tas8831
Well-Known Member
Where did the physical laws come from? Are they all just an amazing coincidence too?
Amazing - this self-asserted science expert thinks physical laws are actual, like, laws.
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:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Where did the physical laws come from? Are they all just an amazing coincidence too?
If it's good: GodDidIt
If it's bad: The Debil made me do it.
It's really sad that some people have such a simplistic view of the world.
Who or what caused the Big Bang? Can you rule out a Creator simply because his existence is not testable by current scientific methods?
Who said there can't be a first cause?
Circular arguments are so totally AWESOME!If the Creator is an infinite Being, then he is uncaused and was capable of causing everything else.....
Religion cannot prove... anything.science cannot prove that he doesn't exist.
If you cannot prove something, you have no facts
Your insolence is tiresome and grotesque.You know that species have lived at different times but you have no real evidence that they evolved from one to the other.....you assume that they did.
Definitely. It's amusing to watch someone with no more than a decades-old high school education, who also belongs to a religion that specifically discourages education, anoint themselves not only qualified to evaluate evolutionary biology, but superior to the professionals who work in that field.Manifestations? I'd go with one of Deeje's favoirite words:
The Jehovah's Witnesses generally discourage education and higher learning. I think Deeje's posts are proof of that.
I could only mention Thor, if I heard about him. It would not just pop in my head, and roll off my tongue now, would it? Do you get the picture?I wonder where those lightnings come during a storm. Our best scientists and philosophers cannot grasp what can cause that sudden scary release of energy. Ergo, it must be Thor. Who else?
That is probably what you have said if you lived in Scandinavia in the middle ages, using the same line of reasoning.
And since most Vikings were sure about the Thor scenario, together with millions of similar examples from other cultures from the past and the present, that also clearly show that the awsome machine between our skulls is very unreliable. So, if it is the product of a design, it is stupid design. I would have done definetely better if I had sufficient power to create minds.
By the way, what on earth is spiritual energy? Can you measure it in watt-hours?
Ciao
- viole
Well, like all the other Jehovah's Witnesses here, she's an evolution-denialist for one reason and one reason only....because her church specifically forbids acknowledging evolution as reality and severely punishes anyone who doesn't deny it. Everything else she throws at you is just diversion from that main point.If I remember correctly what she wrote about herself, she used to believe in evolution, but her high school biology class made her skeptical of evolution.
She doesn’t have any qualification after high school in biology or in fields related to biology. She is not teacher or lecturer or researcher in biology or biology-related fields.
So how does she expect us to believe that she have the knowledge to refute or debunk evolutionary biology?
As far as I know, she has never worked in the labs, not just in biology, but in any non-biological lab.
I don’t know what her exact qualification she did or what her employment are or were, because she has never been straight about. I have no idea what she does for a living, but it is certainly not in science.
What's really funny though is how one of the reasons Jehovah's Witnesses discourage education is because they see it as a prideful pursuit. Yet when you read Deeje's posts, the level of arrogance and pride in them is off the charts.
And yet these same people present themselves as being more knowledgeable about science than scientists. Sometimes the word "delusional" is entirely appropriate.
The Jehovah’s Witnesses Told Them Not to Get a College Degree; Now, They’re Struggling
More Christian anti-intellectualism:
- "There is another form of temptation, even more fraught with danger. This is the disease of curiosity. It is this which drives us to try and discover the secrets of nature, those secrets which are beyond our understanding, which can avail us nothing and which man should not wish to learn." - St. Augustine
- "Reason must be deluded, blinded, and destroyed. Faith must trample underfoot all reason, sense, and understanding, and whatever it sees must be put out of sight and ... know nothing but the word of God." - Martin Luther
- "Since God has spoken to us it is no longer necessary for us to think." - St Augustine
- "The smallest of minds are the easiest to fill with faith" - Pope Leo X
Well that's a non-answer if I ever saw one.What I truly believe is that science itself cannot prove its own theory, so what hope would anyone have of falsifying something that can't be proven in the first place?
Ancient people believed in gods because:The real reason ancient people believe in gods, is because of their knowledge and experience.
Matt said that 2000 years ago. We're still waiting. But that's OK. You just go on hoping and praying.Matthew 24:37-39 The ungodly will be removed - plucked out of the earth just like that.
Yet when you read Deeje's posts, the level of arrogance and pride in them is off the charts.
I know how much saying those words probably meant to you, but I had to actually look back at my post to be sure they were really not logically following from anything I said.With all due respect, your religious agenda is quite transparent. I have addressed all the underlining assumptions you've presented(in bold). If any of these assumptions were valid, it would indeed support your conclusion. Unfortunately they aren't valid, and based entirely on ignorance.
You apparently ignore the fact that you don't know that evolution shaped anything beyond what we know it did - which a basically changes in our genetic makeup, and what they allow us to do, and look like.Both our interpretations of reality are clear. But, because of your religious presuppositions, you seem go one step further than I do. You seem to believe that concepts and beliefs behave like physical things in reality. You seem to believe that emotions and intelligence exist in us, only because a higher intelligence had designed it for us. You seem to ignore the importance of the brain's ability to compartmentalize data, which unfortunately allows for irrational thoughts as well. You seem to ignore the role that evolution and the environment play, in shaping our internal and external human features. You seem to ignore the roles that our genetic and endocrine systems play in shaping our behavior, intellect, emotions, and our cognitive abilities. You seem to ignore the fact that ours's is a Universe based entirely on cause and effect, mathematics, and the laws of probability. My clarity and reason ends, where your ambiguity and faith begins.
What do you mean you don't filter out any evidence at all? You don't accept evidence for intelligent design. Why not?When I stated, "You are correct, we do see reality through different lens. Your lens has a religious filter, mine has no filter at all.", I meant that I don't filter out any evidence at all. Since I am not making an argument for an intelligent designer, what direct evidence do you expect from me to support your claim? I have no verifiable evidence to support your claim. On the other hand, you filter out all verifiable evidence against your claim. Even if God himself told you that you were wrong, your religious filters would reject His claim. For example, there are no verifiable miracles, paranormal activities, no testable power of prayer, no resurrection, no breeches or cessations of the laws of physics, no souls or spirits, and no verifiable prophesies. So, unless you can present any objective evidence, my mind will continue to be open to the possibility, but not the belief in the possibility.
Are physical laws restricted by anything physical? This seems to me, to be what you are trying to do.No, material things have properties. Those properties dictate what sort of interactions they can have. Descriptions of those interactions are what are known as physical laws.
Yes, the patterns of interaction existed before humans existed. But they are not dictated by someone: they simply are a consequence of matter having properties.
Because causality describes how things can interact: that is a physical law.
Are physical laws restricted by anything physical? This seems to me, to be what you are trying to do.
The properties of every substance are unique to that substance....what's your point?Indeed, but without water there would be no plants and hence no flow on effect vital to life. Where does oxygen and CO2 come from?
The properties of water are unique.
Can you explain what you are trying to say here? Seems like an ill-formed questionAre physical laws restricted by anything physical? This seems to me, to be what you are trying to do.
How can physical laws be restricted to things physical, and at the same time be omnipotent, absolute, and unchanging?Causality is restricted to things physical. So yes, physical laws are restricted to things physical. But then, I don't know of anything that isn't ultimately physical.
How can physical laws be restricted to things physical, and at the same time be omnipotent, absolute, and unchanging?
@Milton Platt Does this help?