Irony of the evolutionary belief

[leroy]

No, circular reasoning is how someone will "infer" that FT is how the laws of physics are what they are, so that suggests a God exists. And if a God didn't exist then there would be no way for the laws to be fine tuned for life to emerge. Therefore God exists and FT is how the laws became what they are.

See how the two ideas are dependent on the other being true, and assuming (or inferring) one is true then the other must also be true.

To point out this flawed thinking is not itself circular reasoning.

Fine tuning is not assumed…………..it is a fact that the universe has this property

I´ll suggest that of all the possible explanations, God is the best explanation for this fact……………no circular reasoning……………….

 

[F1fan]

Fine tuning is not assumed…………..it is a fact that the universe has this property

False. FT is exclusively tied to creationism and religion.

If you are correct then cite the consensus of experts in physics who agree with you. Quote any college textbook.

I´ll suggest that of all the possible explanations, God is the best explanation for this fact……………no circular reasoning……………….

What God? There are no Gods known to exist as an option. There is no supernatural phenomena known to exist. No scientists bring up gods as explanations. So what the hell is your motive to suggest an idea we only hear about in Sunday school?

 

[leroy]

Well, sure if you look at stars from enough points and there are enough stars you will see just about any pattern you want, this is called paradoilia,
Not design.

Ok so under your view finding meanifull words in the stars or in clouds wouldn’t indicate Intelligent design, but rather paradoilia,...............is that what you are saying? this is a yes or no question

And pyramids where assigned design because they were written about by contemporaries not because we didn't recognize how they had cut the stones.

The claim that I made is that we don’t need to know how the pyramids where manufactured in order o conclude design…………….so please ether explicitly agree or disagree, rather than making an unrelated (and wrong) comment

Alien manufacture and beyond ideas were only accepted by crackpots before we rediscovered some techniques they used.

?

 

[Pogo]

Fine tuning is not assumed…………..it is a fact that the universe has this property

I´ll suggest that of all the possible explanations, God is the best explanation for this fact……………no circular reasoning……………….

No Fine Tuna is a questionable hypothesis with no actual evidence. Remember pareidoilia.
You then assume it is real and in a circular argument based on your prior assumption of a god say that it is evidence of said god.

You are welcome to your opinions but don't pretend they are rational explanations when you can't even demonstrate even basics of rational thought.

 

[leroy]

False. FT is exclusively tied to creationism and religion.

If you are correct then cite the consensus of experts in physics who agree with you. Quote any college textbook.

What God? There are no Gods known to exist as an option. There is no supernatural phenomena known to exist. No scientists bring up gods as explanations. So what the hell is your motive to suggest an idea we only hear about in Sunday school?

No, no, no, first acknowledge that you wrongly accused me for “circular reasoning” then we can deal with your other “objections”

 

[Pogo]

Fine tuning is not assumed…………..it is a fact that the universe has this property

I´ll suggest that of all the possible explanations, God is the best explanation for this fact……………no circular reasoning……………….

No Fine Tuna is a questionable hypothesis with no actual evidence. Remember pareidoilia.
You then assume it is real and in a circular argument based on your prior assumption of a god say that it is evidence of said god.

You are welcome to your opinions but don't pretend they are rational explanations when you can't even demonstrate even basics of rational thought.

 

[Pogo]

No, no, no, first acknowledge that you wrongly accused me for “circular reasoning” then we can deal with your other “objections”

You are not wrongly accused, your arguments are based on the assumption that your God exists and that whatever evidence is presented is evidence of this gods existence. That is a circular argument whether you admit it or not.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No, no, no, first acknowledge that you wrongly accused me for “circular reasoning” then we can deal with your other “objections”

Your circular reasoning was dealt with. Denying that does not make it go away. If you did not like the explanation you should have refuted it when it was made, not demand that the person do it all over again.

 

[F1fan]

No, no, no, first acknowledge that you wrongly accused me for “circular reasoning” then we can deal with your other “objections”

Look, an attempt at blackmail.

No, you are looking for excuses to avoid answering questions that are fatal to your beliefs and assumptions. You must be feeling stress and looking for a way out of answering my questions.

I was just going to make a point about how those who advocate for these religious ideas are incapable or unwilling to realize the emotional response they exprience to religious ideas as answers to questions about the universe. More skilled thinkers are able to feel biased emotions and stop, and disregard them as relevant.

 

[leroy]

No Fine Tuna is a questionable hypothesis with no actual evidence.

It is a fact that if gravity would have been say .1% stronger, the universe would have collased in a black hole

It is a fact live could have not existed if a single black hole is all there is in the whole universe.

Which of these facts do you find controversial ………… NONE

(this is what is meant by FT)

Remember pareidoilia.

You then assume it is real and in a circular argument based on your prior assumption of a god say that it is evidence of said god.

You are welcome to your opinions but don't pretend they are rational explanations when you can't even demonstrate even basics of rational thought.

I assume that FT because there is evidence.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It is a fact that if gravity would have been say .1% stronger, the universe would have collased in a black hole

It is a fact live could have not existed if a single black hole is all there is in the whole universe.

Which of these facts do you find controversial ………… NONE

(this is what is meant by FT)








I assume that FT because there is evidence.

LMAO! The worst possible example since that specific one has been refuted:

 

[McBell]

“If you imagine a puddle waking up one morning and thinking, 'This is an interesting world I find myself in — an interesting hole I find myself in — fits me rather neatly, doesn't it? In fact it fits me staggeringly well, must have been made to have me in it!"
~Douglas Adams

 

[Pogo]

Ok so under your view finding meanifull words in the stars or in clouds wouldn’t indicate Intelligent design, but rather paradoilia,...............is that what you are saying? this is a yes or no question

Irrelevant, the statement was about the existence of the pattern not your interpretation

The claim that I made is that we don’t need to know how the pyramids where manufactured in order o conclude design…………….so please ether explicitly agree or disagree, rather than making an unrelated (and wrong) comment

Irrelevant to the question as we already knew they were designed.

?

Look in a mirror.

 

[F1fan]

How can an unknown and unevidenced cause like a Creator/Designer be claimed when fine tuning does not absolutely explain that it is the ONLY explanation for physics being what it is?

Even the FT argument admits its basis is playing the odds of things being as they are isn't likely naturally. It doesn't assert an absolute 100% certainty that FT has to be what hapvened. So how do any advocates come up with God at all as an option? Where do they do the math on a God existing exactly as they claim needs to exist for it to design and create physics? It's all faith. No evidence.

Well, it's bad faith.

 

[F1fan]

It is a fact that if gravity would have been say .1% stronger, the universe would have collased in a black hole

It is a fact live could have not existed if a single black hole is all there is in the whole universe.

Which of these facts do you find controversial ………… NONE

(this is what is meant by FT)

What makes this lead you to assume the reason is an idea you heard about in Sunday school?

I assume that FT because there is evidence.

Yes, you are assuming. The evidence is mostly non-relevant ideas that you have not filtered out due to lack of reasoning skill. Your conclusions are flawed as a result.

 

[Pogo]

Ok so under your view finding meanifull words in the stars or in clouds wouldn’t indicate Intelligent design, but rather paradoilia,...............is that what you are saying? this is a yes or no question

Irrelevant, the statement was about the existence of the pattern not your interpretation

The claim that I made is that we don’t need to know how the pyramids where manufactured in order o conclude design…………….so please ether explicitly agree or disagree, rather than making an unrelated (and wrong) comment

Irrelevant to the question as we already knew they were designed.

?

Look in a mirror.

It is a fact that if gravity would have been say .1% stronger, the universe would have collased in a black hole

It is a fact live could have not existed if a single black hole is all there is in the whole universe.

Which of these facts do you find controversial ………… NONE

(this is what is meant by FT)








I assume that FT because there is evidence.

Again,

 

[leroy]

No Fine Tuna is a questionable hypothesis with no actual evidence.

It is a fact that if gravity would have been say .1% stronger, the universe would have collased in a black hole

It is a fact live could have not existed if a single black hole is all there is in the whole universe.

Which of these facts do you find controversial ………… NONE

(this is what is meant by FT)

Remember pareidoilia.

You then assume it is real and in a circular argument based on your prior assumption of a god say that it is evidence of said god.

You are welcome to your opinions but don't pretend they are rational explanations when you can't even demonstrate even basics of rational thought.

I assume that FT because there is evidence.

 

[Pogo]

It is a fact that if gravity would have been say .1% stronger, the universe would have collased in a black hole

It is a fact live could have not existed if a single black hole is all there is in the whole universe.

Which of these facts do you find controversial ………… NONE

(this is what is meant by FT)








I assume that FT because there is evidence.

And again.

 

[leroy]

LMAO! The worst possible example since that specific one has been refuted:

I didn’t understand what Carlol meant do you? Care to explain it…………….. care to support it with a source?

 

[Pogo]

I didn’t understand what Carlol meant do you? Care to explain it…………….. care to support it with a source?

If that is too complicated, then you are not capable though you could ask the guy taking notes at the other end of the table. LOL