Jump to content


Photo

Ctd's End-of-august Challenge


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
27 replies to this topic

#1 CTD

CTD

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2059 posts
  • Age: 44
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Missouri

Posted 30 August 2009 - 07:37 PM

After typing this post, the magnitude of the problem began to sink in.


The current Big Bang model is more than opinion.  There is strong evidence to suggest that the current model is very likely to be the right one.

View Post

There is stronger evidence suggesting purple is the prettiest colour. A wise man speaking to a logical, intelligent, informed audience would prefer arguing "Bar-B-Q is the tastiest flavour" than arguing big bang mythology is "likely to be true". Scarcely anything is more unlikely to be true.

Dark matter, Dark energy, extra spatial dimensions, expansion, suspension of all physical laws, something from nothing, and who knows what I'm leaving out because I'm not even going to waste time trying to remember any more. Ha! Soon as I typed that I remembered a couple more; but that's plenty.

Any single one of those issues is sufficient to scrap the whole fantasy, if one is scientific about things. Neither need anyone argue from spam, for every last one of them is a true and fatal flaw, which can only be overcome by invoking specially chosen assumptions (blind faith).

View Post

My challenge is simple: posit something less likely to be true than the big bang. I think it best to defer discussion of submissions for at least a few days, perhaps a week, in order that everyone may give it a try.

#2 Arch

Arch

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 961 posts
  • Age: 21
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Australia

Posted 30 August 2009 - 07:57 PM

Posted Image

Sorry, couldn't resist :D

-Arch.

#3 Guest_Instructorus Rex_*

Guest_Instructorus Rex_*
  • Guests

Posted 31 August 2009 - 05:42 AM

The steady state model? Static universe? I don't understand how this is supposed to be a challenge.

#4 de_skudd

de_skudd

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1518 posts
  • Location:North Augusta, SC
  • Interests:reading, learning, talking and stuff
  • Age: 41
  • no affiliation
  • Creationist
  • North Augusta, SC

Posted 31 August 2009 - 07:32 AM

Hmmmmmmmmm… ;)


Everything (or anything at all) coming from nothing!

Solipsism

Agnostic atheists
  • gilbo12345 likes this

#5 jason78

jason78

    Veteran Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1349 posts
  • Age: 30
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Birmingham, UK

Posted 31 August 2009 - 01:02 PM

Posted Image

#6 rico

rico

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 532 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Jesus, computers, physics, video games, philosophy, epistomology
  • Age: 33
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • USA

Posted 31 August 2009 - 01:13 PM

[quote name='CTD' date='Aug 30 2009, 07:37 PM']
After typing this post, the magnitude of the problem began to sink in.

There is stronger evidence suggesting purple is the prettiest colour. A wise man speaking to a logical, intelligent, informed audience would prefer arguing [/quote]
My challenge is simple: posit something less likely to be true than the big bang. I think it best to defer discussion of submissions for at least a few days, perhaps a week, in order that everyone may give it a try.

View Post

[/quote]Humans are alien, flying space fish;
CTD, explosions destroy they don't build.

#7 Teo

Teo

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 104 posts
  • Location:Romania
  • Interests:Debates, Video Editing, Gaming, Bible Study.
  • Age: 15
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Romania

Posted 31 August 2009 - 02:11 PM

Something that is less likely to be true than the Big Bang?

Hmm... Evolution?

Oh, I know. Atheists who believe in young earth creation. ;)

#8 Javabean

Javabean

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 950 posts
  • Location:Harrisburg Pa
  • Age: 33
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Harrisburg

Posted 31 August 2009 - 02:13 PM

Hmmmmmmmmm…  ;)
Everything (or anything at all) coming from nothing!

Solipsism

Agnostic atheists

View Post



Wait, how do you figure? I'm confused.

#9 Arch

Arch

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 961 posts
  • Age: 21
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Australia

Posted 31 August 2009 - 04:22 PM

Oh, I know. Atheists who believe in young earth creation. ;)

View Post

Ooooh, I like this one :D

#10 Javabean

Javabean

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 950 posts
  • Location:Harrisburg Pa
  • Age: 33
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Harrisburg

Posted 31 August 2009 - 05:09 PM

Oh how about something Biblical.

The Christian god wiping out all life with "another" Global Flood. ;)

#11 CTD

CTD

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2059 posts
  • Age: 44
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Missouri

Posted 01 September 2009 - 12:22 AM

I don't intend to respond to the posts I can't see. Those on my ignore list know how they got there. Skipping them, I'll begin with De_Skudd's entries.

Hmmmmmmmmm…  ;)
Everything (or anything at all) coming from nothing!

Solipsism

Agnostic atheists

View Post

Solipsism is a contender; it's also very difficult to evaluate precisely how wrong it is relative to its fruits. We have to remember that the big bang is a destination - a goal reasoned to - by "western" you-can't-knowists who took Erasmus Darwin as their guide, and "eastern" you-can't-knowists who've had systems dating back too far for me to pinpoint their origin.

The breaking of all physical law vs. the breaking of all logic. Tough call indeed.

Some lines of evaluation get nasty & circular & interdependent. For example, if Godlessness of any variety were correct, logic would indeed come into question because chaos has no means of or desire to produce anything capable of utilizing any logic at all. In this respect, one might argue that solipsism is less unlikely.

I'll be giving this some more thought.

As for "agnostic atheists", you'll need to be more specific if you want me to take the entry seriously. We observe irrational people frequently, so I'm actively interpreting a bit to conclude that you refer to agnostic atheism itself. This could still mean several different things. Which variety is the least likely to be true? (If it turns out to be the Solopsist, this is a repeat.)

#12 CTD

CTD

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2059 posts
  • Age: 44
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Missouri

Posted 01 September 2009 - 12:26 AM

Posted Image

View Post

Care to translate your entry?

#13 CTD

CTD

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2059 posts
  • Age: 44
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Missouri

Posted 01 September 2009 - 12:55 AM


My challenge is simple: posit something less likely to be true than the big bang. I think it best to defer discussion of submissions for at least a few days, perhaps a week, in order that everyone may give it a try.

View Post

Humans are alien, flying space fish;
CTD, explosions destroy they don't build.

View Post

It's good to see some agreement

When discussing thermodynamics, the distinction between any old energy and useful energy is important. Bombs are known to raze buildings; bombs are not known to raise buildings.

View Post

As for the flying space fish, they don't even in the big bang's league. It's fairly close to plausible that men might build suits for fish that wold allow them to fly in space. Even getting them to do so naturally only requires the breakage of a few strategic laws. There is is a pressure issue; an issue of respiration, and an issue of propulsion.

One can even solve multiple issues with the same proposal. Water comes into being around the fish; the fish breathe the water, and the fish propel themselves by means of water jets. See?

Now compare this to the "dark energy" thing alone, which claims energy is (present tense!) continually being created which is driving galactic regions away from each other. This invisible energy isn't just moving stars; it isn't just moving galaxies. It's moving all the contents of these regions including the "dark matter". There's more absurdity, but I'll stop.

"Humans are alien." This could stand work. We have human aliens already. I think I know what you mean. A revision of origins. Origins are properly investigated by employing the same scientific historic methods we regularly employ to investigate the past. Both proposals fail dismally against these methods, and are known to be false.

Okay, what's more unlikely
1.) a false history of everything
2.) a false history of a tiny fraction of everything

#14 CTD

CTD

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2059 posts
  • Age: 44
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Missouri

Posted 01 September 2009 - 01:19 AM

Something that is less likely to be true than the Big Bang?

Hmm... Evolution?

View Post

That's a bit unfair. BBT is a component of evolutionism, after all. Questioning it obtains the very same results, slanderwise and employmentwise and intimidationwise.

But since it's convenient, I'll start with what I just got done posting.

Okay, what's more unlikely
1.) a false history of everything
2.) a false history of a tiny fraction of everything

Oh, I know. Atheists who believe in young earth creation. ;)

View Post

Not even very implausible. People have the capacity to be quite irrational. Well, I have to admit I have been surprised, but I've seen a couple of cases of young-earth, evolutionists. Then again, it's not all that hard to find "old-earth" creationists, so people's willingness to mix & match the incompatible can hardly be denied.

Also, Cain & sons might well be supposed to fit the description.

Thanks for playing. The point here is to demonstrate how difficult it is - if you think about it - to come up with anything that really is less likely to be true than the big bang. I couldn't do it myself, so I thought I'd give others a crack at the problem.

So far solipsism is the best candidate, IMO.

#15 jason78

jason78

    Veteran Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1349 posts
  • Age: 30
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Birmingham, UK

Posted 01 September 2009 - 02:35 AM

Care to translate your entry?

View Post


That was a miss post. It was supposed to go in the "Problems With Big Bang." thread.

#16 CTD

CTD

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2059 posts
  • Age: 44
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Missouri

Posted 01 September 2009 - 03:47 AM

That was a miss post.  It was supposed to go in the "Problems With Big Bang." thread.

View Post

Ha - I done that before.

#17 de_skudd

de_skudd

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1518 posts
  • Location:North Augusta, SC
  • Interests:reading, learning, talking and stuff
  • Age: 41
  • no affiliation
  • Creationist
  • North Augusta, SC

Posted 01 September 2009 - 04:40 AM

Oh how about something Biblical.

The Christian god wiping out all life with "another" Global Flood. :D

View Post


That's true Javabean! God promised He would never do that again!!! :)

#18 de_skudd

de_skudd

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1518 posts
  • Location:North Augusta, SC
  • Interests:reading, learning, talking and stuff
  • Age: 41
  • no affiliation
  • Creationist
  • North Augusta, SC

Posted 01 September 2009 - 04:43 AM

Wait, how do you figure?  I'm confused.

View Post


Atheism (there is no God) cannot follow its own tenants, therefore they had to steal from the Agnostics (I have no knowledge if there is or isn’t a God). :D

#19 Javabean

Javabean

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 950 posts
  • Location:Harrisburg Pa
  • Age: 33
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Harrisburg

Posted 01 September 2009 - 06:08 AM

Atheism (there is no God) cannot follow its own tenants, therefore they had to steal from the Agnostics (I have no knowledge if there is or isn’t a God).  :D

View Post



Oh I get it.

And now I understand your use of equivocation in a previous post of mine.

Thanks!

#20 de_skudd

de_skudd

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1518 posts
  • Location:North Augusta, SC
  • Interests:reading, learning, talking and stuff
  • Age: 41
  • no affiliation
  • Creationist
  • North Augusta, SC

Posted 01 September 2009 - 07:10 AM

Oh I get it.

And now I understand your use of equivocation in a previous post of mine.

Thanks!

View Post


No equivocation, just facts Javabean (you really should try them, they're really good :) ). One you get off the quibble train, and jump into the truth car; the air smells fresher, food tastes better and the future looks brighter! :D

But accusing others of your tactics isn’t going to get you anywhere, it just makes your excuses all the more lame.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users