Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
As an ignostic/igtheist, I find God to be no more than a square circle or married bachelor and therefore cannot exist! By analysis,not by dogma, we gnu atheists rightly dismiss God. And as that circle implies, the probability of His existence is aught! My form further notes that ignosticism pervades our naturalists arguments against Him. In total, as the the arguments for Him fail, He has no referents and again cannot exist. Why, the Lamberth atelic/teleonomic argument alone refutes all referents for His very existence. The real query is psychological, and here per Lamberth's reduced animism and Lamberth's non-genetic argument, theists themselves with their arguments from happiness-purpose and from angst boomerang on them, affirming our naturalistic arguments why they believe, and therefore they don't commit the genetic fallacy. See the thread why believe in God. We naturalists as one philosopher puts it, have fun in exposing the arguments for Him, and I add like educating others on how to have that more abundant life without Him, and its mind exercise!
You can believe in afterlife of some kind without basing on "ancient religion". Quite easily, in fact.
There is nothing that SAYS the multiverse is REAL. There is only theory. Yet you. Believe it.
Again, you claim the universe is full of mystery and surprising behaviors, yet refuse to consider outside what we know of it, which is les than 1%.
I personally don't necessarily "believe" in a multiverse. I think it's possible. One of the great unsolved problems in physics is reconciling the theory of relativity and quantum mechanics. Some theoretical physicists have developed mathematical models - called string theories - which attempt to do this. And these models predict the possibility of multiple dimensions and multiple universes. But there are lots of problems with these models as well.
Todate there is no empirical evidence that mulitiple dimensions or universes exist. But there are lots of Nobel Prizes in physics waiting to be awarded for those who can solve these mysteries. ;-)
Last edited by BigCityDreamer; 05-02-2012 at 09:22 AM..
With the laws of existence we have definte Anthropic Principles with show then definte purpose and design. Earths magnetic field, if it were much weaker, our planet would be devasted by Cosmic Radiation. Conversely, if it were much stronger, we would be devasted by severe electromagnetic storms. Again this is obvious deliberate design, which is a simple proof of God.
With the laws of existence we have definte Anthropic Principles with show then definte purpose and design. Earths magnetic field, if it were much weaker, our planet would be devasted by Cosmic Radiation. Conversely, if it were much stronger, we would be devasted by severe electromagnetic storms. Again this is obvious deliberate design, which is a simple proof of God.
With this type of percision one can scientifically deduce the existence of God, or one can fear the existence of a God, and give this uncanny percision over to random luck.
With this type of percision one can scientifically deduce the existence of God, or one can fear the existence of a God, and give this uncanny percision over to random luck.
What is the chain of logical inferences that get from geomagnetism to God?
What is the chain of logical inferences that get from geomagnetism to God?
Oh I wish you could see the glory of it; if only I could give you eyes to see the smooth transition from geomagnetism to God. The laws of existence are wide in variance, but Gods creation follows rules, rules that God made for us to figure out, and figure out his existence. Fundamentally mathmatical rules and none of these laws have been broken, and no new laws have been created by anyonelse.
With this type of percision one can scientifically deduce the existence of God, or one can fear the existence of a God, and give this uncanny percision over to random luck.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mensaguy
What is the chain of logical inferences that get from geomagnetism to God?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mickiel
Oh I wish you could see the glory of it; if only I could give you eyes to see the smooth transition from geomagnetism to God. The laws of existence are wide in variance, but Gods creation follows rules, rules that God made for us to figure out, and figure out his existence. Fundamentally mathmatical rules and none of these laws have been broken, and no new laws have been created by anyonelse.
Your post appears to have absolutely nothing to do with the question I asked.
With the laws of existence we have definte Anthropic Principles with show then definte purpose and design. Earths magnetic field, if it were much weaker, our planet would be devasted by Cosmic Radiation. Conversely, if it were much stronger, we would be devasted by severe electromagnetic storms. Again this is obvious deliberate design, which is a simple proof of God.
Not entirely true, and deliberate design has nothing to do with it...Earth's magnetosphere is weakening at a fairly rapid pace at this point in time...In fact it was 10% stronger when it first began to be measured in 1845...
Your post appears to have absolutely nothing to do with the question I asked.
One of the laws of existence is the law of attraction ; and I see it as an " Inspired Action", stunning proof of God.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.