Bad Math Used in Apologetics

[Jagella]

Recently I've noticed that some apologists like William Lane Craig are using mathematics-based arguments to assure us that the Christian god exists. I would like to explain why those arguments use poor logic.

A very broad argument is that mathematics in general seems to explain the cosmos in a way that seems to work unreasonably well. An intelligent designer like Yahweh is then required to explain this apparent mathematical basis for the universe. He is "the great mathematician in the sky."

Not really. The reason math works so well to explain the world--in at least some cases--is because we humans created math to describe the cosmos. There is no mystery here. We are the mathematicians describing the universe.

Also, many apologists like to wow us with enormously improbable events that they say cannot be attributed to chance. Since chance is ruled out, "God musta done it."

Wrong again. The only probability that rules out an event happening by chance is an event with a probability of zero. Extremely improbable events--like the conception of any of us--happen all the time.

Also, to state how improbable a natural event might be doesn't say much if you don't know the probability of an alternate event. So if apologists wish to argue that an event like the apparent fine-tuning of the universe by chance is only one out a a gazillion, they must compare that probability to the probability that "God musta done it." If they cannot say that the probability of God fine-tuning the cosmos is greater than chance, then they haven't proved anything.

Finally, a really laughable argument is that the universe cannot be infinitely old because if it was infinitely we could never have reached the present! Such apologists must have slept through their high-school algebra. Consider the number line with numbers increasing infinitely with positive numbers to the right and negative numbers to the left. All you need to do is have any point on that line represent a moment in time with zero being the present, points on the positive direction are the future, and points on the negative direction are the past. See that? You're at 0 (the present), but the past is infinite. You can go back as far as you want to with no limit.

I can go on, but for now let me ask the...

Question for Debate: Are apologists sloppy mathematicians, or are they deliberately trying to deceive people with numbers?

[Bust Nak]

So in a world full of playing cards floating around in the cosmos, are you saying that eventually, card houses will begin to formulate?

Given naturalistic laws that tend towards card houses, sure.

if yes, then your position goes against observational evidence and everything that we know about entropy.

No, it does not. A world where card houses forms naturally still follows the laws of nature. All it would mean is that card houses are on average higher entropy than before there are houses. We can add bad science in apologetics to the list too.

Nonsense. If you can't countdown from a day that is infinitely far away, then an infinitely far away "future" day can't be reached.

That fine though, I don't need to reach an infinitely far away future day. There is no such day on the time line.

You can't have it one way and not the other, because it is literally the same concept either way.

Oh but I can. Counting to infinity is absolutely not the same concept as counting to every finite integers. Hence "bad math in apologetic."

Nonsense...what is a "past eternal" universe, BUT an infinite amount of "days"?

That exactly what it is though. Nothing I said suggested otherwise. An infinite amount of days still doesn't involve anything like counting from infinity.

And second, if each past day was traversed, then each past day can be counted.

Exactly. That's what I been telling you all along. I can count all the days of the past eternal.

So, we've reached today...how many days were traversed to arrive at today, sir?

Your question is incomplete, arrive at today from which point? From yesterday? It one day. From a week ago? It's seven.

Never mind counting down...I will make it even "easier" for you...count ALL of the integers in the numbers set..with the last integer counted being zero. Can you do that for me?

Sure, where would you like me to start?

Let me know once you've counted all of the numbers in the set and zero is the only number which remains uncounted.

That will literally take for ever. In the mean time, I will point out that you avoided my challenge: name me one finite integer that I cannot count to. If there is no such number then it follows that I would be able to count I all of them.

[For_The_Kingdom]

So in a world full of playing cards floating around in the cosmos, are you saying that eventually, card houses will begin to formulate?

Given naturalistic laws that tend towards card houses, sure.

Well, given the fact that current natural laws tend NOT towards card houses, any hypothesized scenarios that doesn't reflect what is actually going on out there in reality is irrelevant.

if yes, then your position goes against observational evidence and everything that we know about entropy.

No, it does not.

It does. Throw 52 cards in the air and see if a card house will formulate. It won't. It can't...and the fact that it won't/can't doesn't get any more observational than that.

A world where card houses forms naturally still follows the laws of nature.

Sure, in THAT world..but we are talking about OUR world...and in our world, it just doesn't work like that.

All it would mean is that card houses are on average higher entropy than before there are houses. We can add bad science in apologetics to the list too.

?

Nonsense. If you can't countdown from a day that is infinitely far away, then an infinitely far away "future" day can't be reached.

That fine though, I don't need to reach an infinitely far away future day. There is no such day on the time line.

So according to you; there is no infinitely far away future day, but at one point, TODAY was an infinitely far future day (relative to an eternal past)...yet, today was obviously reached.

SMH.

You can't have it one way and not the other, because it is literally the same concept either way.

Oh but I can. Counting to infinity is absolutely not the same concept as counting to every finite integers. Hence "bad math in apologetic."

Um, there is an infinite amount of finite integers in the numbers set...so to count an infinite amount of finite members is the same as counting to infinity..either way, an infinite amount is being counted.

Nonsense...what is a "past eternal" universe, BUT an infinite amount of "days"?

That exactly what it is though. Nothing I said suggested otherwise. An infinite amount of days still doesn't involve anything like counting from infinity.

Bruh, an infinite amount of days was traversed...it is the same thing...when you count (in general), you are traversing numbers...and every 24 hour period, days are being traversed. It is the same thing.

And second, if each past day was traversed, then each past day can be counted.

Exactly. That's what I been telling you all along. I can count all the days of the past eternal.

Sure, that is what you SAY...and I am saying count those days down and let me know once you've arrived at zero. You said it can be done, so DO IT.

So, we've reached today...how many days were traversed to arrive at today, sir?

Your question is incomplete, arrive at today from which point?

From an infinite past point. You can't do it, can you...yet, we've obviously reached today from past infinity.

Never mind counting down...I will make it even "easier" for you...count ALL of the integers in the numbers set..with the last integer counted being zero. Can you do that for me?

Sure, where would you like me to start?

Did the eternal past have a "start"? No, it didn't...yet, it had no problem getting to zero (today)...so if "it" did it, then why can't you? Hmmm.

Let me know once you've counted all of the numbers in the set and zero is the only number which remains uncounted.

That will literally take for ever.

Yet, today has arrived...in a finite proper time.

In the mean time, I will point out that you avoided my challenge: name me one finite integer that I cannot count to. If there is no such number then it follows that I would be able to count I all of them.

"All of them" is actually an infinite amount..and you just said that it will literally take forever...which means it is impossible.

[For_The_Kingdom]

[Replying to post 111 by For_The_Kingdom]

Doesn't seem reasonable considering that time is a quality of the universe that had a beginning.

I am glad that you acknowledge this fact...now ask yourself, what can possible give STEM (space, time, energy, matter) a beginning. That should be the next question that your pondering mind should want to ask.

Will the universe exist forever as well?

Not necessarily. The universe could pop OUT of being..and the question of "how much time has pasted since the universe popped out of being" can still be asked.

Time will exist forever..the universe, not so much the case.

[postroad]

[Replying to post 122 by For_The_Kingdom]


I'm not inclined to insert "God" into every space labeled " not yet known "

And which God would I put there anyway?

Time is a property of the physical universe. It starts and ends with it.

[Bust Nak]

Well, given the fact that current natural laws tend NOT towards card houses, any hypothesized scenarios that doesn't reflect what is actually going on out there in reality is irrelevant.

Right, but there are current naturals laws that end towards galaxies forming, living organism and so on, which I presumed is what you were referring to as "order."

It does. Throw 52 cards in the air and see if a card house will formulate. It won't. It can't...and the fact that it won't/can't doesn't get any more observational than that.

That's only because there aren't natural laws that tend towards card houses. It's a moot point.

Sure, in THAT world..but we are talking about OUR world...and in our world, it just doesn't work like that.

So why did you bring up card houses in the first place when you knew full well there are no such natural laws?

?

Drop in entropy (such as formation of a card house) does not violate the laws of nature because the laws of thermodynamics allow localised decrease of entropy.

So according to you; there is no infinitely far away future day, but at one point, TODAY was an infinitely far future day (relative to an eternal past)...yet, today was obviously reached.

Incorrect. TODAY is an finitely far future day relative to each and every single one day in an eternal past.

Um, there is an infinite amount of finite integers in the numbers set...so to count an infinite amount of finite members is the same as counting to infinity..

No it isn't. An infinite amount is being counted, and that would not involve any thing like counting to infinity. Granted this isn't basic math but it's really isn't all that difficult.

Bruh, an infinite amount of days was traversed...it is the same thing...when you count (in general), you are traversing numbers...and every 24 hour period, days are being traversed. It is the same thing.

It really isn't that hard: infinity is not an integer, I am counting integer, which means I need not count to infinity

Sure, that is what you SAY...and I am saying count those days down and let me know once you've arrived at zero. You said it can be done, so DO IT.

Keep waiting.

From an infinite past point. You can't do it, can you...

But I can, just tell me which day you had in mind.

yet, we've obviously reached today from past infinity.

Exactly.

Did the eternal past have a "start"? No, it didn't...yet, it had no problem getting to zero (today)...

Right, but I still need a "start" to answer the how long would it take question.

so if "it" did it, then why can't you?

Loaded question cannot be answered.

Yet, today has arrived...in a finite proper time.

Right you are.

"All of them" is actually an infinite amount..and you just said that it will literally take forever...which means it is impossible.

That does not follow, you can't name me a finite number that I cannot count to which means it is possible.

[For_The_Kingdom]

Right, but there are current naturals laws that end towards galaxies forming, living organism and so on, which I presumed is what you were referring to as "order."

Please tell me the natural law which allows life to originate from nonliving material.

It does. Throw 52 cards in the air and see if a card house will formulate. It won't. It can't...and the fact that it won't/can't doesn't get any more observational than that.

That's only because there aren't natural laws that tend towards card houses. It's a moot point.

Good...now admit that there also ain't natural laws that tend towards life from nonlife.

Sure, in THAT world..but we are talking about OUR world...and in our world, it just doesn't work like that.

So why did you bring up card houses in the first place when you knew full well there are no such natural laws?

If nature can't get card houses, then nature also can't get "human houses" (abiogenesis). Now, you can certainly believe otherwise...and then you will be prompted to scientifically demonstrate abiogenesis, which we know you can't.

So at that point your belief becomes pure naturalistic speculation with no shred of scientific data supporting it.

?

Drop in entropy (such as formation of a card house) does not violate the laws of nature because the laws of thermodynamics allow localised decrease of entropy.

I still don't understand what you are saying.

So according to you; there is no infinitely far away future day, but at one point, TODAY was an infinitely far future day (relative to an eternal past)...yet, today was obviously reached.

Incorrect. TODAY is an finitely far future day relative to each and every single one day in an eternal past.

Nonsense. On one hand, you are saying you can't count all of the past days because it is impossible..and on the other hand, you are saying that each day was traversed to reach any finite discrete day.

Well, if it is impossible to count, it is impossible to traverse...yet, you said that you can traverse it, but not count it.

Your reasoning is nonsensical, is what I am trying to say

Um, there is an infinite amount of finite integers in the numbers set...so to count an infinite amount of finite members is the same as counting to infinity..

No it isn't. An infinite amount is being counted, and that would not involve any thing like counting to infinity. Granted this isn't basic math but it's really isn't all that difficult.

Please explain the intrinsic difference in counting to infinity, and counting an infinite amount. I mean, I know you must avoid the "G" word at all costs...but it shouldn't come at such a high cost.

Bruh, an infinite amount of days was traversed...it is the same thing...when you count (in general), you are traversing numbers...and every 24 hour period, days are being traversed. It is the same thing.

It really isn't that hard: infinity is not an integer, I am counting integer, which means I need not count to infinity

Bruh, you just said you can count an infinite amount...so I am trying to figure out what this means, since, as you pointed out; it isn't an integer, after all.

Sure, that is what you SAY...and I am saying count those days down and let me know once you've arrived at zero. You said it can be done, so DO IT.

Keep waiting.

I didn't think so.

From an infinite past point. You can't do it, can you...

But I can, just tell me which day you had in mind.

I didn't have to tell the eternal past a "day". It just did it. Why can't you?

yet, we've obviously reached today from past infinity.

Exactly.

It is logically absurd..exactly.

Did the eternal past have a "start"? No, it didn't...yet, it had no problem getting to zero (today)...

Right, but I still need a "start" to answer the how long would it take question.

If "it" (eternal past) didn't need a start, then why do you?

so if "it" did it, then why can't you?

Loaded question cannot be answered.

"It" didn't accuse me of asking a loaded question...it just did it.

Yet, today has arrived...in a finite proper time.

Right you are.

Gotta avoid the "G" word.

"All of them" is actually an infinite amount..and you just said that it will literally take forever...which means it is impossible.

That does not follow, you can't name me a finite number that I cannot count to which means it is possible.

This is a borderline straw man. No one ever said you can't count up to any given finite number. Instead of issuing a challenge based upon a position that I never held, how about responding to my challenge..

Please explain how can "today" ever arrive if an infinite amount of days was TRAVERSED to get there.

Pretty simple/straight forward.

[For_The_Kingdom]

[Replying to post 122 by For_The_Kingdom]


I'm not inclined to insert "God" into every space labeled " not yet known "

Me neither..only when I am rationally justified to do so.

And which God would I put there anyway?

Hopefully, the Christian one.

Time is a property of the physical universe. It starts and ends with it.

I've already given a scenario at which the universe could end, but time would still go on. So, until you can adequately address that, I will take the W on that exchange.

[postroad]

[Replying to post 126 by For_The_Kingdom]

Your rationale inclinations are a product of indoctrination.

The Christian God isn't necessarily the Jewish one. That is a claim they still deny.

Are you not aware that time doesn't exist sans the physical universe?

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 126 by For_The_Kingdom]

Me neither..only when I am rationally justified to do so.

And yet that is what you do with Modal and Kalam. Even if those arguments were valid and sound (they aren't), they do not speak anything at all as to the identity of the first cause, or the MGB.

[Bust Nak]

Please tell me the natural law which allows life to originate from nonliving material.

There is no one specific law for that, it's just plain old chemistry. Alternatively I can just list the typical laws that is relevant to chemistry re: Conservation of energy, of equilibrium and so on.

Good...now admit that there also ain't natural laws that tend towards life from nonlife.

Nah. Why would I do that?

If nature can't get card houses, then nature also can't get "human houses" (abiogenesis).

That does not follow.

Now, you can certainly believe otherwise...and then you will be prompted to scientifically demonstrate abiogenesis, which we know you can't.

Sure, not yet we can't, but what makes you think we won't ever be able to?

So at that point your belief becomes pure naturalistic speculation with no shred of scientific data supporting it.

Ah, but we do, the Miller–Urey experiment being the standard go to example of scientific data supporting abiogenesis.

I still don't understand what you are saying.

Well that's unsurprising. Is there anything specific about entropy that you would like to learn about in this context?

Nonsense. On one hand, you are saying you can't count all of the past days because it is impossible...

Incorrect. I did not say such a thing, I said the exact opposite: I said I can indeed count all of the past days. The rest of that paragraph is the result of misreading what I said.

Your reasoning is nonsensical, is what I am trying to say

We can chalk that much up to a lack of care in reading my post. You've created a strawman.

Please explain the intrinsic difference in counting to infinity, and counting an infinite amount.

Sure, consider the number line, there are infinitely many integers, I can count to each and every single one of them, none of which is infinity.

Bruh, you just said you can count an infinite amount...so I am trying to figure out what this means, since, as you pointed out; it isn't an integer, after all.

Right, and that should have been enough for you to figure out that counting all the integers does not involve counting to infinity. 1...2...3... and so on, for ever and ever. So what exactly are you having problem with?

I didn't think so.

You didn't think it would take for ever? Why not?

I didn't have to tell the eternal past a "day". It just did it. Why can't you?

You are speaking of two different things here, I don't need to have a start at a particular day to arrive at today, I can do that just fine. What I do need a day for, is to tell you the time between that day and today.

It is logically absurd..

That's up to you to demonstrate, which you can do by simply naming a finite number that I cannot count to (or from.)

If "it" (eternal past) didn't need a start, then why do you?

To arrive at today? I don't need a start though. But that's a very different thing to measuring the gap between two days, for that I do need, you know, two days.

"It" didn't accuse me of asking a loaded question...it just did it.

Did what? Tell you how long it took to get here to today? It couldn't have because you need another day for that. Or perhaps you meant arriving at today on the other hand, sure, it just did it. And I can do it too without another day. Either way you should still stop asking loaded question regardless.

Gotta avoid the "G" word.

There is no need to evoke the "G" word in the first place.

This is a borderline straw man. No one ever said you can't count up to any given finite number.

Oh? But you did say that I couldn't count down all of the finite integers to arrive at zero. You are trying to distinguish counting up and counting down? If I can count up to a number, what's stopping me from then counting down back to zero?

Instead of issuing a challenge based upon a position that I never held, how about responding to my challenge..

Please explain how can "today" ever arrive if an infinite amount of days was TRAVERSED to get there.

Asked and answered: One day at a time. Pretty simple and straight forward.