ARCHIVE: Burden of Proof

[Caledvwlch]

But we do know..... matter and energy cannot create themselves from nothing.

We know that.

It's a fact.

Yet matter and energy exist.

Exactly. And so what? So they must have come from somewhere? Not necessarily. They may simply exist. Just like the Christian God. No beginning, no end. I never heard a theist explain that one, and I see no reason or need to explain the origin of matter/energy/space/time.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Sure, that no God exists...

That isn't a plausible alternative to the the question of the origin of matter and energy.

I realize things move fast on TOL and maybe you are not used to the speed but do try and keep up.

 

[SUTG]

:cheers:

but I understand that it is just "compelling evidence" and not actual proof. That's fine, I didn't mean to argue semantics.

It just seems like it is almost impossible to "prove" anything outside of mathematics. Even if we took you to Spenser's house (which is actually a makeshift compund in the Mojave Desert) and showed you his blue shirt, he could have changed it right before we got there, you could be colorblind, he could be a Spenser impersonator, etc...

I guess my understanding of positive/negative claims is just off. :noid:

Or mine is!

What exactly is a negative claim then?

Maybe people mean different things, but I've always considered a negative claim as being the claim that a specific proposition is not true.

Of course, logically, all claims can be expressed in both ways if you permit yourself to use unusual linguistic constructs. Just add an "~" into your proposition and translate back to English.

 

[Spenser 2]

How could you possibly say that?

One says... I have a plausible answer.

The other says... I have no plausible answer.

Regardless of the actual answer the one with a plausible answer is far more credible than the one with no plausible answer or alternative.

Hence the Flying Spaghetti Monster. I have an answer to how to become a millionaire tomorrow on the stock market, does that make me far more credible than most?

 

[allsmiles]

Exactly. And so what? So they must have come from somewhere? Not necessarily. They may simply exist. Just like the Christian God. No beginning, no end. I never heard a theist explain that one, and I see no reason or need to explain the origin of matter/energy/space/time.

Knight hasn't addressed the impersonal creating force. one of the reasons i feel strongly about this idea is that it is possible to recognize and identify this specific force in creation itself.

one cannot specifically and positively identify the tri-une christian godhead in creation.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Exactly. And so what? So they must have come from somewhere? Not necessarily. They may simply exist. Just like the Christian God. No beginning, no end. I never heard a theist explain that one, and I see no reason or need to explain the origin of matter/energy/space/time.

:duh: God is described as being SUPERnatural not natural.

The SUPERnatural by definition would not be subject to the laws that govern the natural.

 

[Caledvwlch]

Apparently you have.

You claim that it's possible for the matter and energy that exists now existing eternally into the past. Energy does not last forever. Therefore you are suggesting that the matter and energy that exists now must in some way be perpetual.

From what I recall of high school physics (A Beka textbook, if anyone knows that name), energy does last forever, it simply transfers from one form to another. Not to mention that atoms themselves may very well be nothing but energy in their smallest components.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Hence the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

Is the Flying Spaghetti Monster your answer to the creation of matter and energy?

 

[Spenser 2]

But we do know..... matter and energy cannot create themselves from nothing.

We know that.

It's a fact.

Yet matter and energy exist.

This is only true shortly after the singularity. All laws seem to break down the closer you get to it...

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Knight hasn't addressed the impersonal creating force. one of the reasons i feel strongly about this idea is that it is possible to recognize and identify this specific force in creation itself.

one cannot specifically and positively identify the tri-une christian godhead in creation.

It's true I am not coming within a million miles of debating what type of SUPERnatural force created matter and energy, just that it is a plausible answer.

Good job allsmiles, I like to see you critically thinking. :up:

 

[Spenser 2]

Apparently you have.

You claim that it's possible for the matter and energy that exists now existing eternally into the past. Energy does not last forever. Therefore you are suggesting that the matter and energy that exists now must in some way be perpetual.

How could that be? It's a scientific impossibility.

False, science does not know enough on the subject to make such a claim. It is ok in science to also say "I don't know."

:think: Hmmmmm....... makes me wonder about the premise of this thread.

Belief is different from asserting fact.

 

[Caledvwlch]

:duh: God is described as being SUPERnatural not natural.

The SUPERnatural by definition would not be subject to the laws that govern the natural.

That's kind of a cop-out. You been arguing that because a thing exists (matter/energy/space/time), it must have an origin. The same principle can be applied to God in the same way.

 

[allsmiles]

It's true I am not coming within a million miles of debating what type of SUPERnatural force created matter and energy, just that it is a plausible answer.

Good job allsmiles, I like to see you critically thinking. :up:

thanks Knight, we may not agree on the specific identity of the creator but at least we can agree that we are at least created.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

This is only true shortly after the singularity. All laws seem to break down the closer you get to it...

Singularity?

I thought you said matter and energy could have existed eternally?

Are you now changing your answer?

 

[Spenser 2]

Is the Flying Spaghetti Monster your answer to the creation of matter and energy?

No, its a mocking of the idea that asserting anything some how makes you credible. :noway:

 

[Nathon Detroit]

False, science does not know enough on the subject to make such a claim. It is ok in science to also say "I don't know."

Apparently you know little about science.

[Freak impersonation] Usable energy runs out. Batteries drain, fires burn out.... entropy is real. Were you aware of that? [/Freak impersonation]

 

[Nathon Detroit]

No, its a mocking of the idea that asserting anything some how makes you credible. :noway:

I suggest that before you mock anything you should at least be able to come up with a plausible alternative. Until then, you make a fool of yourself as you have done in this thread.

 

[Spenser 2]

Singularity?

I thought you said matter and energy could have existed eternally?

Are you now changing your answer?

Not at all. What can science say for sure about a singularity? Not that much. This is where the I don't know fits perfectly well. This could be some force that creates matter and energy whether it be God or not. This could be some other form of energy in which matter and energy is indeed eternal. There is no way yet (if ever) to know what happened at or prior to (if that even makes sense) the singularity nor what exactly it is. So before you label me as agnostic, please note I consider the definition of atheism to be lack of belief...

 

[Spenser 2]

Apparently you know little about science.

[Freak impersonation] Usable energy runs out. Batteries drain, fires burn out.... entropy is real. Were you aware of that? [/Freak impersonation]

Yeah, I only majored in it. So then, where does science state exactly what happened with in or before the singularity? I'd love for you to show me.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

thanks Knight, we may not agree on the specific identity of the creator but at least we can agree that we are at least created.

Indeed. Now maybe you can help Spenser see why what he is saying falls so flat.

For me... I am gonna go eat! :chew: