[ Science/Technology ] [ Main Menu ]
5116
From: Sciguy, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Atheist vs Agnostic
URL: Link
| If you know that there is no scientific evidence that God exists, is that sufficient to deny the existence of God? I say it is. One side in the debate argues unconvincingly that atheism is an invalid concept because nobody can prove that there is no God. That's not a defensible position. It's too bad there wasn't a scientist in that debate. |
Responses:
[5133] [5135] [5136] [5137] [5134] [5123] [5124] [5130] [5132] [5127] [5125] [5120] [5119] [5118] [5121] [5126] [5131] [5122]
5133
From: marc / berkeley, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Einstein was religious Sciguy, let's leave it at that! lol!
5135
From: snodrop, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Quite the contrary
|
Although he quelled those rumors in both his autobiography and personal letters to admirers. "On 22 March 1954 Einstein received a letter from Joseph Dispentiere, an Italian immigrant who had worked as an experimental machinist in New Jersey. Dispentiere had declared himself an atheist and was disappointed by a news report which had cast Einstein as conventionally religious. Einstein replied on 24 March 1954: It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it." "In a letter to Beatrice Frohlich, 17 December 1952 Einstein stated, "The idea of a personal God is quite alien to me and seems even naïve." Eric Gutkind sent a copy of his book "Choose Life: The Biblical Call To Revolt" to Einstein in 1954. Einstein sent Gutkind a letter in response and wrote, "The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this. These subtilised interpretations are highly manifold according to their nature and have almost nothing to do with the original text." Then from his own autobiography he stated: . . . I came—though the child of entirely irreligious (Jewish) parents—to a deep religiousness, which, however, reached an abrupt end at the age of twelve. Through the reading of popular scientific books I soon reached the conviction that much in the stories of the Bible could not be true. The consequence was a positively fanatic orgy of freethinking coupled with the impression that youth is intentionally being deceived by the state through lies; it was a crushing impression. Mistrust of every kind of authority grew out of this experience, a skeptical attitude toward the convictions that were alive in any specific social environment—an attitude that has never again left me, even though, later on, it has been tempered by a better insight into the causal connections. It is quite clear to me that the religious paradise of youth, which was thus lost, was a first attempt to free myself from the chains of the 'merely personal,' from an existence dominated by wishes, hopes, and primitive feelings. Out yonder there was this huge world, which exists independently of us human beings and which stands before us like a great, eternal riddle, at least partially accessible to our inspection and thinking. The contemplation of this world beckoned as a liberation, and I soon noticed that many a man whom I had learned to esteem and to admire had found inner freedom and security in its pursuit. The mental grasp of this extra-personal world within the frame of our capabilities presented itself to my mind, half consciously, half unconsciously, as a supreme goal. Similarly motivated men of the present and of the past, as well as the insights they had achieved, were the friends who could not be lost. The road to this paradise was not as comfortable and alluring as the road to the religious paradise; but it has shown itself reliable, and I have never regretted having chosen it. |
5136
From: Sciguy, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Quite the contrary
|
Einstein did have such a deep reverence for the mystery and magistry of Nature that his beliefs went beyond that of a totally indifferent Universe. I think he believes there is something spiritual out there that transcends human knowledge, but, as you say, it is clear that his belief had nothing to do with the notion of a personal God, such as is the prevailing religion here. Thank you for posting. |
Responses:
[5137]
5137
From: Sciguy, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Errata
|
believed instead of believe majesty instead of that word I invented |
Responses:
None
5134
From: Sciguy, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Einstein was religious Sciguy, let's leave it at that! lol!
| Yes, considering that your ego is so vast and your intellect so tiny, I agree that you should "leave it at that". |
Responses:
None
5123
From: Akira, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Atheist vs Agnostic
|
"If you know that there is no scientific evidence that God exists, is that sufficient to deny the existence of God? I say it is." Well, if you know there isn’t any scientific evidence to prove that our visible universe exists with parallel universes in a multiverse, is that sufficient to deny the existence a multiverse? I say only a fool would say it is. |
5124
From: Sciguy, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Atheist vs Agnostic
|
I expected conflict with some holding religious viewpoints, I didn't expect it from those who put their faith in gurus without good evidence that their guidance is anything more than clever manipulation. Inasmuch as I usually respect your opinion, I'll respond, but not argue with you about whether you are a fool for labeling me as a fool, even though it is you who is behaving as one. My only response is that you are ignorant of science, or you would not have drawn such an absurd analogy. |
5130
From: Akira, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Atheist vs Agnostic
|
I don't think you're a fool (in this context) especially considering opposition. I was arguing for the fun of it. Why isn't it a good analogy? My inner guru insists it is. |
Responses:
[5132]
5132
From: Sciguy, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Atheist vs Agnostic
URL: Link
| Ok, I will take your word for your intent, inasmuch as you are usually rational and your devil persona was cute, but as I said, I don't have time to discuss this issue. The link is the best I can do right now. |
Responses:
None
5127
From: horst graben, [DNS_Address]
Subject: please try to remember that you're not as smart as you think you are
| none of us are |
Responses:
None
5125
From: horst graben, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: your words sound more like "petulant puffery" to me
|
i don't think you understand "science" at all abstract five-dimensional space "Abstract five-dimensional space occurs frequently in mathematics, and is a legitimate construct. ... In physics, the fifth dimension is a hypothetical extra dimension beyond the usual three spatial dimensions and one time dimension of Relativity. The Kaluza-Klein theory used the fifth dimension to unify gravity with the electromagnetic force; e.g. Minkowski space and Maxwell's equations in vacuum can be embedded in a five-dimensional Riemann curvature tensor. Kaluza-Klein theory today is seen as essentially a gauge theory, with gauge group the circle group. M-theory suggests that space-time has 11 dimensions, seven of which are 'rolled up' to below the subatomic level. Physicists have speculated that the graviton, a particle thought to carry the force of gravity, may 'leak' into the fifth or higher dimensions, which would explain how gravity is significantly weaker than the other three fundamental forces. ... In 1993 the physicist Gerard 't Hooft put forward the holographic principle, which explains that the information about an extra dimension is visible as a curvature in a spacetime with one fewer dimension. For example, holograms are three-dimensional pictures placed on a two-dimensional surface, which gives the image a curvature when the observer moves. Similarly, in general relativity, the fourth dimension is manifested in observable three dimensions as the curvature path of a moving infinitesimal (test) particle. Hooft has speculated that the fifth dimension is really the spacetime fabric. ... A hypersphere in 5-space (also called a 4-sphere due to its surface being 4-dimensional) consists of the set of all points in 5-space at a fixed distance r from a central point P. The hypervolume enclosed by this hypersurface is: V = [8 x (pi)^2 x (r)^5]/15 ..." |
Responses:
None
5120
From: horst graben, [DNS_Address]
Subject: it's unnecessary for believers to prove the existence of the CREATOR
| his CREATION is all around us ... William Blake knew this ... read his Auguries of Innocence |
Responses:
None
5119
From: horst graben, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: statistical analysis kick atheists in the ass
Responses:
None
5118
From: horst graben, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: one word ... "abiogenesis" ... science has no answer
|
that and the nature of entropy ... disorder increasing being not just a good idea ... it's the law ... put science on it's lips the "primordial stew" and a "bolt of lightning" is right out of Greek tales of "the gods" on Mount Olympus consider the DNA helix and explain how science has failed to "create" something so complex in the laboratory |
5121
From: Sciguy, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: one word ... "abiogenesis" ... science has no answer
|
It would be cool if you would stop and think before you post your serial messages when one message could easily cover the ground well enough to satisfy the reader about your argument. Btw, I don't intend to argue the semantic points raised in the article, or those scientific arguments raised by you. I could refute them with science, but it would cost me more time than I am willing to put into this effort. I only posted the debate because I thought people who come to this board might be interested. It seems that most of the people who post here are religious, some fanatically so, despite having no good evidence to support their belief. I consider the article a shallow discussion because it lacks the scientific perspective. I don't see that your multiple messages on the subject changes that. That was my final message on this subject. |
5126
From: horst graben, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: here are some other choice words for you to contemplate
URL: http://listoftheday.blogspot.com/2008/01/25-yiddish-words-you-should-know.html
| just remember ... i'm not answering you out of spite ... i love you and want you to do better |
Responses:
[5131]
5131
From: Akira, [DNS_Address]
Subject: here's one for you
|
pisher: a nobody, an inexperienced person (Yiddish פּישער pisher, from פּישן pishn 'piss', sorry, couldn't resist. my inner nudnik made me say it |
Responses:
None
5122
From: horst graben, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: your "final message of this subject"? you ain't got bupkes (NT)
| (NT) |
Responses:
None
[ Science/Technology ] [ Main Menu ]