*sigh* Maragon, you have wayyyyyyy more patience than I do. In a reply to Maragon in which she was told that the burden of proof is on the one making the claim, this is what Vera has presented as evidence for a god: (this is a snippet, click the above link for her total nonsense)
God - Creation has a beginning. Life jump starts out of nowhere. 1 chance in 10^215 that all the parameters would come together that are necessary for life to exist on this planet. People testify of knowing God and being set free from sin. People have all the attributes one would expect from one created in the image of God. The Bible stands the test of time and the attack of skeptics over and over. The Bible contains facts only a Creator could know and has the same characteristics of the record of nature with many items that are testable. The conscience of man shows that man is given that ability to know right from wrong and testifies many times that heaviness of guilt. God - Truth.
See how easy that is?
Vera
Allow me:
Life jump starts out of nowhere. 1 chance in 10^215 that all the parameters would come together that are necessary for life to exist on this planet.
Translation: there was a high probability against life starting, yet it did, so this proves a god.
Wrong. Just because we do not know exactly how life started does not mean that postulating a deity is the best possible answer. This is worshiping the god of the gaps of knowledge.
People testify of knowing God and being set free from sin.
People also testify to having seen bigfoot, to having been abducted by aliens, and to a multitude of other things that are unproven. This is also an appeal to the masses fallacy.
People have all the attributes one would expect from one created in the image of God.
Really? Which attributes are those? What is the proof for this claim?
The Bible stands the test of time and the attack of skeptics over and over.
Really? What is this 'test of time' that the bible has withstood? Which specific attacks has it withstood by which skeptics?
The Bible contains facts only a Creator could know and has the same characteristics of the record of nature with many items that are testable
Really? What are the facts that only a creator could know? What characteristics of the record of nature ? Which items are testable and how, and where is the proof that these items have been tested and how do we know the tests were valid?
The conscience of man shows that man is given that ability to know right from wrong and testifies many times that heaviness of guilt
Really? What about psychopaths who seemingly have no conscience whatsoever? What does that 'testify' to and please provide evidence for your claims.
God - Truth.
Really? And the evidence for this is what?
See how easy that is?
No. I do see, however, that you offer as proof a lot of unsubstantiated claims. I also see that you wonder if sin causes changes in the human genome, and seem to think that this might be proven as science unfolds. I wonder how you think science could prove a religious construct such as sin. Also, you think that there are creatures that can walk through walls and other physical objects, so I wonder why I am surprised at any of the claims you make anymore.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
That "one chance in 10^215" point is pure nonsense, for three reasons:
ReplyDelete1.) We don't have all the information we need to determine that probability. This lack of knowledge is something the theists rag on us constantly about (because they have all the answers in that big magic book of theirs), but when it comes time for them to talk about the improbability, they magically pull that number out of their ass.
2.) Take a standard deck of cards, shuffle it, and fan them out, face up. Now, reflect upon the mind-boggling improbability of what you''re seeing. The probability that you are seeing the order of cards you are seeing is 54 factorial (if you kept the jokers in), which figures out to be roughly 2.31 x 10^71. Now, try the same with a Tarot deck (78 cards). 78 factorial = approx. 1.13 x 10^115. Now, try the same exercise with a Mah Jong set (144 tiles). 144 factorial = approx. 5.55 x 10^249. So, obviously, the game of Mah Jong is more complex than the universe, and simply could not exist. In fact, are you sure those tiles aren't figments of your imagination?
3.) The reason things are as they are (conducive to our particular form of life) is quite simply because if things were not conducive to our particular form of life, we would not be here to comment upon it. One need look no further than that to understand why the "parameters" are so "perfect".
Tripmaster,
ReplyDeleteThanks for tackling the probability portion of Vera's post. Theists drive me crazy with this sleight of hand. Creationists do the same with DNA.
It's also easy to point out that we have never found anywhere else in the universe that has life, despite having observed vast parts of it. Even on Earth, there are only so many places that we can live heathily without technology. So the idea that the universe is made for us is rubbish. Life is improbable, and life is rare. That fits.
Another thing Vera said...
ReplyDelete"Nobody has ever testified that they have encountered a fairy other than a grouping of stories known to be fiction by the author."
How can that be true, people claim to see crazy shit all the time and how can you prove a negative? How could she possibly prove no one has said they saw something? Even if no one confessed to seeing some strange entity that doesn't mean no one ever saw it.
I have a reply awaiting Ray's moderation that deals with the first half of her post where she disproves fairies, Santa Claus, and goblins.
ReplyDeleteI basically used fundy logic to rationalize her arguments away, like they do to similar arguments against the existence of God. I used the old "you'd have to have absolute knowledge to know that no one has seen a fairy" one on her.
Should be fun to see her reply.
Vera replies to me, but you'll notice I won't reply to Vera much.
ReplyDeleteI spent several days on her when I first showed up at Ray's - didn't take me overly long to realize that she is incapable of rational thought.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletePeople have all the attributes one would expect from one created in the image of God.
ReplyDeleteTen toes? An inclination toward racial bigotry? Jealousy? An obsession with lust? A prediliction for violence? Two ears?
Religous people created the myth of god in their own image, investing him with human traits, and then they flip it around and say, "Look at us! We're made in God's image!"
Their inability to fathom the idea that their deity could be a cultural myth makes it impossible for them to really evaluate and discuss the evidence.
People have all the attributes one would expect from one created in the image of God.
ReplyDeleteTen toes? An inclination toward racial bigotry? Jealousy? An obsession with lust? A prediliction for violence? Two ears?
Religous people created the myth of god in their own image, investing him with human traits, and then they flip it around and say, "Look at us! We're made in God's image!"
Their inability to fathom the idea that their deity could be a cultural myth makes it impossible for them to really evaluate and discuss the evidence.
Geoff, your post reminds me of a passage in one of my favorite books, God's Debris:
ReplyDelete“
If you were God,” he said, “what would you want?”
“I don’t know. I barely know what I want, much less what God wants.”
“Imagine that you are omnipotent. You can do anything, create anything, be anything. As soon as you decide you want something, it becomes reality.”
I waited, knowing there was more.
He continued. “Does it make sense to think of God as wanting anything? A God would have no emotions, no fears, no desires, no curiosity, no hunger. Those are human shortcomings, not something that would be found in an omnipotent God. What then would motivate God?”
“Maybe it’s the challenge, the intellectual stimulation of creating things,” I offered.
“Omnipotence means that nothing is a challenge. And what could stimulate the mind of someone who knows everything?”
“You make it sound almost boring to be God. But I guess you’ll say boredom is a human feeling.”
“Everything that motivates living creatures is based on some weakness or flaw. Hunger motivates animals. Lust
motivates animals. Fear and pain motivate animals. A God would have none of those impulses. Humans are driven by
all of our animal passions plus loftier-sounding things like
self-actualization and creativity and freedom and love. But God would care nothing for those things, or if he cared would already have them in unlimited quantities. None of
them would be motivating.”
A truly omnipotent, omniscient God would not resemble mortal man in the least, and to speak of man as being created "in God's image" is meaningless.
The problem with the 10^215 calculation is that it was done by mathematicians, not chemists. The failed to take into account any and all of the parameters at play in chemicals reactions. Think of doing chemistry and regarding HE and C as acting in the same manner. Of course they came of with a ridiculous figure.
ReplyDeleteWe can only calculate probabilities based on the data we have, and if we have reason to believe the data is sufficient to give us a useful number.
ReplyDeleteSince we don't have another universe to compare, for all we know the probability of life arising within this universe is 1.