• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Creationists: How do you test for "truth"?

W

whirlingmerc

Well-Known Member
blü 2 said:
You'll now set out a good clear example of this, quoting the words Hawkins used, I take it?
Click to expand...


Humans could escape from black holes, rather than getting stuck in them, according to a new theory proposed by Stephen Hawking.

Unfortunate space travellers won’t be able to return to their own universe, according to Hawking. But they will be able to escape somewhere else, he has proposed at a conference in Stockholm.

Black holes are a passage to another universe, says Stephen Hawking

sounds like speculation turned into a claimed fact to me
 
blü 2

blü 2

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Theresa A Drumgold said:
The Bible book of Daniel in Chapter 2 the dream of Nebuchadnezzar, brings his dream when Daniel interpreted his dream, down to our day, that image at the feet is the last Government standing till God's kingdom comes to reality (Daniel 2:44) we are at the feet of that image. And there is so much more proof.
Click to expand...
But Daniel is a folk-hero, having folk-hero adventures. You're meant to enjoy the ride, not take it seriously. It no more reflects reality than Conan and Sherlock do.
 
blü 2

blü 2

Veteran Member
Premium Member
whirlingmerc said:
Humans could escape from black holes, rather than getting stuck in them, according to a new theory proposed by Stephen Hawking.

Unfortunate space travellers won’t be able to return to their own universe, according to Hawking. But they will be able to escape somewhere else, he has proposed at a conference in Stockholm.

Black holes are a passage to another universe, says Stephen Hawking

sounds like speculation turned into a claimed fact to me
Click to expand...
Quote me his words and let's see whether he said it was hypothesis or fact.
 
sandy whitelinger

sandy whitelinger

Veteran Member
blü 2 said:
What is truth? said jesting Pilate, and would not stay for an answer.
─ Francis Bacon, 'On Truth'​

Dear Creationists

My own view is that truth is conformity with reality. This, often called the 'correspondence' view, means that if you want to know whether a particular statement is true or not, you check how accurately its report corresponds to objective reality. Thus truth can in principle be objectively verified ─ a wholly admirable quality, surely you agree, for any claim of truth to have.

You must use this definition of truth at least part of the time, even if just to know that it's true it's daytime, you're in Kamloops, those are Bikkios on the supermarket shelf, and so on.

But then you add a wholly different concept of 'truth' ─ that the bible is inerrant and therefore all its factual statements are necessarily 'true'.

What truth test did you carry out on the bible to determine that it's inerrant?
Click to expand...
Why should I apply a truth test that is based on differences to a concept that exists out side of the world of differences? It's like playing a CD on a 45 and saying the music sucks.
 
blü 2

blü 2

Veteran Member
Premium Member
sandy whitelinger said:
Why should I apply a truth test that is based on differences to a concept that exists out side of the world of differences? It's like playing a CD on a 45 and saying the music sucks.
Click to expand...
What exactly is the "world of differences"?

What exactly is the "concept that exists outside" of that world?

And what test do you use to determine whether some statement is true or not, is an accurate statement about objective reality or not?
 
sandy whitelinger

sandy whitelinger

Veteran Member
blü 2 said:
What exactly is the "world of differences"?

What exactly is the "concept that exists outside" of that world?

And what test do you use to determine whether some statement is true or not, is an accurate statement about objective reality or not?
Click to expand...
God does not exist in objective reality.

Try this as an example: all the world is colorblind. How do you explain color to them? Is it not a concept that would exist outside their world?
 
W

whirlingmerc

Well-Known Member
blü 2 said:
Quote me his words and let's see whether he said it was hypothesis or fact.
Click to expand...

He didn't go through a black hole and come out into another universe so it would be more like speculation. It actually takes allot more to go from speculation to hypothesis

Hypothesis is allot more than telling an audience an interesting speculation
 
blü 2

blü 2

Veteran Member
Premium Member
sandy whitelinger said:
All of our senses and perceptions function through a recognition of differences. Hot is hot because there is something colder. Dark is dark because something is lighter. That is the world that we exist in.
Click to expand...
Good thing we exist there ─ otherwise the best we could hope for is to be imaginary.
sandy whitelinger said:
Suppose the imaginary interacted with the non-imaginary. How would that be perceived by the non-imaginary
Click to expand...
As a mental event. All imagination takes place in brains.
sandy whitelinger said:
Why did you ignore the rest of my statement?
Click to expand...
Because it's irrelevant. First, even the totally blind can perceive parts of the EM spectrum in the form of heat, and understand the concept of wavelength. It's then only a small step to understanding that sighted people perceive particular wavelengths within that spectrum through particular receptors (the color-sensitive cones of the eye) which don't function with blind people and function incompletely, or misfunction, with colorblind people. (Not all forms of color blindness are due to faulty cones, but that needn't detain us.)

And it's not an analogy for the perception of God. In total contrast to the EM spectrum, we have no definition of a real God such that if we found a candidate we could tell whether it were a real god or not. That's part of the very large body of evidence that god is a mental construct, not an actual being.
 
sandy whitelinger

sandy whitelinger

Veteran Member
blü 2 said:
Good thing we exist there ─ otherwise the best we could hope for is to be imaginary.
As a mental event. All imagination takes place in brains.
Because it's irrelevant. First, even the totally blind can perceive parts of the EM spectrum in the form of heat, and understand the concept of wavelength. It's then only a small step to understanding that sighted people perceive particular wavelengths within that spectrum through particular receptors (the color-sensitive cones of the eye) which don't function with blind people and function incompletely, or misfunction, with colorblind people. (Not all forms of color blindness are due to faulty cones, but that needn't detain us.)

And it's not an analogy for the perception of God. In total contrast to the EM spectrum, we have no definition of a real God such that if we found a candidate we could tell whether it were a real god or not. That's part of the very large body of evidence that god is a mental construct, not an actual being.
Click to expand...
Ok, I see you missed the point.
 
blü 2

blü 2

Veteran Member
Premium Member
whirlingmerc said:
He didn't go through a black hole and come out into another universe so it would be more like speculation. It actually takes allot more to go from speculation to hypothesis

Hypothesis is allot more than telling an audience an interesting speculation
Click to expand...
Since it seems you can't quote what Hawking actually said, I'll save you the trouble. Here are >quotes from Hawking< with some emphases which I've added in bold:

“The existence of alternative histories with black holes suggests this might be possible,” Hawking said, according to a report from Stockholm University. “The hole would need to be large and if it was rotating it might have a passage to another universe. But you couldn’t come back to our universe. So although I’m keen on space flight, I’m not going to try that."
[...]
Now Hawking has proposed that the information is stored on the boundary, at the event horizon. That means that it never makes its way into the black hole, and so never needs to make its way out again either.
​
You can call it speculation, you can call it hypothesis, but it's totally different to your initial representation of his words, and is a reasoned statement by a qualified and well-informed physicist, put forward in a particular scientific context about which you appear to be ignorant.

Fortunately ignorance is curable. Start reading up on such matters. Get to understand them ─ they're intrinsically fascinating to the curious mind. This may spare you from repeating your error of launching into baseless criticisms.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top