Interesting little facts. Science can’t explain why galaxies aren’t flying apart given the visible, detectable mass in said galaxies.
Now, to make things right, they’ve decided that 15 % of the galaxy is detectable matter. The other 85 % is something called “Dark Matter”.
Now, Dark Matter composes the majority of the Matter in any given galaxy; it is invisible; does not interact with electromagnetic energy; and is “very hard to detect”.
Sound like anyone you know, Atheists? Maybe a certain Deity by the name of God, hmm? What are your views on this sort of scientific woo woo?
Your fiend,
rat spit
Subscription Note:
Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.
Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.
I dunno, it just means if they start a Church of Dark Matter and asking for tax concessions and their dogma to be taught to children in all schools than I will treat them the way I treat any religion....
Other than that waaayyyy above my pay grade RS
There is empirical evidence the galaxies have considerably more mass than what can be counted from their photons. Such as: galaxy dynamics and gravitational lensing.
The phrase dark matter is just a place holder, a term to make discussing the situation easier.
A nice god of the gaps fallacy from Rat Shit.
Well done.
I think you're correct, though I'd have said **yet another** god of the gaps fallacy from ratspit. He uses them in nearly all of his arguments, then just ignores anyone pointing it out. This argument is a text book argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacy.
@Sheldon
This is the first time I’ve been accused of “the god of gaps” fallacy - so once again, Sheldon - you’re being intellectually dishonest or purposefully ignorant.
My main argument is that I directly hear the voice of a Supreme Being. Since you do not - you call me “schizophrenic” (which I’m not). Consequently, I refuse to recognize your existence and, thus, any claims to your beliefs or non-beliefs. Ie. you are not an Atheist if you have no claim to Selfhood.
You hear the voice of thunderlips???
Attachments
Attach Image/Video?:
@Random
Hulk Hogan? I wish. That’s one sexy bod. I’d like to sex that up. You’ve heard of remote viewing? How about remote sexy time? Oh yeah ...
rat spit
"This is the first time I’ve been accused of “the god of gaps” fallacy - so once again, Sheldon - you’re being intellectually dishonest or purposefully ignorant."
Nonsense, your first posts on here were based on an argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacy, and I said so, and have said so every time you have used that same fallacy, so it is you who is being dishonest.
"My main argument is that I directly hear the voice of a Supreme Being. "
That's not an argument, it's an unevidenced claim.
"Since you do not - you call me “schizophrenic” (which I’m not). "
Did I, are you sure? I think that is a second lie.
"Consequently, I refuse to recognize your existence "
And you thought you'd respond to my post to illustrate how ridiculous that claim is.
"thus, any claims to your beliefs or non-beliefs. Ie. you are not an Atheist if you have no claim to Selfhood."
I have no idea what that means, but it strikes me as specious nonsense. I am an atheist because I don't believe in any deities. If I didn't have an individual identity you wouldn't get so hysterical when I demonstrate that individuality in my ideas and arguments.
You haven't addressed the point though, which is that you have AGAIN predicated a belief based an argument from ignorance fallacy. Here is your OP
"Sat, 01/26/2019 - 22:23
rat spit
"Science can’t explain " > That's the appeal to ignorance
"Sound like anyone you know, Atheists? Maybe a certain Deity by the name of God, hmm? What are your views on this sort of scientific woo woo?" > That's the assertion based on that appeal to ignorance that makes it an appeal to ignorance fallacy.
This is the same as your assertion that peoples thoughts are derived from an external supernatural cause unless they can demonstrate otherwise - as this is again the very definition of an argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacy. It is often used as an attempt to reverse the burden of proof, which is what you have done there.
@Sheldon
You are the consummate example of the phrase, “You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make it drink.” I will address two of your points. I can’t be bothered to get into a war of rhetoric with the rest of your wish wash.
You called me, on one occasion, the “Schizophrenic Elephant in the room”. It was Nylaralethep, I believe, who called my “unevidenced claim” an “appeal to schizophrenia” - or rather that “as far as rat spit is concerned”. So, once again YOU are the one who isn’t admitting to his ad hominems.
This argument about Dark Matter - I couldn’t care less. It was hastily formed and poorly executed. I resign all interest in it. I will maintain that it is not a God of Gaps fallacy - merely a comparison of two sciences (knowledge).
My “unevidenced claims” as you put it ... I have extremely accurate evidence for those claims. I hear the evidence in my thoughts. Keeping in mind that every post you make first starts with a thought, I would expect you, Sheldon, to be a little more accurate when deciding what is evidenced and what is not.
Regarding miracles. 40,000 people witnessed a prophesied miracle at the miracle of Fátima. It was foretold and it came true. It was foretold by an apparition believed to be the Virgin Mary and it came true and 40,000 people witnessed it. The young girls who made contact with the apparition are now all saints.
Please link the post where I said such things.
/e
I don't think I did. It seems one of us has lost their mind. If you can link that post, then clearly it is me. Otherwise, I think it is you.
@Nylarathotep
http://www.atheistrepublic.com/forums/debate-room/bacon
Well, my apologies. It was Sapporo who made the innocuous “Appeal to Schizophrenia” comment; Cyber LN who commented that rat spit would support such a claim; and Sheldon who addressed “the schizophrenic elephant in the room.”
I apologize profusely. I had you mixed up with another moderator. On another note, I’m not offended by the comment. I don’t live by that diagnosis. I sympathize with people of that diagnoses - far more than any good intentioned psychiatrist might - and I understand the stigma that comes with living under such a diagnosis.
In particular, I understand how people perceive you the moment you admit to having such a diagnosis. I mean, look at Dan. Does he have any credibility on this site? We are not all like Dan. Some of us live with the obscure voices and still have a rational mind. Anyhow. I think this thread has run its course.
My apologies once again.
@ratspit
"You called me, on one occasion, the “Schizophrenic Elephant in the room”.
Do you really need to be told that play on words was levity? Given that you have bombarded me with some fairly personal, and unpleasant ad hominem from the very first moment you came here, it's hard to believe you're really this thin skinned.
"This argument about Dark Matter - I couldn’t care less. It was hastily formed and poorly executed. I resign all interest in it. "
I'd prefer it if you showed some integrity, and addressed the flaws I and others gave indicated in your claims.
"My “unevidenced claims” as you put it ... I have extremely accurate evidence for those claims. I hear the evidence in my thoughts. "
That's anecdotal and subjective, did you just forget I said objective evidence? We have claims exactly like those for mermaid sightings, do you believe mermaids are real?
"Regarding miracles. 40,000 people witnessed a prophesied miracle at the miracle of Fátima."
No they didn't - Hitchens's razor applied (you can't evidence a claim with another unevidenced claim, sigh.
" It was foretold and it came true. "
No it wasn't, and no it didn't - Hitchens's razor, sigh.
" It was foretold by an apparition believed to be the Virgin Mary "
A belief is not evidence, and this confusion on your part is the problem, and it makes your take a horse to water crack all the more ironic, since multiple posters have tried patiently to edify you for months, and you seem unable to grasp this simple epistemological principle.
"it came true and 40,000 people witnessed it. "
No it didn't and no they didn't - ho hum, I can do this all day. Can you really not see the irony of trying to prop up one unevidenced claim with another unevidenced claim? The Fatima myth, despite the lies that exaggerate the numbers after the fact, debunks itself, as the so called miracle would have visible to half the globe, and not one single person anywhere reported the sun moving about in the sky. You'd have to be beyond gullible to fall for anything so obviously made up, but even if it were 100% true, it would simply be an event you couldn't explain, thus you are using yet another argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacy, how ironic is that.
"The young girls who made contact with the apparition are now all saints."
Wow, you mean the superstitious church gave a fictional title to a load of superstitious girls because they allegedly made an unevidenced claim? That's.......well not very compelling at all really. You could believe literally anything with your bar for belief set that low.
As I said you can demonstrate no objective evidence for any deity, or for your supernatural beliefs. All you;re doing is showing that you don't understand what objective evidence is, or remotely grasp what is needed in order for something to be objectively evidenced. The measurable effects of what scientists have called Dark Matter, that is objective evidence, and of course the claim unlike all that you offer here again, is falsifiable. If it turn out to be wrong, it still isnlt remotely comparable to the nonsense you've trotted out here.
Sheldon;
You’re lengthy posts point to one thing (or two or three). You love the sound of your own writing voice, and you don’t give a hairy penis of a damn whether anyone has a response to your arguments - because in your own mind you are the be all end all of intellectualism.
Regarding our little ad hominem back and forth. Sheldon, I don’t know how big or small your erect penis is, okay? If I make fun of it being unusually small or abnormally large - it’s all in good taste.
But degreasing - and lowering insults to the level of stigma is a different thiing. Although, I will express that I am not offended by it; I don’t suffer from schizophrenia - I suffer from a milder condition that, indeed, does include voices as a symptom.
In any case, I am willing to bury the hatchet. However, you’re response to the Fátima case is profusely stupid. “No it’s not” “No they didn’t”. ???
What is that? Yes. The girls predicted the event. Yes 40,000 people heard about the prediction and showed up for the event. Yes, an event happened involving the sun.
You can attack this scenario on certain levels and not others. You can discount the actual event as a weather phenomenon - but you can’t say the Shepard girls failed to announce its coming.
In any event. There are numerous miracles around the world that require some sort of explanation.
Take the self immolation of Buddhist monks during the Vietnam war? Do you think, Sheldon, that you could cover your self in gasoline, light your self ablaze and remain in a seated position until the flames had consumed your life?
This is exactly what some monks did in response to South Vietnam’s treatment of Buddhists during the Vietnam war. Good luck explaining these person’s ability to with stand the pain in anything other than a supernatural fashion.
@ Rat Spit
Going to interrupt your little love fest with Sheldon....
However in the Fatima non miracle, several thousand (not 40,000) people turned up..yet of all the observers looking at the sun that day through smoked glass, negatives, polarised sunglasses, or polarised telescopes and observatories, not one saw the phenomenon as described by the many who who were spending up to twenty minutes staring at the sun with naked eyes.
There is a very good physiological reason for the discrepancy. I suggest you look it up you sad little rat bastard LOL...you are funny...Fatima LOL...And yes the little girls were beatified at just the time that the Church were losing power to a secular government in Portugal..coincidence...or "gods plan?" Yes I am a cynic and with good reason.
No there are not, there are some very rare happenings around the world that await confirmation....the explanation will wait until the facts emerge.
Amazing what the human mind can accomplish when driven to extremes. The Japanese women in Okinawa throwing themselves and their children off cliffs, children running onto the swords of invaders as described in several cultures...the Japanese customs of Seppuku...nothing miraculous, almost commonplace. Humans accomplish amazing things on a daily basis.
So rat snit...your bubble is burst again. Damn. I enjoy it when you are riding your high (somewhat fanciful) horse...but watching you tumble to earth is infinitely more amusing...
Anyway, apologies for interrupting your pre onanistic foreplay with Sheldon..off you go...dragging your tail behind you.. remember the tissues!
And yet another petty ad hominem attack, rather proves my point. I think its clear you don't understand the difference between derogating the contents of a post and pure ad hominem .
There is no miracle at Fatima and no one predicted it. All you've done Again is repeat your claims..
CLAIMS ARE NOT EVIDENCE.
If something requires an explanation then it's unexplained by definition, and any assertions based on the lack of a contrary explanation or evidence to a claim are by definition an argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacy.
Self immolation doesn't require or provide any supernatural evidence.
"
Good luck explaining these person’s ability to with stand the pain in anything other than a supernatural fashion."
Yet again this is a text book argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacy. The lack of an explanation doesn't validate your claim it requires a supernatural miracle. What's more you have not offered any explanation or evidence to support your claim, just pointed to the lack of contrary evidence
This has been explained carefully now several times, so I can only assume your endless repetition of it is mendacious.
Argumentum ad ignorantiam
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance
@rat spit
"Regarding miracles. 40,000 people witnessed a prophesied miracle at the miracle of Fátima. It was foretold and it came true. It was foretold by an apparition believed to be the Virgin Mary and it came true and 40,000 people witnessed it. The young girls who made contact with the apparition are now all saints."
Yes, there were a lot of people there. Yes, there was a collection of inconsistent and contradictory accounts. Yes, there was a temperature inversion in the sky that made the sun distorted. And yes, this story is exaggerated beyond belief.17
Dark matter is hard to detect. But it has been detected, unlike a god.
Also, when it has been detected you can directly observe it. You don't need to rely on faith, or your spirit being moved, or a feeling in your heart, or a personal relationship with it, etc
@lost locke
Go back to your Wikipedia article and reread it. Dark Matter is a hypothetical substance based on the fact that galaxies are exhibiting far greater indications of gravitational force than what the actual visible matter contained within them could otherwise supply.
If you still maintain that it’s been detected - please quote or cite something. Thank you.
@rat spit
"If you still maintain that it’s been detected - please quote or cite something. Thank you."
ESA’s XMM-Newton spacecraft spotted a weird spike in X-ray emissions coming from two different spots in the universe. Many scientists believe this may be indicators of dark matter. https://www.iflscience.com/space/could-scientists-have-finally-detected-...
Many centuries ago primitive man witnessed lightning, and attributed it to gods. Eventually science caught up and we now know that lightning has a scientific explanation. This is the same with dark matter. We know something is out there, but we have not been able to detect it directly with our current technology.
Science detected dark matter, eventually science will explain it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZXlQuXuwA8
Occam's razor also applies, a god explanation requires a lot more speculation.
Rat spit, you ever look at a glass of beer, and notice the bubbles forming? Have you ever wondered why they formed? I will give you a little secret, god did not do it. Tiny particles on the glass were points where the bubbles could form. They are so small that they are invisible to the naked eye.
Just because it is not easily detectable, that does not mean god is involved.
@David
I appreciate the article. Two observations does not a pattern make. Please read the bottom comments. This topic was never created to explain that God is the reason why galaxies don’t rip them selves apart. And yes, I have stared into many a pint of golden lager thinking to my self - “Self? Is it God making these bubbles?” And now, thanks to you, I have an answer affirming that to the negative.
rat spit,
"If you still maintain that it’s been detected - please quote or cite something. Thank you."
The only Dark Matter in this solar system is between some people's ears.
ratspit "Go back to your Wikipedia article and reread it."
Well this is from that very article, and it claims there is evidence:
"The primary evidence for dark matter is that calculations show that many galaxies would fly apart instead of rotating, or would not have formed or move as they do, if they did not contain a large amount of unseen matter. Other lines of evidence include observations in gravitational lensing, from the cosmic microwave background, from astronomical observations of the observable universe's current structure, from the formation and evolution of galaxies, from mass location during galactic collisions, and from the motion of galaxies within galaxy clusters. In the standard Lambda-CDM model of cosmology, the total mass–energy of the universe contains 5% ordinary matter and energy, 27% dark matter and 68% of an unknown form of energy known as dark energy. Thus, dark matter constitutes 85% of total mass, while dark energy plus dark matter constitute 95% of total mass–energy content."
So you're wrong to say there is no evidence, and even though it is not fully understood yet, to compare it to belief in a supernatural deity is extremely disingenuous, it;s a falsifiable idea for a start, unlike supernatural deities. I mean how could your belief in a deity be falsified? What evidence can you demonstrate for any deity comparable to what is demonstrated for Dark Matter?
If everything science thinks it knows about Dark Matter is wrong, and it is falsified, then science will abandon it, that will never happen with theism, theists cling to their beliefs without any evidence and often in spite of contrary evidence.
@Sheldon
Ugh. No comment. If you can’t represent me, I won’t bother correcting you time and time again.
"Ugh. No comment. If you can’t represent me, I won’t bother correcting you time and time again."
The article you linked and urged someone to read claimed there is evidence for Dark Matter.
I have no idea what that disjointed rant means or is about, but its clear you didn't properly read the article before you linked it. Now you're just squirming all over the place. Have the integrity to admit it when you've made an error.
If you start with the postulate that the law of gravity is accurate; that is a detection.
"Sound like anyone you know, Atheists? Maybe a certain Deity by the name of God, hmm? What are your views "
My view is you have created yet another argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacy. Why a deity hiding in there, why not mermaids or leprechauns, it's no less irrational.
@Sheldon’s Little Sheldon
Obviously, as per your usual verbiage, you have misinterpreted me and misrepresented me.
What I’ve done here is shown the great lengths to which scientists will go in order to maintain a hold on a theory.
85% of the matter in these galaxies is undetectable - and for all intents and purposes may as well not be there ie. some other explanation might be found. However, as gravity is the only force that holds galaxies together (as far as what is known by scientists) they put absolute faith in the Dark Matter hypotheses.
What I am claiming about God is that, on any given day, you could place an 85% margin of ignorance towards some kind of faith in Him.
Given that you don’t know what 85% of your environment is made of - why not put faith in an appeal to a force of nature Who is undetectable- yet changes the world according to some kind of Divine plan.
The scientists are doing exactly what the theists are doing. They’re explaining the universe using matters of faith. I’ve said nothing about God hiding in galaxies - holding them together.
@Rat Spit
"The scientists are doing exactly what the theists are doing. They’re explaining the universe using matters of faith. I’ve said nothing about God hiding in galaxies - holding them together."
Science gives us the best explanation for the moment. As our technology and understanding improves, theories may be discarded or adjusted. But faith is not involved.
What you've shown is that despite your ridiculous assertion that your endless rhetoric is rational, you still don't recognise common logical fallacies like argumentum ad ignorantiam. You've also shown yet again you don't understand the basic scientific method.
And of course you've yet again shown that when your vapid rhetoric is challenged you resort to ad hominem fallacies.
Dark Matter is falsifiable, as all scientific ideas must be. Religious superstions like yours are not. That's the difference. Scientists are working on ways to test and if possible falsify or validate its existence. Religious adherents are not interested in any evidence or facts that falsify their doctrines. Quite the opposite is true, as you have shown they live in denial of objective facts all the time.
All scientific ideas, even the best evidenced accepted or valid scientific theories, that are accepted globally as scientific facts, must remain tentative, and this is an integral part of the method to correct errors.
Religions in stark contrast cling doggedly to peurile myths that have long since been debunked, disproved, or discredited, some of which are risible nonsense thatdefy known scientific facts.
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2016/dec/31/dark-matter-existence-sp...
That's an experiment started in 2016 to try and falsify dark matter. Ortajeanother step towards validating the theory.
Science has always abandoned what is demonstrably false. When has religion ever done this? What would falsify the existence of a supernatural deity?
"The majority of dark matteris thought to be non-baryonic in nature, possibly being composed of some as-yet undiscovered subatomic particles. Its presence is implied in a variety of astrophysical observations, including gravitational effects that cannot be explained unless more matter is present than can be seen."
Nothing supernatural nor any magic is necessary there. Unlike your woo woo superstion.
"I’ve said nothing about God hiding in galaxies - "
Liar...Its in your op here:
"Now, Dark Matter composes the majority of the Matter in any given galaxy; it is invisible; does not interact with electromagnetic energy; and is “very hard to detect”.
Sound like anyone you know, Atheists? Maybe a certain Deity by the name of God,:
You are either losing track of your own endless superstitious rhetoric, or you're blatantly lying. I'd say it's a 50/50 call given your muddled thinking and rank dishonesty thus far.
@ Sheldon
I’ll repeat my self and the point of this topic. Believing in an undetectable substance which accounts for 85% of the observable data when you barely have a trace of it is as stupid as believing in God.
Dark Matter - undetectable, invisible, potent
God - undetectable, invisble, potent
Kind of sound the same, don’t they? Not THE same thing. Just equally ridiculous ideas. As far as your point regarding falsifiable theory - I get it. Thanks. This topic isn’t one of my shining moments. I’ll admit it. But thanks for posting.
And miracles make God falsifiable. A miracle is observed - if a reason other than God is found for it, then we have falsified it. If no explanation can be found, we attribute the miracle to God.
Jesus was famous for his miracles. But he also said that it was a depraved generation that needed a sign from God to believe in Him.
Pages