This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

The idea of the multiverse and religion

#41PatriotwolfPosted 7/22/2011 9:31:53 AM
If you cant explain the origin of the universe scientifically, and lets say we may never know, that leaves allot of doubt, and a creator is in fact a logical consideration at that point.

As dawkins has said, there is always that possibility. And 10% is still doubt. You can never say 100% that you are right if that is the case.

If LISA goes up and finds no evidence for the big bang, or refutes it, than what other theory's are there for the creation of the universe besides a god, and how are they provable?
---
"You're just one big headache, and I got a pistol full of aspirin"
"Who cares if you screw others?"-1337toothbrush
#42OnceInALifeTime(Topic Creator)Posted 7/22/2011 9:42:23 AM
The point, which isn't flawed, is that if you cannot fully explain the beginning of the universe scientifically, then that leaves only one possibility.

You're quite right, there is only one possibility: that we don't know. So please don't tell me you're making a god of the gaps argument.
---
http://www.gamereplays.org/community/uploads/post-396-1161708490.jpg :: sound advice from the NHS
"I like FosterTaken" - Darth Snake
#43PatriotwolfPosted 7/22/2011 10:10:26 AM
OnceInALifeTime posted...
The point, which isn't flawed, is that if you cannot fully explain the beginning of the universe scientifically, then that leaves only one possibility.

You're quite right, there is only one possibility: that we don't know. So please don't tell me you're making a god of the gaps argument.


My argument is that saying "I Don't know" means that god is logically then, a possibility..

If X is true, than Y is true

If X is not true, Y cannot be true.
---
"You're just one big headache, and I got a pistol full of aspirin"
"Who cares if you screw others?"-1337toothbrush
#44OnceInALifeTime(Topic Creator)Posted 7/22/2011 10:34:12 AM
My argument is that saying "I Don't know" means that god is logically then, a possibility..

Yes, it is a possibility. It also means that there is the possibility that our universe was cultivated in a test tube by an alien race of cow-dogs that rule us with an iron...I don't know what a cow-dog would have, a paw or a hoof...a poof? Although I'm pretty sure poof's are against most religion.
---
http://www.gamereplays.org/community/uploads/post-396-1161708490.jpg :: sound advice from the NHS
"I like FosterTaken" - Darth Snake
#45RedEricPosted 7/22/2011 10:57:36 AM
If you cant explain the origin of the universe scientifically, and lets say we may never know, that leaves allot of doubt, and a creator is in fact a logical consideration at that point.

But we can and do explain the origin of the universe scientifically.
A creator could not be a logical alternative unless there was some evidence supporting such a claim. That evidence would come from science.

As dawkins has said, there is always that possibility. And 10% is still doubt. You can never say 100% that you are right if that is the case.

I think you are misunderstanding Dawkins. I don't recall a figure as high as 10%, but still that isn't the point. What Dawkins was saying was that he believes wholeheartedly in the scientific method. Not that he thinks there is any real chance of god existing.

If LISA goes up and finds no evidence for the big bang, or refutes it, than what other theory's are there for the creation of the universe besides a god, and how are they provable?

Finding anything (even nothing) is a step forward. If evidence were to surface against the big bank then a new theory will be put forward. God would not be a part of the theory unless evidence pointed that way. There is no, "we don't know how it all began so god did it".
---
Smoke me a kipper, I'll be back for breakfast.
#46KiIogramPosted 7/22/2011 7:03:53 PM
tag
---
~crazychris~