infinity, and did so by proving infinite delineation to be an inaccurate assumption. And that was enough to completely kill off the entire concept of physical infinity, since infinity - by its very definition - isn't infinite if it's limited in any sense whatsoever.

I also put up a video that explains why time moves in only one direction and another one that explains why time exists, why gravity exists and why people do all the effed up stuff they do - including all that evil stuff.

I have a ball tossing those little clips together, and when I don't feel like debating I can link to one of them if it covers the topic. What's not to like about that?
edit on 5/25/2013 by NorEaster because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 25 2013 @ 07:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by HarryTZ
reply to post by MichaelPMaccabee
 


You appear not to understand what I was saying. All phenomena in the universe, no matter how simple, are based on infinitely complex fundamental mathematics which precede them. If this was not so, nothing could exist. These mathematics aren't 'just there' for no reason. They were caused. This really shouldn't be that difficult a concept to grasp.

Again, I say they are infinitely complex because they are literally based on nothing. The math wasn't just floating there for God to make something out of. Each infinitesimal aspect had to be defined individually, from absolute scratch.

Where has science shown where God 'isn't'? The way I see it, science is God's most obvious form.
edit on 25-5-2013 by HarryTZ because: (no reason given)


I couldn't agree with you more!



posted on May, 25 2013 @ 07:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus

Originally posted by HarryTZ
reply to post by MichaelPMaccabee
 


You appear not to understand what I was saying. All phenomena in the universe, no matter how simple, are based on infinitely complex fundamental mathematics which precede them. If this was not so, nothing could exist. These mathematics aren't 'just there' for no reason. They were caused. This really shouldn't be that difficult a concept to grasp.

Again, I say they are infinitely complex because they are literally based on nothing. The math wasn't just floating there for God to make something out of. Each infinitesimal aspect had to be defined individually, from absolute scratch.

Where has science shown where God 'isn't'? The way I see it, science is God's most obvious form.
edit on 25-5-2013 by HarryTZ because: (no reason given)


I couldn't agree with you more!


Actually, all it takes is contextual ramification, residual information to establish that contextual ramification as ongoing and progressively developing historical precedence, and the primordial imperative that requires all that physically exists to inherently pursue that existence as survival, and all the math (Set Logic) in all of reality simply assembles and lays down the laws of nature.

It's not even rocket science. Well...it is, since rocket science is based on this as well....as is literally everything else.

Not God, though. God is a surrender to ignorance, and nothing more than that.



posted on May, 25 2013 @ 07:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by NorEaster
I have a ball tossing those little clips together, and when I don't feel like debating I can link to one of them if it covers the topic. What's not to like about that?
edit on 5/25/2013 by NorEaster because: (no reason given)


It comes across kinda pretentious in my opinion. Plus it's makes the point which you are trying to put forth harder to understand and take too long. I'm even in agreement with you on the whole "No physical Infinity" idea and still found it to be a less than ideal way of presenting the concept. I think just straight forward dialog would have been better. Just my opinion anyway...

Anyway, on the other topics you mentioned. The "why time moves in only one direction and another one that explains why time exists, why gravity exists and why people do all the effed up stuff they do". Do you have links to those??? Are they only Youtube Vids. or do you have something more direct that you've written or posted somewhere that I might read???



posted on May, 25 2013 @ 07:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by NorEaster

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by NorEaster
 

...that infinity does not exist, that the physical world is finite, that God doesn't exist, what?
Maybe even to prove that the theory of evolution is even finite and evolution mysteriously stops when man becomes a greedy fat pig?
edit on 25-5-2013 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)


Oh sure....all of that.

Actually, it's just one of a series that's being constructed to address a variety of existential staples. It's part of a contractual agreement. By the way, the quantum of physical existence and the quantization of action (absolutely proven to be true, by the way) completely debunked the validity of the concept of physical infinity, and did so by proving infinite delineation to be an inaccurate assumption. And that was enough to completely kill off the entire concept of physical infinity, since infinity - by its very definition - isn't infinite if it's limited in any sense whatsoever.

I also put up a video that explains why time moves in only one direction and another one that explains why time exists, why gravity exists and why people do all the effed up stuff they do - including all that evil stuff.

I have a ball tossing those little clips together, and when I don't feel like debating I can link to one of them if it covers the topic. What's not to like about that?
edit on 5/25/2013 by NorEaster because: (no reason given)


I have news for you. Your video doesn't prove anything. It has slides of the Mayan 2012 thing and some Christians saying it's the end of the world. All that says is that the Mayans had a calendar that ended at Dec 22, 2012. You think the world is finite and you think Christians are stupid for thinking the world may come to an end. Your theory is no better I have news for you. I would have at least expected some mathematical formulas for your proof, not some nasty jab at Christians. But what's new with liberals? After all, wasn't it liberal Hollywood which cashed in on the Mayan craze with the movie 2012 where the Elites hand picked all the planned genetic survivors of the holocaust and decided for themselves who would get the free ride to whatever the end of the world provided?
all the Mayan calendar shows is that there is an end to a cycle. What you say is the end of a finite physical Universe is to Hindus and mayans merely the end of an old cycle and beginning of a new. Natural things do reflect the bigger cosmos. The inbreath gives way to the outbreath, then the outbreath is followed by another inbreath, the forever cosmic cycles.


Praakritik Pralaya, which is of 311,040,000,000,000 solar years duration, occurs after the completion of life of Brahma (i.e. 100 Brahma years = 311 trillion and 40 billion earth years = one day of Vishnu = 1 Parama). After the completion of one Brahma life cycle, the complete dissolution of all the entities (i.e. the Pancha Mahabhutha or Universe) takes place in the eternity (God). Praakritik Pralaya is the time for which Vishnu sleeps. The next morning, he again gives birth to a new Lord Brahma and asks him to create new worldly entities. Noticeably, Praakritik Pralaya and the Life of Brahma are of equal duration.


en.wikipedia.org...

So perhaps this cosmology can explain the decay rate of matter in the larger context of things. But the thing is that proving that the physical Universe is finite does not prove that God does not exist and that there is not in fact infinity outside the realm of physical universes.

So if the universe is finite, what is beyond the limit of it? Where does it end? Is there just nothing beyond it? Is the nothing infinite or finite?
edit on 25-5-2013 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 25 2013 @ 07:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by mOjOm

Originally posted by NorEaster
I have a ball tossing those little clips together, and when I don't feel like debating I can link to one of them if it covers the topic. What's not to like about that?
edit on 5/25/2013 by NorEaster because: (no reason given)


It comes across kinda pretentious in my opinion. Plus it's makes the point which you are trying to put forth harder to understand and take too long. I'm even in agreement with you on the whole "No physical Infinity" idea and still found it to be a less than ideal way of presenting the concept. I think just straight forward dialog would have been better. Just my opinion anyway...


You need to sit with the marketing dept of the publishing house, then. I can't tell them a damn thing.



Anyway, on the other topics you mentioned. The "why time moves in only one direction and another one that explains why time exists, why gravity exists and why people do all the effed up stuff they do". Do you have links to those??? Are they only Youtube Vids. or do you have something more direct that you've written or posted somewhere that I might read???


You know how Youtube works. Just hit the channel link directly under the video itself. They're listed.



posted on May, 25 2013 @ 07:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by MichaelPMaccabee

All phenomena in this universe play by the rules of this universe. I agree, but if these rules were different, we would be playing by -different- rules. This is not evidence of an Intelligent Design. This is evidence of the potential of this specific set of rules being in place.

Everything that can happen within this universe can happen within this universe, and nothing that cannot happen within this universe can happen within this universe.



What's your point? That doesn't disprove my point at all. It just shows you can describe it (somewhat) in a different way.



Reason and causality are too separate things entirely. Reason denotes purpose. What is the purpose of the Universe?


"One day, Shiva had nothing to do and he was playing marbles – nobody else, no company. One marble fell this way and it became planet Earth. Another one shot up and it became the Sun; I can go on like this. Now you won’t believe this ridiculous story. But if I make the story more elaborate ... you would believe it." -Sadhguru



Yeah, and you don't need to believe in God to understand that idea.

"If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe." - Carl Sagan.

What you are saying is that an intelligence created everything. You say this because you can't fathom that it may happened for no reason, no purpose.


Exactly. Saying that creation has a purpose is like saying that God has a purpose. It makes absolutely no sense at all.



If Science is God's most obvious form, then why isn't it obvious for all to see God in the form?


Ignorance, stupidity, disbelief... there could be a thousand different reasons.



posted on May, 25 2013 @ 07:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus

I have news for you. Your video doesn't prove anything. It has slides of the Mayan 2012 thing and some Christians saying it's the end of the world. All that says is that the Mayans had a calendar that ended at Dec 22, 2012. You think the world is finite and you think Christians are stupid for thinking the world may come to an end. Your theory is no better I have news for you. I would have at least expected some mathematical formulas for your proof, not some nasty jab at Christians. But what's new with liberals? After all, wasn't it liberal Hollywood which cashed in on the Mayan craze with the movie 2012 where the Elites hand picked all the planned genetic survivors of the holocaust and decided for themselves who would get the free ride to whatever the end of the world provided?
all the Mayan calendar shows is that there is an end to a cycle. What you say is the end of a finite physical Universe is to Hindus and mayans merely the end of an old cycle and beginning of a new. Natural things do reflect the bigger cosmos. The inbreath gives way to the outbreath, then the outbreath is followed by another inbreath, the forever cosmic cycles.


Praakritik Pralaya, which is of 311,040,000,000,000 solar years duration, occurs after the completion of life of Brahma (i.e. 100 Brahma years = 311 trillion and 40 billion earth years = one day of Vishnu = 1 Parama). After the completion of one Brahma life cycle, the complete dissolution of all the entities (i.e. the Pancha Mahabhutha or Universe) takes place in the eternity (God). Praakritik Pralaya is the time for which Vishnu sleeps. The next morning, he again gives birth to a new Lord Brahma and asks him to create new worldly entities. Noticeably, Praakritik Pralaya and the Life of Brahma are of equal duration.


en.wikipedia.org...

So perhaps this cosmology can explain the decay rate of matter in the larger context of things.


You obviously didn't watch past the 7 minute mark. Either that or you're not very bright.

Frankly, I don't care which of those two are why you didn't even notice the whole "debunking Infinity" part of the video.

You can believe whatever you want. No one cares. I sure as hell don't. My little fun concerning the 2012 foolishness was just that - a little fun. I was actually hoping that the end-of-the-world thing would come through for us. Oh well. Maybe you guys will find another end-of-days timetable, and maybe this one will work out for you. I'll be pulling for you if you do. Hell, this world's long past its due date.



posted on May, 25 2013 @ 07:50 PM
link   
reply to post by NorEaster
 


Anyway, it looks like the jury is not all out yet

phys.org...



posted on May, 25 2013 @ 07:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by NorEaster
Frankly, I don't care which of those two are why you didn't even notice the whole "debunking Infinity" part of the video.

If 'debunking' to you is repeating the same thing over and over and claiming how another man's research confirms your theory, without any actual substance or evidence beyond that, than yes, you successfully debunked infinity.



posted on May, 25 2013 @ 07:56 PM
link   
reply to post by HarryTZ
 




Something of literally infinite complexity can occur by accident? Please, do explain how.


The scientific literature exists and you do not need me to explain the Big Bang. What I find idiotic here is that the only reason this argument exists is that people are to arrogant to conceive of the fact that a conscience entity was not in any way involved in the creation of the universe.



The contention that a creator doesn't exist is not supported by any fact, either. The difference between my contention, and that of an atheist, is that I can explain how and why the universe exists. An atheist cannot.


The idea that no creator exists is supported by the absence of fact. The absence of fact that proves a creator exists. Also, you are quite arrogant insofar that you think you explain anything. You haven't explained a single thing, you have essentially just made up an unsubstantiated story.




Also, and I may be wrong, but it seems that you are claiming that God is only responsible for part of the universe, and not all of it. Like I said, I may be wrong, but that is what it sounds like you are implying.


No, you are wrong. To me, God doesn't exist. Period.




You, and you alone, are responsible for your life.


This statement is fundamentally wrong, like everything else you have written. Random strangers are also responsible for your life, as are your parents, friends and family.

When a random stranger kidnaps, rapes and murders a woman, he is responsible for her life. She has done nothing to deserve it, nor has she asked for it, the occurrence of said event is beyond her power. Where is Gods intervention in this case?



While there may seem to be things that are out of your control (disease, for instance), you are always responsible for the way you perceive every event.


The occurrence of natural disasters is beyond your control, When a Tsunami drops a car on your body, there is nothing you can do. However, according to you, if you perceive this differently, then it is within your control. That is why your thread is stupid. A bunch of philosophical garbage not supported by a single fact.



posted on May, 25 2013 @ 08:04 PM
link   
reply to post by SpeachM1litant
 


Individually, we are each responsible for the consciousness that makes rape even possible. This is due to the fact that no one cares enough to do anything about it. Therefore, yes, rape is also created by you.

If you want to see a tsunami dropping a car on your body and ending your current life as a disaster, than that is entirely your choice. To me it is just an infinitesimally small moment compared to the endless existence that we each have as the entirety of God.

And while I may not be able to prove any of my claims with factual evidence, I can make it quite obvious with simple logical deduction.



posted on May, 25 2013 @ 08:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by NorEaster
 


Anyway, it looks like the jury is not all out yet

phys.org...



The basic idea of the infinite repetition of histories in space is that, if you take yourself right now and change one thing (say make your red shirt a blue one), then there's another you somewhere who is exactly the same except for that one difference. Change your shirt to purple, and that's a third you. Change the drink in your hand from soda to tea, and there's another one. Plus, there are copies of all of these universes – an infinite number of copies. In their paper, Soler Gil and Alfonseca quote the popular science book "The Music of the Big Bang, The Cosmic Microwave Background, and the New Cosmology" by Amedeo Balbi: "In an infinite universe, every possible event does happen. Not just that: it happens an infinite number of times."


That idiocy is a direct excerpt from your linked reference. What amazes me is that the author limited the "changes" that launch entire universes to things like shirt color choices and what kind of beverage a person might choose. As if such a reality structure based on launching entire universes as a result of choices made and not made could be limited to specific choices over other specific choices (such as whether to scratch with your index or middle finger, or to step off the bus with your left foot or right foot). Then, of course, no one's bothering to factor out the progressing ramification suite that winds out as soon as the resulting universes occupants make their choices and launch their own infinite universes as a result - and then on and on and on.

I wouldn't ever put my name on such childishness. I don't know what these guys are thinking. I really don't.



posted on May, 25 2013 @ 08:06 PM
link   
reply to post by NorEaster
 


Wait? You have a video depicting man evolving into a pig and you are telling me I'm not too bright? oh ok so a guy is holding a string, ok so that represents the string theory. So what you have is a video that has pics that you feel describe scientific theory. So that's all very nice. I have yet to see scientific theory proving man can evolve from an ape to a man to a pig. If you feel that imagery proves that man will not evolve further, then fine you disprove the theory of evolution, that is unless evolution happens for a while then stops. That was what you were trying to prove I presume. But again, that can happen according to Hindu cosmology. Evolution happens then the great inbreath happens. And the great inbreath and outbreath of Brahman happens continually.
So everything just stops and then what? Nothing forever? Isn't forever nothing also infinity? So it can't be forever nothing forever right?
You also don't agree with the fractal theory?



posted on May, 25 2013 @ 08:10 PM
link   
reply to post by NorEaster
 


Hey I just said the jury is not out yet. I do not claim to be a scientist. But you still have not given me any proof of anything you said. I'm still waiting. All I hear from you is arrogant lecturing and dismissing. The same method you use in other threads where liberal ideas abound. All I hear is you arrogantly telling me that if I don't find your video too illuminating I must not be bright.
By the way, I do not care for hip hop.
If you are a scientist, then by all means give me something that doesn't involve an ignorant clip of smacking down Christians.
edit on 25-5-2013 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 25 2013 @ 08:13 PM
link   
Something else which completely debunks your debunking of infinity is Zeno's Paradox, which describes how the distance between one point and another point can be divided into an infinite number of digressing halfway points. Here is an excerpt from the Wikipedia page:


Suppose Homer wants to catch a stationary bus. Before he can get there, he must get halfway there. Before he can get halfway there, he must get a quarter of the way there. Before traveling a quarter, he must travel one-eighth; before an eighth, one-sixteenth; and so on.



new topics
top topics
 
18
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join