Healthy skepticism of ALL worldviews is good. Skeptical of non-belief like found in Atheism? Post your challenging questions. Responses are encouraged.
As humans, it`s pretty much accepted that we are the most "intelligent" species on the planet, yes? (I know dolphins, elephants, primates etc.. btw, have you heard of Koko the gorilla?... but you all know what I mean)
AI is becoming more and more advanced, yes? To the point where some scientists believe that eventually they will develop self awareness. (I can`t give sources, I`m not even sure where I read it, it may well have been Stephen Hawkings. If I`m wrong then I will retract all of this, it`s just an idea anyway)
What`s the similarity?
Creation.
I`m putting this terribly, aren`t I?
I suppose the point I`m trying to make is surely to create intelligence, in whatever form, takes a prior intelligence? Otherwise where did it come from?
How did we get intelligence form non intelligence?
Not quite sure where you're getting at or if this applies, but one can get an unintelligent sperm and put it with an unintelligent egg, and the bond will evolve into the most intelligent person alive! I know the origin of the sperm and egg must be intelligent also, but who is to say an unintelligent thing from a source we are unfamiliar with can't produce something that evolves into something intelligent?
Ken
RickD wrote
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence".
Kenny wrote:
Your answer makes the most sense to you but it doesn't for everybody
Ken
Yes it does,they just choose to take the long way around to try to get to the truth.Evidence matters to most people but not to somebody choosing to willingly take the long way around,ignoring evidence while not having any evidence atheism is true,only speculations that are not real science and are irrational compared to accepting the obvious that nothing happens in our universe without a cause,NOTHING except the God we believe in,not some straw man god we don't believe in.
You openly admit that you don't know and you are OK with it instead of focusing on evidence and reason and having a desire to want to know the truth holding your people to the same standard for evidence you do for God and people of faith who tell you and give you evidence but its not important to you so long as you can reject God and all the evidence for him,while you have no evidence that you are right.
It is intellectual dishonesty that I hope you'll free yourself from someday. You need to understand that nobody or nothing gets a pass when it comes to what is true or not,not even atheists or agnostics get a pass if you're really seeking the truth.
So you are making the claim that everything requires a cause? Prove it! Prove dark matter and dark energy requires cause.
Ken
Prove it? are you serious? Look around you at everything that had a cause and that is your proof.Look around you right now and you cannot name anything that did not have a cause,even if you go outside,even if we talk about the weather or whatever all things have a cause,yet you reject reality around you to somehow believe it applies to everything except dark matter? Based on what?You're asking for proof while ignoring reality around you while having no proof you are right but you give yourself a pass while demanding proof. You are ignoring reality taking the long way around like you always do. I don't understand how you do it especially when it is so easy to believe God caused it to happen compared to anything else you could think up.
Everything you are talking about applies to normal matter and energy, that's the matter and energy around you; I'm not talking about that, I'm talking about Dark Matter and Dark Energy. Prove that has a cause. Also dark matter was discovered in the 1970's so pointing to some guy who made a bunch of arguments a thousand years before dark matter was even discovered won't work either.
Ken
Ken,
Aquinas' argument still stands. Unless you want to prove it wrong? Or maybe you can prove dark matter is eternal. Go for it. I'd love to hear your argument. Because up until now, you've given nothing but opinions based on nothing. Everything that science tells us, says the entire universe has a beginning. That includes dark matter and dark energy.
As one who holds heavily to science, you don't have any evidence to back your opinion.
John 5:24 24 “Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life.
“A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves.”
-Edward R Murrow
St. Richard the Sarcastic--The Patron Saint of Irony
PaulSacramento wrote:What I mean by this is that nothing can have qualities that do not pertain to itself and the universe, since it had a beginning and it continues to expand, requires and :outside force" to make it "come into being" as we know it.
It doesn't really matter IF there was some sort of "universe" before it started to expand since even IF that was the case you would still NEED something to cause it to expand and since that something couldn't be "itself", it must be something else.
According to science, dark energy is responsible for the accelerated expansion of the Universe. How do you know dark energy isn't responsible for the initial expansion of the Universe (big bang)? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_energy
PaulSacramento wrote:Now, you may ask, WHY couldn't the "universe" has started itself?
Because that would mean that the universe would present properties and qualities RIGHT NOW that would make it possible for something that comes into being, to come into being BEFORE it existed.
OR, something would have to "act onto itself, by itself, for itself" to cause expansion and THAT would mean that we would see the characteristics of that ability to "act onto itself, by itself, for itself" present in the universe.
And we do not.
Are you suggesting the Universe did not exist at all prior to the Big Bang?
Ken
Ken,
You are stating hypotheses, noting more.
Those things aren't even theories yet.
Science of the gaps Ken, science of the gaps.
abelcainsbrother wrote:Atheists cannot go back prior to the singularity but the reason we can is because by reason we know all things have a cause
Actually according to my understanding, the most common theistic claim is everything EXCEPT GOD has a cause. Of course if the theist can make an exception for his explanation not requiring a cause, so can the Atheist.
Ken
You are incorrect.
The theistic view that is collaborated by science, by the way, is that ALL things that COME into being have a cause.
Not ALL things, only those that come into existence.
As humans, it`s pretty much accepted that we are the most "intelligent" species on the planet, yes? (I know dolphins, elephants, primates etc.. btw, have you heard of Koko the gorilla?... but you all know what I mean)
AI is becoming more and more advanced, yes? To the point where some scientists believe that eventually they will develop self awareness. (I can`t give sources, I`m not even sure where I read it, it may well have been Stephen Hawkings. If I`m wrong then I will retract all of this, it`s just an idea anyway)
What`s the similarity?
Creation.
I`m putting this terribly, aren`t I?
I suppose the point I`m trying to make is surely to create intelligence, in whatever form, takes a prior intelligence? Otherwise where did it come from?
How did we get intelligence form non intelligence?
Not quite sure where you're getting at or if this applies, but one can get an unintelligent sperm and put it with an unintelligent egg, and the bond will evolve into the most intelligent person alive! I know the origin of the sperm and egg must be intelligent also, but who is to say an unintelligent thing from a source we are unfamiliar with can't produce something that evolves into something intelligent?
Ken
If non intelligence evolves into intelligence..... how?
Faith is a knowledge within the heart, beyond the reach of proof - Kahlil Gibran
PaulSacramento wrote:What I mean by this is that nothing can have qualities that do not pertain to itself and the universe, since it had a beginning and it continues to expand, requires and :outside force" to make it "come into being" as we know it.
It doesn't really matter IF there was some sort of "universe" before it started to expand since even IF that was the case you would still NEED something to cause it to expand and since that something couldn't be "itself", it must be something else.
According to science, dark energy is responsible for the accelerated expansion of the Universe. How do you know dark energy isn't responsible for the initial expansion of the Universe (big bang)? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_energy
PaulSacramento wrote:Now, you may ask, WHY couldn't the "universe" has started itself?
Because that would mean that the universe would present properties and qualities RIGHT NOW that would make it possible for something that comes into being, to come into being BEFORE it existed.
OR, something would have to "act onto itself, by itself, for itself" to cause expansion and THAT would mean that we would see the characteristics of that ability to "act onto itself, by itself, for itself" present in the universe.
And we do not.
Are you suggesting the Universe did not exist at all prior to the Big Bang?
Ken
Ken,
You are stating hypotheses, noting more.
Those things aren't even theories yet.
Science of the gaps Ken, science of the gaps.
Yes. I was very clear from the start that I don't have an answer. I was just making a point to ACB who said I was being dishonest by stating I don't have an answer rather than posit God as an answer. I was just listing some possibilities a person could believe, I never even suggested that was what I believed.
Ken
RickD wrote
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence".
abelcainsbrother wrote:Atheists cannot go back prior to the singularity but the reason we can is because by reason we know all things have a cause
Actually according to my understanding, the most common theistic claim is everything EXCEPT GOD has a cause. Of course if the theist can make an exception for his explanation not requiring a cause, so can the Atheist.
Ken
You are incorrect.
The theistic view that is collaborated by science, by the way, is that ALL things that COME into being have a cause.
Not ALL things, only those that come into existence.
That is different than what ACB said; I was responding to what ACB said.
Ken
RickD wrote
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence".
As humans, it`s pretty much accepted that we are the most "intelligent" species on the planet, yes? (I know dolphins, elephants, primates etc.. btw, have you heard of Koko the gorilla?... but you all know what I mean)
AI is becoming more and more advanced, yes? To the point where some scientists believe that eventually they will develop self awareness. (I can`t give sources, I`m not even sure where I read it, it may well have been Stephen Hawkings. If I`m wrong then I will retract all of this, it`s just an idea anyway)
What`s the similarity?
Creation.
I`m putting this terribly, aren`t I?
I suppose the point I`m trying to make is surely to create intelligence, in whatever form, takes a prior intelligence? Otherwise where did it come from?
How did we get intelligence form non intelligence?
Not quite sure where you're getting at or if this applies, but one can get an unintelligent sperm and put it with an unintelligent egg, and the bond will evolve into the most intelligent person alive! I know the origin of the sperm and egg must be intelligent also, but who is to say an unintelligent thing from a source we are unfamiliar with can't produce something that evolves into something intelligent?
Ken
If non intelligence evolves into intelligence..... how?
I gave the example of the sperm and the egg; sperm isn't intelligent is it? Eggs aren't intelligent are they?
Ken
RickD wrote
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence".
I gave the example of the sperm and the egg; sperm isn't intelligent is it? Eggs aren't intelligent are they?
no, neither is yet intelligent, but they do spring from intelligence, human beings. imo you'll need another stronger sample that cannot presuppose any intelligence familiarity at all.
Trust the past to God’s mercy, the present to God’s love, and the future to God’s providence. -St Augustine
Ken demanded proof from me while going on his opinion without proof and evidence.It is intellectual dishonesty which is why I demand the same proof and evidence that they do when it comes to God,they ignore our evidence while having none just going on their opinion or non-peer reviewed scientific ideas in some cases.
Hebrews 12:2-3 Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith;who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross,despising the shame,and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.
2nd Corinthians 4:4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not,lest the light of this glorious gospel of Christ,who is the image of God,should shine unto them.
As humans, it`s pretty much accepted that we are the most "intelligent" species on the planet, yes? (I know dolphins, elephants, primates etc.. btw, have you heard of Koko the gorilla?... but you all know what I mean)
AI is becoming more and more advanced, yes? To the point where some scientists believe that eventually they will develop self awareness. (I can`t give sources, I`m not even sure where I read it, it may well have been Stephen Hawkings. If I`m wrong then I will retract all of this, it`s just an idea anyway)
What`s the similarity?
Creation.
I`m putting this terribly, aren`t I?
I suppose the point I`m trying to make is surely to create intelligence, in whatever form, takes a prior intelligence? Otherwise where did it come from?
How did we get intelligence form non intelligence?
Not quite sure where you're getting at or if this applies, but one can get an unintelligent sperm and put it with an unintelligent egg, and the bond will evolve into the most intelligent person alive! I know the origin of the sperm and egg must be intelligent also, but who is to say an unintelligent thing from a source we are unfamiliar with can't produce something that evolves into something intelligent?
Ken
If non intelligence evolves into intelligence..... how?
I gave the example of the sperm and the egg; sperm isn't intelligent is it? Eggs aren't intelligent are they?
Ken
There is genetic disposition and potential, building blocks really, for intelligence in sperm and eggs and they came from intelligent beings ( hence their potential for intelligence).
As humans, it`s pretty much accepted that we are the most "intelligent" species on the planet, yes? (I know dolphins, elephants, primates etc.. btw, have you heard of Koko the gorilla?... but you all know what I mean)
AI is becoming more and more advanced, yes? To the point where some scientists believe that eventually they will develop self awareness. (I can`t give sources, I`m not even sure where I read it, it may well have been Stephen Hawkings. If I`m wrong then I will retract all of this, it`s just an idea anyway)
What`s the similarity?
Creation.
I`m putting this terribly, aren`t I?
I suppose the point I`m trying to make is surely to create intelligence, in whatever form, takes a prior intelligence? Otherwise where did it come from?
How did we get intelligence form non intelligence?
Not quite sure where you're getting at or if this applies, but one can get an unintelligent sperm and put it with an unintelligent egg, and the bond will evolve into the most intelligent person alive! I know the origin of the sperm and egg must be intelligent also, but who is to say an unintelligent thing from a source we are unfamiliar with can't produce something that evolves into something intelligent?
Ken
If non intelligence evolves into intelligence..... how?
I gave the example of the sperm and the egg; sperm isn't intelligent is it? Eggs aren't intelligent are they?
Ken
No but their "creators" (us) are.
Faith is a knowledge within the heart, beyond the reach of proof - Kahlil Gibran
abelcainsbrother wrote:Ken demanded proof from me while going on his opinion without proof and evidence.It is intellectual dishonesty which is why I demand the same proof and evidence that they do when it comes to God,they ignore our evidence while having none just going on their opinion or non-peer reviewed scientific ideas in some cases.
Perhaps you should go back and read what was said. I was very clear that it was NOT my opinion. I was just giving examples of what a person COULD believe. You made a claim, so I asked you to back it up. I have nothing to back up because I never made any claims.
Ken
RickD wrote
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence".
... :8 
insider stuff 