Do we need a "God" to act morally?

[Cann!bal]

We get it. You truly, fundamentally, and blindly subscribe to the ideas of this Lawrence Krauss fellow, without any of the necessary tools to prove or disprove his claims (i.e. a PhD in physics). Kind of like how people latch on to the ideas from the Q'uran, Old Testament, and New Testament blindly... don'tcha think?

---

Never said ya did... your words, not mine.

---

No. I have read his works and his conclusions came through scientific research and logic. The claims he make require a prerequisite of information. It's pointless if I engaged in debate with someone who has misconstrued idea of the science behind it.

Huh? What are you talking about? I told you I don't proclaim I'm always right. You assumed I did.

 

[Executioner]

No. I have read his works and his conclusions came through scientific research and logic. The claims he make require a prerequisite of information. It's pointless if I engaged in debate with someone who has misconstrued idea of the science behind it.

Huh? What are you talking about?

Just like what you said before in another thread, that people believe that the earth was flat, and that people believe that the earth is the center of the universe, so it comes to my senses that you go with the mainstream into believing until being disproved? Pathetic.

 

[dmay]

No. I have read his works and his conclusions came through scientific research and logic. The claims he make require a prerequisite of information. It's pointless if I engaged in debate with someone who has misconstrued idea of the science behind it.

Huh? What are you talking about?

Let me clarify: falling into a quantum mechanics wikipedia or science channel/Michio Kaku wormhole is not analogous to drafting your own mathematical proofs. I hope you understand my skepticism when I see someone with a lot of free time (apparently) to spend trying to win a [fruitless] debate on a message board claiming that they can personally prove/conclude through 6-10 years of physics training on a university level all facets, nuances, and logic of quantum mechanics as well as the universe as a whole.

 

[Cann!bal]

Just like what you said before in another thread, that people believe that the earth was flat, and that people believe that the earth is the center of the universe, so it comes to my senses that you go with the mainstream into believing until being disproved? Pathetic.

What? Your assertions make little to no sense. I agree with Lawrence Krauss because of I have read his works and the science behind it, not because I'm some bandwagon atheist.

 

[dmay]

What? Your assertions make little to no sense. I agree with Lawrence Krauss because of I have read his works and the science behind it, not because I'm some bandwagon atheist.

Once again, you are throwing in your own words and not my own. Even more simply put: just because you read articles on wikipedia and watch science channel documentaries does not mentally or intellectually equip you to verify these kinds of lofty physical proofs all on your own. If you truly are capable of doing so, I suggest we take out the Crayola crayons, macaroni, and construction paper once again... that way I can wrap my feeble mind around your oh-so-cumbersome scientific proofs which you have obviously been properly trained for.

 

[Cann!bal]

Let me clarify: falling into a quantum mechanics wikipedia or science channel/Michio Kaku wormhole is not analogous to drafting your own mathematical proofs. I hope you understand my skepticism when I see someone with a lot of free time (apparently) to spend trying to win a [fruitless] debate on a message board claiming that they can personally prove/conclude through 6-10 years of physics training on a university level all facets, nuances, and logic of quantum mechanics as well as the universe as a whole.

I'm not a scientist. I'm a freethinker and have read the works of Lawrence Krauss. I don't require an expertise to debate this matter, simply the basics.

Stop it with the passive aggressive insults.

---

Once again, you are throwing in your own words and not my own. Even more simply put: just because you read articles on wikipedia and watch science channel documentaries does not mentally or intellectually equip you to verify these kinds of lofty physical proofs all on your own. If you truly are capable of doing so, I suggest we take out the Crayola crayons, macaroni, and construction paper once again... that way I can wrap my feeble mind around your oh-so-cumbersome scientific proofs which you have obviously been properly trained for.

"I'm not a scientist. I'm a freethinker and have read the works of Lawrence Krauss. I don't require an expertise to debate this matter, simply the basics.

Stop it with the passive aggressive insults."

 

[dmay]

I'm not a scientist. I'm a freethinker and have read the works of Lawrence Krauss. I don't require an expertise to debate this matter, simply the basics.

Stop it with the passive aggressive insults.

So basically, in your own words, if I am reading correctly: you have chosen to follow and canonize the words Lawrence Krauss under your own free will without the intellectual capabilities to prove or disprove them on your own. At the end of the day in theory, you're no different than people who blindly follow the Bible(s) without the capacity to prove or disprove their own God. Hence your argument has now earned the **GOLD STAR OF FALLACY**. My point.

 

[Cann!bal]

So basically, in your own words, if I am reading correctly: you have chosen to follow and canonize the words Lawrence Krauss under your own free will without the intellectual capabilities to prove or disprove them on your own. At the end of the day in theory, you're no different than people who blindly follow the Bible(s) without the capacity to prove or disprove their own God. Hence your argument has now earned the **GOLD STAR OF FALLACY**. My point.

Faulty. I do withhold the basics, as aforementioned, I do not need a degree in this matter to be correct or debate it. No, God is not demonstrable, unlikewise to science, which is demonstrable. I redirected him to Lawrence Krauss and to quantum mechanics, because they withhold the full capacity to explain it thoroughly, unlike me, I have the basics.

 

[dmay]

Faulty. I do withhold the basics, as aforementioned, I do not need a degree in this matter to be correct or debate it. No, God is not demonstrable, unlikewise to science, which is demonstrable. I redirected him to Lawrence Krauss and to quantum mechanics, because they withhold the full capacity to explain it thoroughly, unlike me, I have the basics.

Well, yes, you will always be free to make claims. The fun part is being able to prove your claims. "Lawrence Krauss explains his ideas well using nifty Powerpoint presentations on an IMAX projector" does not equate to the mathematical proofs which are actually required to support or reject his ideas. Once again, these are the kinds of ideas that one must be equipped with a PhD (or perhaps some Rain Man-esque autism/savant syndrome) to prove on their own. I understand the premise of Einstein's ideas of special relativity, but I'll be the first to admit that I lack the mathematical training and intellectual capacity to actually prove it myself.

 

[Cann!bal]

Well, yes, you will always be free to make claims. The fun part is being able to prove your claims. "Lawrence Krauss explains his ideas well using nifty Powerpoint presentations on an IMAX projector" does not equate to the mathematical proofs which are actually required to support or reject his ideas. Once again, these are the kinds of ideas that one must be equipped with a PhD (or perhaps some Rain Man-esque autism/savant syndrome) to prove on their own. I understand the premise of Einstein's ideas of special relativity, but I'll be the first to admit that I lack the mathematical training and intellectual capacity to actually prove it myself.

I never claimed I possess the knowledge to prove the claim. I claimed I possess the basic knowledge of his claims.

Let me make it abundantly clear for you. The ideas within science, such as quantum mechanics are demonstrable. The ideas within religion, such as God are not demonstrable. Therefore, I do trust scientists with their claims. (The theories go through a repetitive process; that being the scientific method. However, if in a scientific theory, if there's an error, the whole theory is discarded.) However, blindly like theists? No, because God is not demonstrable. Scientific claims can be demonstrated (and I can personally test them if I wanted), theirs can't be. Hence, why I redirected him to someone who can explain the oeuvre.

Your argument is the same fallacious argument loony Ray Comfort uses when approaching citizens trying to persuade them to creationism. It's folly.

 

[dmay]

I never claimed I possess the knowledge to prove the claim. I claimed I possess the basic knowledge of his claims.

Let me make it abundantly clear for you. The ideas within science, such as quantum mechanics are demonstrable. The ideas within religion, such as God are not demonstrable. Therefore, I do trust scientists with their claims. (The theories go through a repetitive process; that being the scientific method. However, if in a scientific theory, if there's an error, the whole theory is discarded.) However, blindly like theists? No, because God is not demonstrable. Scientific claims can be demonstrated (and I can personally test them if I wanted), theirs can't be. Hence, why I redirected him to someone who can explain the oeuvre.

Your argument is the same fallacious argument loony Ray Comfort uses when approaching citizens trying to persuade them to creationism. It's folly.

You prove to me why your beliefs regarding quantum mechanics are correct, and I'll show you proof that God doesn't exist. Enjoy your eternity of fire and rock, heathen.

 

[Bit]

No, it's about understanding the affects of your actions, not just on the other person, but on the world as a whole.

It comes down to a desire to see the world not fall to shit.

 

[Cann!bal]

You prove to me why your beliefs regarding quantum mechanics are correct, and I'll show you proof that God doesn't exist. Enjoy your eternity of fire and rock, heathen.

Don't bother commenting if you're going to troll.