Does anyone actually believe in God or are they just afraid...

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Joe, Apr 22, 2014.

  1. They are the same argument and jem knows it.
     
    #291     May 6, 2014
  2. jem

    jem

    1. the fine tunings of the constants of the universe has its genesis in the science, cosmology and physics. It has been observed and debated by physicists.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine-tuned_Universe

    2. whereas the ID argument is mostly based on biology and concepts like irreducible complexity, dna and information technology.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligent_design


    3. Lately some IDers have picked up the fine tuning argument.

    So for me... ID is biology, biologists, information tech guys and believers
    Fine Tuning is cosmologists and physicists
















     
    #292     May 6, 2014
  3. jem

    jem

    good question.
    That the constants are fine tuned is apparent to our current (non troll) understanding of science.
    the real question is what is the explanation, and I think most scientists would say Tuner or hope to find a Multiverse or hope to find TOE... I doubt it gets near 97% for any explanation.


     
    #293     May 6, 2014
  4. stu

    stu

    That's right. You are always linking to posts which contradict the silly things you say.


    Utter rubbish. Higgs remains a part of the Hierarchy problem or "fine tuning" to you, as was the case before being discovered.

    "Its funny cause the Middle Ages thinking theist troll just lies his ass off, over and over."
     
    #294     May 7, 2014
  5. stu

    stu


    .....but "fine tunings" actually being fine tunings, is never defined or established or confirmed in cosmology and physics as science.
    "Fine tuning" is only a phrase, a term, an interpretation in cosmology and physics for a set of observations that appear to be especially particular to each other, but as yet remain unexplained.

    In religion, "Fine tuning" is an excuse to throw a deity at a specific group of yet undetermined extraordinary natural circumstances.


    Which are thoroughly discredited debunked and rejected by the science they try to invade.


    Except you can only insinuate both, as neither are science.
     
    #295     May 7, 2014
  6. stu

    stu

    No need, there is gravity. Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing.

    That's what's "apparent to our current (non troll) understanding of science."
     
    #296     May 7, 2014
  7. Says your "god" who doesn't know the composition of over 95% of the universe, and who also once claimed that time would reverse and people would die before they were born.
     
    #297     May 7, 2014
  8. stu

    stu

    You'll need turn to Jem for a "god" whether it be Hawking or whatever. Other than that, it's a matter for science.
     
    #298     May 7, 2014
  9. Hawking is your "god," STUpid, because you take what he says on faith no matter how absurd it is.
     
    #299     May 7, 2014
  10. stu

    stu

    You have no idea what I do or don't take on faith, stupid.
    The only ones around here insisting what certain scientists say confirms their assumptions are those like yourself, who don't actually have any real argument at all. As proven each time you post.
     
    #300     May 7, 2014