Comments on: fine http://www.jesusandmo.net/2007/08/14/fine/ Two prophets, living together. Sat, 11 Feb 2012 00:52:27 +0000 hourly 1 By: Schadenfreude http://www.jesusandmo.net/2007/08/14/fine/#comment-176013 Schadenfreude Thu, 26 Jan 2012 13:20:33 +0000 http://www.jesusandmo.net/2007/08/14/fine/#comment-176013 Jason, your ontological argument is not really advancing your point - god exists because you imagine him to exist, and you imagine him greater than the universe therefore he must exist - it's standard theist delusional fare and no doubt your god would understand it as Iason cogitat ergo sum (Jason thinks, therefore I am). I suppose that in certain respects god exists, but only ever within the minds of believers - outside of that there's just a vacuum. And just because you cannot conceive of a vacuum doesn't mean you get to fill it with superstition and delusion just so you can understand it better. The same goes for the singularity and your understanding (or lack of understanding) of what it is - ignorance has always been a "rationale" for, or "proof" of god, and as science explains more, our intrepid theists just move the goalposts to whatever they see as the current unanswerable and declare that to be the line in the sand where non-theists fail in their endeavours to disprove the notion of god. Really, it's too ridiculous a conceit - it is not up to the non-theists to explain the origins of the big bang, the explaining needs to be done by those theists that claim the big bang as proof of the divine nature of everything. Of course, for this proof I'd expect the theist to be suitably knowledgeable in quantum physics and bigbangology - just parroting, "it's unknown, therefore it's god", or, "TMI!! my brain hurts!", aint going to win the argument. TL;DR The Singularity "paradox" isn't a mathematical trap for atheists to fall into; it's a straw man argument by theists who entirely fail to understand the science they're quoting and miss the irony in their explaining the "something out of nothing" conundrum by having another "something out of nothing" as a precursor. Just how is that supposed to work? I think heironymous came closest with, "Turtles all the way down". Jason, your ontological argument is not really advancing your point – god exists because you imagine him to exist, and you imagine him greater than the universe therefore he must exist – it’s standard theist delusional fare and no doubt your god would understand it as Iason cogitat ergo sum (Jason thinks, therefore I am).
I suppose that in certain respects god exists, but only ever within the minds of believers – outside of that there’s just a vacuum. And just because you cannot conceive of a vacuum doesn’t mean you get to fill it with superstition and delusion just so you can understand it better.
The same goes for the singularity and your understanding (or lack of understanding) of what it is – ignorance has always been a “rationale” for, or “proof” of god, and as science explains more, our intrepid theists just move the goalposts to whatever they see as the current unanswerable and declare that to be the line in the sand where non-theists fail in their endeavours to disprove the notion of god.
Really, it’s too ridiculous a conceit – it is not up to the non-theists to explain the origins of the big bang, the explaining needs to be done by those theists that claim the big bang as proof of the divine nature of everything.
Of course, for this proof I’d expect the theist to be suitably knowledgeable in quantum physics and bigbangology – just parroting, “it’s unknown, therefore it’s god”, or, “TMI!! my brain hurts!”, aint going to win the argument.

TL;DR
The Singularity “paradox” isn’t a mathematical trap for atheists to fall into; it’s a straw man argument by theists who entirely fail to understand the science they’re quoting and miss the irony in their explaining the “something out of nothing” conundrum by having another “something out of nothing” as a precursor.
Just how is that supposed to work? I think heironymous came closest with, “Turtles all the way down”.

]]> By: Ziz http://www.jesusandmo.net/2007/08/14/fine/#comment-173218 Ziz Tue, 08 Mar 2011 02:18:23 +0000 http://www.jesusandmo.net/2007/08/14/fine/#comment-173218 Actually, Science works on what is most likely to be true, and uses this as a stand point for further science, when new evidence comes to light, science changes and evolves, sometimes science has not got the answers, yet, but actually 'I don't know' is perfectly valid. There is nothing to say that the 'uncaused causer' is god over any other kind of being. And what caused god? Actually, Science works on what is most likely to be true, and uses this as a stand point for further science, when new evidence comes to light, science changes and evolves, sometimes science has not got the answers, yet, but actually ‘I don’t know’ is perfectly valid.
There is nothing to say that the ‘uncaused causer’ is god over any other kind of being. And what caused god?

]]> By: heironymous http://www.jesusandmo.net/2007/08/14/fine/#comment-172781 heironymous Fri, 28 Jan 2011 19:35:34 +0000 http://www.jesusandmo.net/2007/08/14/fine/#comment-172781 Jason - the answer is Turtles. It's turtles all the way down... Jason – the answer is Turtles. It’s turtles all the way down…

]]> By: Bagpuss http://www.jesusandmo.net/2007/08/14/fine/#comment-169767 Bagpuss Wed, 01 Sep 2010 20:11:53 +0000 http://www.jesusandmo.net/2007/08/14/fine/#comment-169767 ..wow, J&M read their own cartoon strip.........what happens when they try to read this particular strip...will they disappear into themselves in a continuous, never ending loop......maybe like tumbling into a black hole or a singularity, or even the end of the world, or the second coming!?; this is doing me 'ed in...(I'll get me coat - again) ..wow, J&M read their own cartoon strip………what happens when they try to read this particular strip…will they disappear into themselves in a continuous, never ending loop……maybe like tumbling into a black hole or a singularity, or even the end of the world, or the second coming!?; this is doing me ‘ed in…(I’ll get me coat – again)

]]> By: Thoughts of a Dying Atheist http://www.jesusandmo.net/2007/08/14/fine/#comment-166084 Thoughts of a Dying Atheist Thu, 11 Mar 2010 16:26:51 +0000 http://www.jesusandmo.net/2007/08/14/fine/#comment-166084 Sigh. Atheists don't construct faulty gods. Religion constructs faulty gods. Atheists just have the balls to admit they see the faults. Sigh. Atheists don’t construct faulty gods. Religion constructs faulty gods. Atheists just have the balls to admit they see the faults.

]]> By: Maharishi .. :D http://www.jesusandmo.net/2007/08/14/fine/#comment-156158 Maharishi .. :D Thu, 01 Oct 2009 19:59:18 +0000 http://www.jesusandmo.net/2007/08/14/fine/#comment-156158 Wow .. azurefrog // if i were jason i would be happy for the author considering my comment important enought to do a strip about it . ANd ofcourse if you already assume and want to BELIEVE that existance is something seperate from and Other than matter, AND MATTER HAS NO PARTICLE, AND MATTER MUST HAVE A BEGINNING, EXISTANCE IS MORE THAN MATTER, MATTER IS ONLY PRODUCT. .. . Then you sir are a true beliver .. iGive up to you .. Wow .. azurefrog //

if i were jason i would be happy for the author considering my comment important enought to do a strip about it .

ANd ofcourse if you already assume and want to BELIEVE that
existance is something seperate from and Other than matter,
AND MATTER HAS NO PARTICLE,
AND MATTER MUST HAVE A BEGINNING,
EXISTANCE IS MORE THAN MATTER,
MATTER IS ONLY PRODUCT. .. .

Then you sir are a true beliver .. iGive up to you ..

]]> By: azurefrog http://www.jesusandmo.net/2007/08/14/fine/#comment-150022 azurefrog Wed, 24 Jun 2009 17:21:20 +0000 http://www.jesusandmo.net/2007/08/14/fine/#comment-150022 Actually the proper answer for how the universe got started is "I don't know, and neither do you, no matter how much you think you do." Maybe we'll find out some day, and maybe we won't, but not knowing the answer to a question is not evidence that god is the answer. Actually the proper answer for how the universe got started is “I don’t know, and neither do you, no matter how much you think you do.” Maybe we’ll find out some day, and maybe we won’t, but not knowing the answer to a question is not evidence that god is the answer.

]]> By: Velok http://www.jesusandmo.net/2007/08/14/fine/#comment-129665 Velok Tue, 13 Jan 2009 19:56:45 +0000 http://www.jesusandmo.net/2007/08/14/fine/#comment-129665 Wow. Did you wait a year to answer, so that your arguments would go unanswered? Bad luck I just found J&M and are reading it through from the beginning :p You talk about an uncaused first cause as illogical, but you belive in God. Who created God? Ops, an uncaused first cause, hello! We know the universe exist, because we live in it. I don't know how it came to be, but to me I can live with the fact that it happened. We have no proof of any gods. Isn't it way more illogical to invent a first cause to the universe (god) and then claim your invented first cause (god) don't need a first cause, than to just accept the fact that we don't know how the universe came to be? Just because you think it is absurd to think that something mindless is the first cause, doesn't make it absurd. But then again, if you follow your own logic to it's conclusion, it is absurd to believe in god, because he too must have a "mindless cause". Or did he create himself? Then why can't you accept that the universe created itself? It's the same explanation, just one step removed. The concept of god doesn't bring anything to the table by way of en explaining how things started, so you might as well just remove it.... Wow. Did you wait a year to answer, so that your arguments would go unanswered? Bad luck I just found J&M and are reading it through from the beginning :p

You talk about an uncaused first cause as illogical, but you belive in God. Who created God? Ops, an uncaused first cause, hello!

We know the universe exist, because we live in it. I don’t know how it came to be, but to me I can live with the fact that it happened. We have no proof of any gods. Isn’t it way more illogical to invent a first cause to the universe (god) and then claim your invented first cause (god) don’t need a first cause, than to just accept the fact that we don’t know how the universe came to be? Just because you think it is absurd to think that something mindless is the first cause, doesn’t make it absurd. But then again, if you follow your own logic to it’s conclusion, it is absurd to believe in god, because he too must have a “mindless cause”. Or did he create himself? Then why can’t you accept that the universe created itself? It’s the same explanation, just one step removed. The concept of god doesn’t bring anything to the table by way of en explaining how things started, so you might as well just remove it….

]]> By: Jason http://www.jesusandmo.net/2007/08/14/fine/#comment-102952 Jason Thu, 14 Aug 2008 18:50:58 +0000 http://www.jesusandmo.net/2007/08/14/fine/#comment-102952 Everything has a source... All matter has it's source... I came from my parents, my parents came from theirs and so on and so forth... But their is always a trail that leads further back... Eventually you hit a mathematical problem for the atheist, that problem is SINGULARITY. Eventually there had to be a first cause that has no cause. It is absurd to think that anything mindless is that cause, knowing that such a logical universe spawned from this first source. It takes more faith to believe that than to believe in a being that transcends all things... Why can you believe in an uncaused first cause that has no mind, but find it intellectually impossible to grasp the concept of an uncaused first cause that has a mind, a consciousness? We have all seen matter, correct? So it's easy for us to believe in a source that is material... Well, we've all experienced conscious awareness, correct? Why can we not accept the one, and religiously cling to the other, as if a conscious being instead of unconscious matter did it all??? Is there ANY PROOF that matter did it all? Despite what an overzealous atheist might say, there actually is no PROOF, only speculation... Welcome to the world of faith atheists! Everything has a source… All matter has it’s source… I came from my parents, my parents came from theirs and so on and so forth… But their is always a trail that leads further back… Eventually you hit a mathematical problem for the atheist, that problem is SINGULARITY. Eventually there had to be a first cause that has no cause. It is absurd to think that anything mindless is that cause, knowing that such a logical universe spawned from this first source. It takes more faith to believe that than to believe in a being that transcends all things… Why can you believe in an uncaused first cause that has no mind, but find it intellectually impossible to grasp the concept of an uncaused first cause that has a mind, a consciousness? We have all seen matter, correct? So it’s easy for us to believe in a source that is material… Well, we’ve all experienced conscious awareness, correct? Why can we not accept the one, and religiously cling to the other, as if a conscious being instead of unconscious matter did it all??? Is there ANY PROOF that matter did it all? Despite what an overzealous atheist might say, there actually is no PROOF, only speculation… Welcome to the world of faith atheists!

]]> By: kmiers http://www.jesusandmo.net/2007/08/14/fine/#comment-54021 kmiers Thu, 30 Aug 2007 03:32:13 +0000 http://www.jesusandmo.net/2007/08/14/fine/#comment-54021 Jason. You were totally pwned. Jason. You were totally pwned.

]]>