Evolution, Big bang religion; no cause= no theory = religion

[EarthScienceguy]

One the cornerstones of physics is the idea of causality, every event has a cause. And yet all naturalistic religions like the Big Bang religion and the evolutionary religion has its origins in uncaused events.

For example

The big bang theory does not explain how the universe was created out of nothing it simply explains what happen after that the creation event.

The evolutionary religion does not describe how life began here on earth it simply explains what happen after life already began here on earth.

And then when pressed on the issue the response is simply that they have faith that science will eventually come up with the solution. That is by definition faith. They are believing something happen that did not actually happen.

Thesis

Creation theory is a much more robust theory because it does not break the laws of physics. Every event in this universe must have a cause, if they do not have a cause they are simply a believe or a religion.

[Topaz27]

[Replying to post 1 by EarthScienceguy]

Who said there had to be a start to the universe?

[EarthScienceguy]

[Replying to post 21 by Topaz27]

According to doppler red shift of light.

What theory are you proposing?

[Divine Insight]

God has an unchanging entropy. God is unchanging. God has always existed and will always exists.

Why call it "God"? Why not just conclude that something exists that has no entropy and that this is what gave birth to our universe which has entropy?

Not only this, but apparently you are either forgetting, (or simply don't know), that any record of information requires entropy. Including memory and thoughts.

Therefore if you want to claim that your "God" has no entropy then you must also acknowledge that your God cannot think, or remember anything. That's certainly not going to support the Biblical picture of God.

So your arguments based on "science" are simply wrong. And I'm absolutely certain that all of these famous physicists that you keep referencing would totally reject your ideas and your claim that they somehow support your position.

You appear to be trying very hard to appeal to authority by claiming that famous physicists would support your views, when in fact, they most certainly wouldn't. Instead they would actually point out the facts about science that you have gotten wrong.

Any so-called "God" who has no entropy, could not think, or remember anything. Both of those events require a change in entropy.

Apparently you are trying to sell your ideas to those who are ignorant of physics. But that's not going to apply to a lot of the non-theists on this forum. Your claim to owning science simply fails dramatically. None of these physicists that you have mentioned would support your views.

[EarthScienceguy]

[Replying to post 23 by Divine Insight]

Why call it "God"? Why not just conclude that something exists that has no entropy and that this is what gave birth to our universe which has entropy?

An adiabatic process has no change in entropy. No heat energy is gained and no energy is lost. The heat in the system can be any value whatsoever.

Not only this, but apparently you are either forgetting, (or simply don't know), that any record of information requires entropy. Including memory and thoughts.

Therefore if you want to claim that your "God" has no entropy then you must also acknowledge that your God cannot think, or remember anything. That's certainly not going to support the Biblical picture of God.

Memory is only for beings who are pulled along by the movement of time. God is not He transcends all moments of time. He is present at every moment of time and every point in space. How could He possibly change if He is at every place and every time all at the same time?

So your arguments based on "science" are simply wrong. And I'm absolutely certain that all of these famous physicists that you keep referencing would totally reject your ideas and your claim that they somehow support your position.

I do not care whether they support my views or not. You are right since they are atheist they would not support my views.

Anyone is free to use the knowledge they discovered about the universe God created.

I am simply pointing out how views that have been part of theology for thousands of years are supported by current physics.

[Divine Insight]

I am simply pointing out how views that have been part of theology for thousands of years are supported by current physics.

Well you're not doing a very good job of it since the knowledge you claim to have of current physics is deeply flawed.

And besides, a God who has no entropy could hardly be an egotistical jealous God like the Bible describes who supposedly designed a bunch of deeply flawed humans to the point where he had to arranged to have them crucify him on a pole so he can forgive them for his extreme flaws.

There's no way that current physics could save Hebrew mythology.

As I point out, the only reason you would even feel a need to make such unconvincing arguments is because you have already realized that the original theology/mythology cannot be defended or justified. If the original fables had any merit there would be no need to pretend that current physics supports the dogma.

So the mere fact that you are even going this route only demonstrates the failure of the original dogma.

[EarthScienceguy]

[Replying to Divine Insight]

And besides, a God who has no entropy could hardly be an egotistical jealous God like the Bible describes who supposedly designed a bunch of deeply flawed humans to the point where he had to arranged to have them crucify him on a pole so he can forgive them for his extreme flaws.

Constant entropy. And why? You give no reason for your belief in this statement.

There's no way that current physics could save Hebrew mythology.

There is no need for physics to save God. He exists whether you believe it or not. Just like the other billions of human beings you do not know. But they still exists.

Wait, the physics say that they do not exist without God to create the universe. If you do believe that other beings exist than your only hope is a God to create those beings. Otherwise they are nothing but a figment of your Boltzmann brain.

As I point out, the only reason you would even feel a need to make such unconvincing arguments is because you have already realized that the original theology/mythology cannot be defended or justified. If the original fables had any merit there would be no need to pretend that current physics supports the dogma.

None of your arguments have established any point of failure in my theory.

So the mere fact that you are even going this route only demonstrates the failure of the original dogma.

I am simply demonstrating using the physics contained in this universe how it would God does exist. The problem with any of your arguments is that you have not established the fact that the laws of this universe exist outside this universe. Once the conversation moves outside this universe the laws of physics can be whatever.

The reason why string theory was developed was to give some reason why the laws of the physics are what they are in this universe.

I am using the laws of physics in this universe simply as a starting reference point but there is no reason to believe that these laws apply outside our universe.

[Divine Insight]

I am using the laws of physics in this universe simply as a starting reference point but there is no reason to believe that these laws apply outside our universe.

But that's not what you are doing at all. To the contrary all you have demonstrated is a complete misunderstanding of physics.

You are also demonstrating a complete misunderstanding of logic as well. Even if the misguided views you have of physics were true they wouldn't support the God of Hebrew mythology anymore than they would support any other human fables of gods.

Like I say, you avoid theology like the plague because deep down inside you know that if we actually turn to theology there are plenty of theologies that exist, and can even be imagined, that are far more intelligent than the ancient crude fables of the jealous immature God the Hebrews created.

By the way, the scientists you have used in an attempt to support your views via an appeal to authority don't share your views.

Here's Jim Al-Khalili explaining (using known physics) why it isn't necessary to have an intelligent creator for order to emerge from apparent disorder.

So science is not in agreement with your unscientific views anyway.

[youtube][/youtube]

[EarthScienceguy]

[Replying to post 27 by Divine Insight]

But that's not what you are doing at all. To the contrary all you have demonstrated is a complete misunderstanding of physics.

How is that? You have not mentioned any. And everything I have said has been consistent with the current understanding of science. You would have to relate what I have written that does not coincide with current understanding for you the make the comment like the one above.

You are also demonstrating a complete misunderstanding of logic as well. Even if the misguided views you have of physics were true they wouldn't support the God of Hebrew mythology anymore than they would support any other human fables of gods.

Nature simply points out that there is a God who had to create everything. I never said that it points to the true God of the universe.

Romans 1:20

For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.

So the attributes that can be seen in nature are
1. eternal attributes
2. divine nature

This is exactly what we see when we look at nature.

Like I say, you avoid theology like the plague because deep down inside you know that if we actually turn to theology there are plenty of theologies that exist, and can even be imagined, that are far more intelligent than the ancient crude fables of the jealous immature God the Hebrews created.

Not at all it is because DrNoGod always tells me that I am preaching when I start talking theology.

By the way, the scientists you have used in an attempt to support your views via an appeal to authority don't share your views.

No kidding they are all atheist. So what, facts are still facts. What do I care if they do not interpret the facts like I do.

Here's Jim Al-Khalili explaining (using known physics) why it isn't necessary to have an intelligent creator for order to emerge from apparent disorder.

So science is not in agreement with your unscientific views anyway.

Chaos theory!! Oh my! oh my!

Wait excuse me while I kill this butterfly before it starts a hurricane somewhere.

Oh, there we go, the world is much safer now.

The only problem with the chaos theory is that there has to be something that is in chaos. And where did that something that is in chaos come from.

So Chaos theory is no answer to the question to the question of origins.

[Divine Insight]

How is that? You have not mentioned any. And everything I have said has been consistent with the current understanding of science. You would have to relate what I have written that does not coincide with current understanding for you the make the comment like the one above.

I already did. No entropy = no possibility of intelligence, knowledge, or thought. Apparently you know nothing of entropy. Entropy is what makes intelligent life possible.

So Chaos theory is no answer to the question to the question of origins.

And a make-believe God is the answer?

Like I say, apparently science isn't the only subject you don't understand. Where is your logic? What is the basis for your postulate for an imaginary invisible highly-egotistical God character?

You claim that science is no answer while demanding that some ancient deeply flawed barbaric superstitions represent a meaningful answer.

Who are you kidding?

You must be kidding yourself because I doubt that you are kidding anyone else.

In terms of debate you have nothing to offer. Everything you claim about physics has been shown to be wrong. And everything you claim for support for you invisible God is illogical. So you have neither science nor logic to back up your theological musings.

[Divine Insight]

By the way, the scientists you have used in an attempt to support your views via an appeal to authority don't share your views.

No kidding they are all atheist. So what, facts are still facts. What do I care if they do not interpret the facts like I do.

Exactly. So you finally confess that you misrepresent scientists.

By the way, since you accept science then you must accept that humans evolved from primates and that we are nothing more than highly evolved apes.

How does that fit in with Hebrew mythology?