Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Log in or create an account to join the discussions on the Atheist Republic forums.
@ Rat Spit
You were doing fine until you wrote that load of bollocks....I do worry about you...
@old Man shouts
Ha ha ha. No need to worry. I’m testing Sheldon with this somewhat (very somewhat) appearingly logical argument to get his reaction.
But for the sake of argument - we should all have a little talk about the “miracle of Fátima”. Witnessed by 40,000 people (according to some estimates) and prophesied by three young shepherd girls (who have been awarded a certificate of sainthood posthumously).
Does this not confirm God’s existence? Or Mother Mary’s at the very least? Is it not a falsifiable event?
Lol. I can’t go on. I don’t believe a word I’m saying. But. If any theists like this line of reasoning - by all means - it’s yours for the taking.
@ Rat spit
We have that in common: I don’t believe a word I’m saying. I don't believe you believe a word you are saying either...
Dark Matter isn't completely undetectable, read the article you linked, it has an objectively measurable effect.
"And miracles make God falsifiable. A miracle is observed "
Great, now all you have to do is demonstrate objective evidence for a miracle, in the same way scientists have measured the effects of what they call Dark Matter. Otherwise no, they're not remotely the same, and again how would an anecdotal claim that miracles have been observed be falsifiable? People claim to have observed mermaids, and to have been beamed aboard alien spacecraft, these claims are not evidence.
"If no explanation can be found, we attribute the miracle to God."
That is yet again the very definition of an argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacy.
"Jesus was famous for his miracles."
As is Harry Potter for his wizardry, if we are going to take unevidenced anecdotal claims from a book at face value.
"But he also said that it was a depraved generation that needed a sign from God to believe in Him."
No he didn't - Hitchens's razor applied. Seriously you donlt seem to realise that claims are not evidence.
The miracle of Fátima - nothing more to be said. I don’t share the same enthusiasm as you when it comes to nit picking.
There is plenty more to be said, just because you haven't the integrity to accept you're claims for a miracle are based on hearsay and fallacies. It' hardly nitpicking to object that you relentlessly make unevidenced claims either. This is typical of the theists we see on here, they preach, and make grandiose claims, but then sulk and become reticent when their claims are challenged with rational objections.
You claimed: ""If no explanation can be found, we attribute the miracle to God.""
This simply isn't true, it's the very definition of a argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacy.
There is no evidence for any "miracle" at Fatima, only the claims for Fatima, and you have proved unequivocally that you can't produce any evidence for the claim. Only bare assertion and logical fallacies.
It is more likely that 40,000 people were wrong about the Sun dancing about in the sky than the more than 1,700,000,000 people who did not see the destruction of the Solar System.
1) Something happened - no evidence no exploratory powers.
2) 400000 people saw it - no evidence.
3) Can't be explained therefor godidit.
So We have an argument from ignorance fallacy (1) check.
Then we have argumentum ad populum, (2) a bare appeal to numbers.
A god of the gaps fallacy, which is another appeal to ignorance fallacy.
Oh, and he thinks dismissing it and citing Hitchens's razor is an "idiotic response".
All I know is he owes me another irony meter, as he's broken mine again.
"Jesus was famous for his miracles."
Don't you think that Moses did more impressive miracles than the Jesus character? And what about the big miracle Noah pulled off? Isn't one giant miracle better than a lot of little ones?
If Jesus was still wiggling on the cross after 2,000 years he would get the grand prize.
One more time for the slow learner then. DARK MATTER IS NOT UNDETECTABLE. Like gravity it's effect can be objectively evidenced.
Do you think gravity is a myth because we can't see touch smell taste or hear it?
The effect of DM can be objectively measured. What objective evidence can anyone demonstrate for any deity or anything supernatural?
"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"
The scientific community "believes" this dark matter proposal because the observations and math indicate there is something out there. It was not invented, it was driven by data.
Religion is not driven by valid observation or data.
"Now, to make things right, they’ve decided that 15 % of the galaxy is detectable matter. The other 85 % is something called “Dark Matter”."
Dark Matter is a BS idea. If 85% of matter is Dark Matter then why is there no evidence of it in our solar system?
No argument here, old man.
Let me state this another way so as not to confuse anyone. This is a “science of gaps” argument.
Ahem. Scientists have an 85% sized gap in their understanding of how galaxies stay hinged. If they decide to place their bets on an “invisible, undetectable - yet potent and exotic form of matter” - they are:
a) as stupid as a Theist and/or
b) biased towards a belief with as much conviction as a Theist
This one example draws comparisons to Science and Religion. I am not attempting to prove God to anyone. If I were, I would simply think to my self “God?” And He would say “What do you want!” And then say, “See? See!”
The concept of the existence of Dark Matter is falsifiable, scientists have devised methods and are working on them, like the one I linked above.
The concept of a deity is unfalsifiable, and no amount of negative results returned on the claims and beliefs of theists are ever acknowledged. They either ignore them or try to desperately rationalise the negative result. Moving on to the next gap in our knowledge they can insert their fictional deity into, as you tried to do in your op.
There is no comparison between trying to study and either validate or falsify an idea like Dark Matter using the scientific method, and the unevidenced superstious belief an invisible unevidenced and unfalsifiable deity exists. What objective methods and experiments have montheistic religions created to falsify their core belief? None is the answer, as unlike science they're only interested in preserving their a priori belief, whereas science is advanced by a negative result as this increases our knowledge of the universe and how it functions.
Falsifying the existence of Dark Matter would be a huge success for science.
Theists are so blinkered they don't seem to understand the science venerated and rewards this who falsify ideas as much as those who validate them, because it a vital part of the scientific method.
OK, let's say dark matter is a BS idea. What is your explanation for where the other 85% of the gravity is coming from? Are you saying something other than mass is creating gravity? If so, what? And how?
Not my concern, quite frankly. But just as Newton’s theory of gravity was surpassed by Einstein’s - perhaps someone will have to come along and surpass Einstein - the theories simply break down on a galactic scale (as I understand it; especially on the outskirts where the “arms” of the galaxies are to be found). I am not currently an Astrophysicist- so ... if I had to make a prediction - someone will come along and quantify “nothingness”.
Buddhist wisdom has long known about the meditative attainment of “nothingness”. And for those who have attained such a state - the weight of it is known to them.
Altering the theory of gravity to fix the dark matter problem hasn't worked, and there is good reasons to believe that is not the solution. First off it works great on larger scales. For example, using the theory of gravity on galaxy clusters produces predictions that match observation IF you plug in the mass of galaxies assuming they are populated with massive, cold, particles that don't couple with the electromagnetic field (aka dark matter WIMPS).
Also the WIMP version of dark matter successfully predicts the outcomes of galactic collisions. Galaxies can collide where the WIMP model predicts the dark matter in the two galaxies will combine, while the rest (the visible parts) will separate. When this has been observed, the regular laws of gravity start making accurate predictions about the new galaxies (the ones without the dark matter).
It is also favored because it just postulates the existence of a massive particle. Every time a more powerful accelerator is turned it, it creates new types of even more massive particles. The notion that there are more massive particles out beyond the current experimental range is something almost everyone accepts. So a postulate the relies on the existence of an undetected massive particle isn't much of a stretch.
Newton's theories of gravity weren't surpassed by Einstein's, relativity adds to our understanding of how gravity functions. The two theories overlap.
Buddhism has nothing to do with science, and nothingness is woo woo superstition it has no scientific validity at all. You're simply making up unevidenced assertions that science will validate part of your own religious beliefs. You might as well claim science will find Elvis living on Mars for all the sense that claim makes.
Nothingness ffs...dear oh dear.
Never experienced Nothingness, eh? I’ve known about it since I was an adolescent. Thought experiments. Not you though. Doesn’t really surprise me. But let me ask you ... what or where were you before you were born? Where will you be once you die? And have you ever pondered the universe, asking - “why something, instead of nothing?”
For a sceptic, you really don’t ask a lot of interesting questions. You sort of just sit on your asinine back end telling people what to think and believe.
Please accurately define "nothingness" and demonstrate some objective evidence for it.
"Thought experiments. Not you though. Doesn’t really surprise me."
You know nothing about me, and your endless petty digs say more about you than they do me.
"what or where were you before you were born? "
That would depend on how long before I was born you are talking about. I was a developing foetus, a blastocyst, and prior to that I didn't exist at all.
" Where will you be once you die?"
Again the question is too vague, do you mean my physical remains? My personality and thoughts and all the memories that make me who I am will obviously be lost when my brain dies, as it is with all humans. I will live on briefly in the minds of those who knew me and survive my death, but beyond that I find it absurd that anyone can survive their own physical deaths in any meaningful way.
"“why something, instead of nothing?”"
"For a sceptic, you really don’t ask a lot of interesting questions."
I disagree, you just find woo woo superstition fascinating and I don't.
"You sort of just sit on your asinine back end telling people what to think and believe."
I have never told anyone what to think or what to believe, and it is you who sought atheists out to preach your beliefs to. So again you are being very dishonest, indeed this accusation is hilariously ironic coming from you, given the strident and intransigent way you have relentlessly asserted your superstitious beliefs on here, insisting others disprove your claims or think as you do. You do this relentlessly.
I'm afraid your thinking is pretty muddled when you do this. Take a look at this from your OP as an example:
"What are your views on this sort of scientific woo woo? Your fiend, rat spit"
Science and woo woo are mutually exclusive, and again you could simply Google the phrase? Though I must admit your typo calling yourself a fiend is pretty funny.
1. relating to or holding unconventional beliefs regarded as having little or **no scientific basis,** especially those relating to spirituality, mysticism, or alternative medicine.
Something can't be both woo woo and scientific. Everything scientists think they know about Dark Matter may turn out to be false, but if the evidence shows this science will abandon it, as it is an objective method, that has strict principles of validation. You and the other theists on here simply assert your beliefs without evidence, and sometimes even when the evidence contradicts the claims or beliefs.
Even if Dark Matter turns out to be false, this comparison of theistic belief with a scientific hypothesis is a false dichotomy.
Why are you evading the question, Sheldon. You know exactly what I mean by “before you were born.” Before you were conceived, Sheldon. What of you? Where were you?
And what is “lost” can be found. Can your personality be “found” somewhere after your death. Would you mind rephrasing your answer to the question, “where do you end up when you die?”
To the existential question “why something, instead of nothing” - you reply with (to paraphrase) “I don’t know and I’ve never asked myself that question - or received an answer”
I answered the question, why are you telling bare faced lies again? Here's my answer again then so everyone can see you have lied.
"That would depend on how long before I was born you are talking about. I was a developing foetus, a blastocyst, and prior to that I didn't exist at all."
Rat spit "Before you were conceived, Sheldon. What of you? Where were you?"
Still the same answer as before, this won't change because you repeat the question, and lie that I haven't answered it. So here it is for a third time *****I was a developing foetus, a blastocyst, and prior to that I didn't exist at all."*****]
"“where do you end up when you die?”"
Already answered this, my remains will be either cremated or donated to science. My thoughts, memories and personality will end when my brain dies. As it does with every one else.
To the existential question “why something, instead of nothing” - you reply with (to paraphrase) “I don’t know and I’ve never asked myself that question - or received an answer”"
That's not a paraphrase that's a lie. To our facile question why is there something, I responded why not? You have no answer to my question anymore than I do yours, so your petty jibes and arrogant posturing are again very ironic.
So despite your lie, and my having answered your specious questions twice, you are still refusing to answer mine.
Please accurately define "nothingness" and demonstrate some objective evidence for it.
Is this belief so grounded in evidence and underpinned by its explanatory powers you can't muster a single word about it?
Quelled surprise, but then that's the problem with woo woo superstion, it's an empty bag when you look inside.
Inductive reasoning shows that prior to your birth and also postmortem you will be “nothing”.
“Nothing” is synonymous with “Non-existent”.
I'm not sure I follow your point? My physical brain will die, and my consciousness will die with it. I experienced nothing before my brain was conscious and started to store memories, and that is what will happen when I die, because my brain will have ceased to function.
Nothing supernatural is required to explain this. You seem to telling me what I already accept as true, and not what you have been claiming until now?
"My physical brain will die, and my consciousness will die with it."
Now you, are stating things out of ignorance. Science does NOT know what consciousness is, or where it is located. They hypothesise it is located in the brain.
I'm in the rat spit boat on this one. Not everything his is saying but, the premiss that meditation can lead to what we would consider "supernatural" states of being, but in essence it is still a natural part of our make up as humans.
After extreme practice in concentration, we can move our awareness out of our physical bodies. This happens to everyone at death, but we don't have the concentration needed to notice it.
"OK, let's say dark matter is a BS idea. What is your explanation for where the other 85% of the gravity is coming from?
Did you see what you just did? You just assumed that what people in "authority" says about there being missing matter that results in an 85% deficit. That is essentially what people do when they want to worship a deity. Just because Paul, Moses, Peter, Joseph Smith, Mohammed, Luther, Calvin, or any other "authority figure" yaps his jaws about his favorite god delusion doesn't make it factual.
If there was such a thing as "Dark Matter" why isn't there any in this solar system? You should have some on you hands right now.
Presumably there is as much dark matter in the solar system as there is within any other region of the same size (in the galaxy).
"Presumably there is as much dark matter in the solar system as there is within any other region of the same size (in the galaxy)."
Maybe the dark matter is hiding between some people's ears?
Not even remotely true. There is some evidence to support the existence of something we don't fully understand and scientists have given it the name Dark Matter.
Despite the hysteria it is not an accepted scientific fact, but it can be falsified and scientists arecwotking on that. This has nothing to do with appeals to authority at all. It will only ultimately be determined by objective evidence.