If the universe did not come about by pure chance - what did happen?
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.
The gas meter in my first car was broken, I found that out the hard way, running out of gas when trying to accelerate from a stop at stoplight in an intersection. Fortunately, instead of spending hundreds to fix the gas gauge, I had other tools available to me to prevent running out of gas again.
I was able to use the information that, no gas = no acceleration, and basic understanding of miles per gallon, both city and highway, knowledge of how big the tank is, and how much gas I put in the last fill up. I can do some basic math, and know I needed to refill every 200 miles of mostly city driving. (MPG sucked back then, and as a teenager I had a lead foot.)
All of which of course was done w/o ever being able to see or actively measure how much gas was in the gas tank. I never ran out of gas again.
"my thinking... scientific method...observation....hmm. how can you observe what you can't see"
The universe is measurable, observable and quantifiable even though all those things boggle my brain with their magnitude.
There is no comparison with your fanciful 'god" on the other hand that is none of these things and seems to have chosen (to the exclusion of all others) an otherwise unremarkable, violent, misogynistic and treacherous set of 'tribes' in the middle east as the only humans worth saving for later consumption.
Paul Pores "my thinking... scientific method...observation....hmm. how can you observe what you can't see..."
You test for any physical effects it has, that's how black holes are located. We don't have to see something to demonstrate evidence it there.
"you weren't around for 14.6 billion years to see lol?"
You weren't around 2000 years again, yet believe the superstitious guff claimed about things around that date.
"We haven't seen the creation of the universe, the stars, the galaxies, the back holes, and everything else - "
I agree, so why then do you believe they were "created".
"so we are using faith in scientific experimentation to believe what could have happened."
Nope, the calculation that underpin the big bang theory models are all based on evidence, no faith is used or needed. Unlike absurd beliefs in myths about magic apples, talking snakes, and virgin births, none of which anyone witnessed or can demonstrate any objective evidence for. Give it up this either the poorest trolling I've ever seen, or you are woefully out of your depth. Or both of course.
@Paul Pores: Nothing can change my worldview and my faith I have in Jesus Christ.
Then there's nothing more to talk about, is there? Why are you even here?
Alright, I'm back.
The fact that you think the Big Bang or evolution happened by pure chance proves that you don't know much about them. You basically admit that you are willfully ignorant about this. That's a big step.
No, it's you who believe it came about by pure chance. I didn't say I believed that. I said I've heard all about it and know about it.
Don’t tell me what I believe, especially when it isn’t true.
OK - so then would you be willing to explain to me what you believe, fruyian?
What I believe is irrelevant, it's the facts and evidence that counts.
Ok fruyian. So if you don't believe in Jehovah God, then you must believe that everything just "happened" when that singularity released its unfathomable amount of energy and birthed the universe.
If you don't believe God did it, then you must believe that everything happened by pure chance. Otherwise... What do you believe?
The laws of nature (and the use of instruments), like running a movie backwards, trace our expanding universe back to a tiny region of incredible temperature. Since energy is conserved and gravitational expansion is projected in reverse, you CAN'T ESCAPE the Big Bang with its incredible temperatures. It HAD TO HAVE HAPPENED. No scientists of repute have yet found a need to insert God, an imaginary being, into the scientific picture.
False Dichotomy. You are shifting the burden of proof and committing an argument from ignorance fallacy. I don't owe you an explanation. My position is I don't know how the universe began.
Take a look at this well-reasoned video by QualiaSoup: The burden of proof. https://youtu.be/KayBys8gaJY?t=2m29s
Care to explain? You've dodged it. It's a simple answer really - yes I think the world is a product of chance or no I don't...
If you doubt the way I'm describing it, then by default you assume all came to be by pure chance. Go ahead, give me a rebuttal on this.
Well before we do anything I want to square a few things out first.
Please define what you mean when you use the expression "By pure chance"?
You'll have to be more specific. You say "everything" and "happened" as if there's one answer that explains everything. There are many fields of science that explain many processes that answer many questions.
That said, there are many questions where I'll say, "I don't know." You don't get to insert god into those questions. No "who" is needed until such time "who" is shown to exist.
fruyian, How does what you said make sense?
What do you want me to explain?
I believe God created everything out of complete nothingness, and science says that everything was made by a random singularity that seemingly released its energy at a particular point.
You mean to tell me this singularity was intelligent? This singularity had pre-planned everything to happen? You're saying the singularity itself is a "god"?
"Go ahead, give me a rebuttal on this."
OK...He didn't dodge anything your question is fallacious, it's called a false dichotomy fallacy because you are trying to claim there are only two possible answers, one of which is the one you favour (selection bias) and the other a straw man argument. Stupid ill informed religious apologists usually leap to an argument from ignorance fallacy here, as in "if it's not my sky fairy using magic, then what else could have created the universe" please note the use of the word created in there which they always use and this one is called begging the question fallacy.
When atheists tell you your beliefs are irrational it's not an ad hominem fallacy, it's based on your use of arguments containing fallacies.
"Ok fruyian. So if you don't believe in Jehovah God, then you must believe that everything just "happened"
False dichotomy fallacy, *AGAIN..
The universe exists, and that is a fact, it is a material natural universe, and that is another fact. We know it had a point of origin, and that is another fact. Now all these facts are based on objective empirical evidence. What objective empirical evidence can you demonstrate for the supernatural deity you're claiming exists? So far all you've offered are fallacious false dichotomies, and anything that is irrational cannot be asserted as logically valid, even if you don't know it.
"No, it's you who believe it came about by pure chance. I didn't say I believed that. I said I've heard all about it and know about it."
Your posts are either lies or stupidity or both, but by all means cite a single scientific source that claims this?
I don't understand you people - you make zero sense at all.
Why would you believe everything came from a singularity that existed in a "nothingness" yet you can't believe that a supreme God was in full control and created all?
What is the difference between the singularity and God to you people?
@ Paul Pores
"What is the difference between the singularity and God to you people?"
Observation and a lot of smart people have worked out a lot, and now many people understand that at one time the universe we inhabit was a singularity, or infinite mass but zero dimensions.
The difference between your position and mine (I can only speak for myself) is that we have reached a difficult cliff, but eventually we will learn what occurred before the singularity. You, on the other hand, arrive at the singularity, and since it appears to overwhelm you, give up and state "god did it, I don't need to look any further."
I have great confidence that there was a singularity. I have zero confidence that any god exists.
A difference between the singularity and god is that we know that the singularity existed.
Another difference is that you seem to think that something can be created from nothing - most people who ascribe to the Big Bang theory do not believe this.
@Paul Pores: I don't understand you people - you make zero sense at all.
You believe, purely because other believers have told you so, that the universe was created by an invisible magical sky-fairy, whose creation went so horribly wrong that he had to send his son, who was also himself, to be tortured to death to make the world all right again. And we've all lived happily ever after, right?
Yes. That all sounds perfectly sensible.
The Big Bang is based on solid evidence even if you don't understand it.
God is a gigantic projection of fantasy by little specks of carbon and water living on a tiny speck of dust, which orbits one of a trillion stars in the Milky Way, which itself is but one of a trillion galaxies in the observable universe, and the observable universe is probably a tiny part of the total universe.
So, this infinitesimal bit of protoplasm projects a glorified, huge image of itself that only makes sense at human dimensions. Thus, we get the Big Daddy in the sky. You might say that the whole thing has been blown out of proportion!
"I don't understand you people - you make zero sense at all."
That's the first thing you've claimed I actually believe, that you can make no sense of what you have read here.
"What is the difference between the singularity and God to you people?"
1.the state, fact, quality, or condition of being singular.
2. PHYSICSMATHEMATICS a point at which a function takes an infinite value, especially in space–time when matter is infinitely dense, such as at the centre of a black hole.
I have yet to hear anyone define their fictional deities in either of those terms, so the variation between those definitions is ipso facto the difference "between" them
Because a singularity expanding is much more believable than magic thinking powers of an illogical creature that does not follow the laws of physics.
It's been confirmed by the redshift of distant stars that the universe is expanding and keeps expanding faster. If you think logically if it's expanding, it must've been smaller in the past and unimaginably small in the beginning when it formed.
The difference between my views and your views couldn't be more different. Yours relies on faith, even if it makes no sense at all. Your so called holy book talks about talking donkeys, snakes and bushes, giants, lashing and stoning people to death as punishment, etc... It's clearly been written in a time when people knew absolutely nothing about the world around them and even thought when it rained their god was sad or angry. If I would believe there's rainbow unicorns in the core of the planet Neptune everyone would think I'm crazy, yet believing in a magical sky being that created everything in a few days isn't?
I only accept what can be proven or what could be mathematically correct or plausible. It requires no faith, it requires common sense and looking at the evidence. There are some theories that could be wrong, especially if you look into the field of quantumphysics and some astronomical phenomena, but the scientific community knows this and if a better, more plausible theory with sufficient evidence does arise, it's generally accepted over the old one.
Also the fact that you say there's no evidence of the past means you have absolutely zero knowledge of even the most basic principles and discoveries in paleontology, archeology and astronomy.
Why do you assume that reality is not eternal?
@Orignal Post by PP
I don't know, there are some theories based on observations we have made with tools we have created that gives a few ideas. I do agree science is weak about what happened before the big bang, so far most of the conclusions are it is unknowable.
Not a better question, a "who" based on available evidence and reasoning is extremely unlikely. Would you really even call your own god "who?"
At least you are honest. You refuse to accept information, and you need faith (in all caps to boot!) Hey if you strongly feel you need faith, then you need faith, not going to argue that. My personal opinion of course is: faith/religion is more like the warm blankie you can not let go of or grow out of, but if you "NEED" the warm blankie then you need it.
My "faith," in the evolution theory, (I would use the wording of evidence based conclusion over faith personally,) is indeed quite strong, but who knows if it is stronger, weaker or the same as your conviction for your god. I have lots of "faith" in the big bang too, but that is a bit harder to observe, and also, many folks make the mistake of thinking science says "the big bang" is how everything came into being. That is not the case, it is what happened directly after.
A time machine to somehow magically travel to 14.6 billion years in the past is a ridiculous notion on many levels. But yeah, for sure, no one can directly observe the start of the universe, (if there was one,) just like no one can directly observe your god idea.
Even if somehow such a time machine was possible, even if I somehow was able to observe the first few seconds of the big bang, I would never be 100% confident that my observation = the correct answer to the formation of the universe. Want to know what I am confident on? That these fantasy stories humans made up about "gods" did not create the universe. I am as confident these god ideas are fiction, as I am that the sun will rise from the what we call the "east" tomorrow.
Paul Pores, you wrote, “I know all about your Big Bang theories, your evolutionary concepts, your philosophies how a God couldn't possibly exist, your statistics showing how everything came to be by pure chance, etc.”
“Your, BBT? Your evolutionary concepts, your ...., your....
Really, they don’t belong to me. So far as I know, they don’t belong to anyone who posts here.
Additionally, are you asserting that all people identified as atheist think the BBT, for instance, is true? Are you quite sure that is the case?
You ask folks who are called atheist ‘who’ created the universe if your gawd didn’t. You ask atheists what happened. How the fuck am I supposed to know?
Anybody else finding Paul Pore's "you people" statements and questions a bit weird?
(Edited for typo)