Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Is "Dublin" a real place?

1…6791112…20

Comments

  • #242
    Jim tully
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21 ✭Jim tully


    I'd like to make a point which hasn't been made in relation to the big bang. It is not reasonable to trivialise this event as some bang and then everything just happened as if by magic. The big bang is an extremely difficult problem in physics that baffles the most elite physicists in the world. They are working hard to solve the problem and find out more about our origins. We all have a layman's understanding of the big bang which is not much of an understanding at all and I believe that even the name of the event 'The big bang' is a hindrance as it seems to mislead a lot of people into thinking something along the lines of "oh so what? Bang and then everything happened?".

    Like I said, its a difficult problem that only top physicists should be allowed to have an opinion of. It explains the complexity of the universe by back tracking to a universe with simpler roots. You cannot explain a complex system with another complex system. God making the universe leaves us with a bigger problem...who made God? In order to explain complexity you must break it down into its constituent components.


  • #243
    Notavirus.exe
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 832 ✭✭✭Notavirus.exe


    King Mob wrote: »
    Yet it isn't arrogant for you to claim to know how everything actually started and that you know exactly which god started it and that out of all the countless versions of god and the creation myth yours just happens to be right?

    Can you explain how God created the universe? Can you be more specific than "it was magic"?

    No, I don't know how everything started and I didn't claim that any particular "god" did it. I believe that there is a god out there.

    I didn't say it was magic. I just said that all that we see today is a bit too much to have created itself. Just think about life. It's a bit silly to say that the complexity of our brains, DNA, bodies, subconscious mind and consciousness formed itself.
    If you're so sure, please announce to everyone on this thread that you are 100% sure that there is absolutely no way for everything that stinks of intelligent design to have been created by any supernatural being.
    pauldla wrote: »
    I would not explain intelligent design; I would leave that to you. But again, if you're reading the origin of the universe as akin to something happening inside a celestial cardboard box, I suggest that you read up on it a little more. May I recommend Carl Sagan's excellent Cosmos, and also Marcus Chown's We Need To Talk About Kelvin.

    Think of this, nothing exists. There is an eternally dark plain of existence when suddenly something causes an explosion. This explosion creates the universe. There are rocks, metals, gases, etc created. Now, life comes out of nowhere. How?

    How did life get into the universe? How did life even create itself? Why did life create itself? Why would life bother existing?

    If you can't answer the above questions definitively, you have no right to say that a god couldn't have done it.


  • #244
    Notavirus.exe
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 832 ✭✭✭Notavirus.exe


    Jim tully wrote: »
    Like I said, its a difficult problem that only top physicists should be allowed to have an opinion of. It explains the complexity of the universe by back tracking to a universe with simpler roots. You cannot explain a complex system with another complex system. God making the universe leaves us with a bigger problem...who made God? In order to explain complexity you must break it down into its constituent components.

    Whatever the universe exists inside of, like a "plain of existence" or a "cardboard box" as I have put it in simple terms, that plain of existence would have been in existence forever, i.e. eternal. God isn't a living being. It's absolutely possible for a being such as God to exist.

    But then it turns into some kind of paradox thing because human beings instinctively believe that everything must have a beginning and everything must have an ending.

    I can't explain it, but I strongly believe that a being such as God living outside the realm of what we call "time" is possible.


  • #245
    endacl
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,443 ✭✭✭✭endacl


    Out where? I thought god was omnipresent?

    Come on. Own up. You don't even know what you think you're talking about.

    :D


  • #246
    Jim tully
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21 ✭Jim tully


    Your argument is running along the lines of "I can't explain it, therefore God". It's a tempting side to take as you get the benefits of an afterlife. This is the God of the gaps argument. You must realise that before evolution was discovered by Darwin and Russell everybody looked at life as being the product of gods work. How else could the elegance of a bird's wing or the complexity of an eye come about. These questions were surefire existence of God's design. Once evolution was discovered, these beliefs were discarded. That alone is a reason to believe that just because one cannot explain something does not mean there is an almighty creator behind it.

    We now know by and large the events that have lead up to our existence from a single cell. We do not know the origin of DNA but there are very good hypotheses postulated (RNA world for example). Just because you cannot explain something does not mean that you should throw your hands up in the air and give up and suggest it's God's work. What you SHOULD do however, is roll up your sleeves and get to work on the problem and try learn more about it. That is how science progresses.

    I remember being stumped by these very questions that you are asking and trying to seek out answers. It's a subject I'm very interested and I can only recommend you look up some Richard Dawkins videos as he has made debates with theologians about the topic.


  • Advertisement
  • #247
    kippy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,589 ✭✭✭✭kippy


    Notavirus.exe wrote: »
    No, I don't know how everything started and I didn't claim that any particular "god" did it. I believe that there is a god out there.

    I didn't say it was magic. I just said that all that we see today is a bit too much to have created itself. Just think about life. It's a bit silly to say that the complexity of our brains, DNA, bodies, subconscious mind and consciousness formed itself.
    If you're so sure, please announce to everyone on this thread that you are 100% sure that there is absolutely no way for everything that stinks of intelligent design to have been created by any supernatural being.



    Think of this, nothing exists. There is an eternally dark plain of existence when suddenly something causes an explosion. This explosion creates the universe. There are rocks, metals, gases, etc created. Now, life comes out of nowhere. How?

    How did life get into the universe? How did life even create itself? Why did life create itself? Why would life bother existing?

    If you can't answer the above questions definitively, you have no right to say that a god couldn't have done it.

    No one really knows the answer to any of those questions although the hows might be easier to speculate on than the whys.
    A 'god' could have done it.
    But what makes anyone believe it was THEIR God is what baffles me....(if you are to carry on with that logic)
    Indeed we are so caught up in our own existences and concepts we cannot fathom outside our own reality. (Gods are part of our own reality)


  • #248
    Notavirus.exe
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 832 ✭✭✭Notavirus.exe


    Jim tully wrote: »
    Your argument is running along the lines of "I can't explain it, therefore God". It's a tempting side to take as you get the benefits of an afterlife. This is the God of the gaps argument. You must realise that before evolution was discovered by Darwin and Russell everybody looked at life as being the product of gods work. How else could the elegance of a bird's wing or the complexity of an eye come about. These questions were surefire existence of God's design. Once evolution was discovered, these beliefs were discarded. That alone is a reason to believe that just because one cannot explain something does not mean there is an almighty creator behind it.

    Ah, no. Evolution wasn't discovered. It's a theory that Darwin himself said can only be proven by future scientists if they find the missing links, which they haven't.

    For any unfortunate believers of the evolution theory, this is a good read: http://humansarefree.com/2013/12/9-scienctific-facts-prove-theory-of.html

    According to endacl, the link I gave above is "riddled with malware". It's fine for me with the necessary malware blocking add-ons. Proceed at your own risk.


  • #249
    endacl
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,443 ✭✭✭✭endacl


    Notavirus.exe wrote: »
    Ah, no. Evolution wasn't discovered. It's a theory that Darwin himself said can only be proven by future scientists if they find the missing links, which they haven't.

    For any unfortunate believers of the evolution theory, this is a good read: http://humansarefree.com/2013/12/9-scienctific-facts-prove-theory-of.html

    Oh. You're one of those...

    :D

    Edit: Against my better judgement I had a quick scan of your link. The author appears to be wrong. Details on application.


  • #250
    pauldla
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,248 ✭✭✭pauldla


    Notavirus.exe wrote: »
    ...

    Think of this, nothing exists. There is an eternally dark plain of existence when suddenly something causes an explosion. This explosion creates the universe. There are rocks, metals, gases, etc created. Now, life comes out of nowhere. How?

    If 'nothing exists', then there can't be 'an eternally dark plain of existence'. As has been pointed out already, there was not an 'explosion', the phenomenon you seek to describe is better characterised as an expansion. This expansion didn't create the universe, it is the universe. Rocks, metals and gases all formed using physical processes that we have been remarkably successful in describing using the tools provided us by science. Abiogenesis, the origin of life, is not yet so well described, but it is a fascinating area of study and I secretly hope (whisper it!) that we will get significant insight into it in my lifetime. If not, well, so be it; I'll still get up for work tomorrow.
    How did life get into the universe? How did life even create itself? Why did life create itself? Why would life bother existing?

    Your how questions are interesting, and I think I have dealt with them above. Your why questions are slightly baffling, tbh. Why did life create itself? Could it be one of those things that happen from time to time, given a few billion years and the right conditions? Why would life bother existing? Why does a lichen, to paraphrase Bill Bryson in A Short History of Nearly Everything, endure all forms of abuse and hardship to get one more moment of life? Could it be because that's what life does? Is the question any more useful than 'Why does water bother wetting'?
    [/B]If you can't answer the above questions definitively, you have no right to say that a god couldn't have done it.

    No, you're wrong there. If I can't answer the first two its because we don't yet fully understand abiogenesis. The second two questions I have dealt with. Still no god in there, I'm afraid. By the way, you seemed to argue earlier that I should be scared that I cannot explain abiogenesis. Could you explain what you meant by this, please?

    For what its worth, I don't say that a god couldn't have done it. I am agnostic on the matter of the existence of god(s); I don't know if they are there or not. But I don't believe there are any gods. That's what atheism means.


  • #251
    Notavirus.exe
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 832 ✭✭✭Notavirus.exe


    endacl wrote: »
    Oh. You're one of those...

    :D

    Darwin wrote a book (or at least a chapter) on the flaws of his theory. Why don't schools teach us that part of it?

    How did a cactus "evolve" over millions of years to survive in the desert? If it did "evolve" to adapt to its environment, it would need to have survived in the desert anyway. I'm picking out my own flaws in it. How does a fish adapt to staying out of the water? According to the theory, living things adapt to their environments, not adapt before they change to another environment.

    Seriously though, the link I gave has it all. Read it.


  • Advertisement
  • #252
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,473 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    Notavirus.exe wrote: »
    Ah, no. Evolution wasn't discovered. It's a theory that Darwin himself said can only be proven by future scientists if they find the missing links, which they haven't.
    Ah here, we've a thread for that kind of nonsense over here:

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056883606


  • #253
    endacl
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,443 ✭✭✭✭endacl


    Notavirus.exe wrote: »
    Seriously though, the link I gave has it all. Read it.
    Pick a point from the article. Any point. I'll explain the wrong. No charge.

    :)


  • #254
    endacl
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,443 ✭✭✭✭endacl


    Notavirus.exe wrote: »
    Darwin wrote a book (or at least a chapter) on the flaws of his theory. Why don't schools teach us that part of it?

    How did a cactus "evolve" over millions of years to survive in the desert? If it did "evolve" to adapt to its environment, it would need to have survived in the desert anyway. I'm picking out my own flaws in it. How does a fish adapt to staying out of the water? According to the theory, living things adapt to their environments, not adapt before they change to another environment.

    Seriously though, the link I gave has it all. Read it.

    Cacti are still evolving.
    Check out lungfish, in the context of their life cycle and environment. Still evolving.


  • #255
    Notavirus.exe
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 832 ✭✭✭Notavirus.exe


    endacl wrote: »
    Pick a point from the article. Any point. I'll explain the wrong. No charge.

    :)

    All of it. :pac:


  • #256
    endacl
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,443 ✭✭✭✭endacl


    robindch wrote: »
    Ah here, we've a thread for that kind of nonsense over here:

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056883606

    Not evolving...

    :(


  • #257
    endacl
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,443 ✭✭✭✭endacl


    Notavirus.exe wrote: »
    All of it. :pac:

    OK. Opening statement:
    'The Theory of Evolution is not a scientific law or a law of biology. A scientific law must be 100% correct.'

    A scientific law is a statement based on repeated experimental observations that describes some aspects of the universe. A scientific law always applies under the same conditions, and implies that there is a causal relationship involving its elements.

    This is quite a separate thing from a theory, such as the theory of evoluton by natural selection.

    It would be mean of me to say the author is being deliberately disingenuous, in an attempt to mislead uninformed readers in the interests of promoting a personal agenda. I'm just going to go ahead and presume they were stupid.


  • #258
    endacl
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,443 ✭✭✭✭endacl


    Oh, if you enjoyed that article, this might also be of interest.


  • #259
    eeguy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,399 ✭✭✭eeguy


    Notavirus.exe wrote: »
    If I had 100% definitive proof that there was no God, I'd turn into a depressed psycho murderer. That's if I didn't kill myself in a depression fulled rage.

    I don't know if it's been said in this thread, but if your belief in God is the only thing preventing you from becoming a murderer, then you need to commit yourself.
    endacl wrote: »
    OK. Opening statement:
    'The Theory of Evolution is not a scientific law or a law of biology. A scientific law must be 100% correct.'

    A scientific law is a statement based on repeated experimental observations that describes some aspects of the universe. A scientific law always applies under the same conditions, and implies that there is a causal relationship involving its elements.

    This is quite a separate thing from a theory, such as the theory of evoluton by natural selection.

    http://evolutionfaq.com/faq/why-isnt-evolution-considered-law

    This is an issue which often confuses the general public, as the two words, theory and law, have very different common meanings. But in science, their meanings are very similar. A theory is an explanation which is backed by "a considerable body of evidence," while a law is a set of regularities expressed in a "mathematical statement."

    This is why Newton's Laws of Motion are referred to as laws and not theories.
    They are expressed with simple equations (like f = ma for his 2nd Law of Motion). Evolution, and most of Biology, cannot be expressed in a concise mathematical equation, so it is referred to as a theory.

    A scientific law is not "better" or "more accurate" than a scientific theory. A law explains what will happen under certain circumstances, while a theory explains how it happens.
    [ References: Kennesaw State University: Scientific Laws and Theories ]


  • #260
    endacl
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,443 ✭✭✭✭endacl


    eeguy wrote: »
    Notavirus.exe wrote: »
    If I had 100% definitive proof that there was no God, I'd turn into a depressed psycho murderer. That's if I didn't kill myself in a depression fulled rage.
    /QUOTE]

    I don't know if it's been said in this thread, but if your belief in God is the only thing preventing you from becoming a murderer, then you need to commit yourself.

    You're grand. We've done the god bit. Looks like we'll be joining the 'specious nonsense' thread soon.


  • #261
    Notavirus.exe
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 832 ✭✭✭Notavirus.exe


    eeguy wrote: »
    I don't know if it's been said in this thread, but if your belief in God is the only thing preventing you from becoming a murderer, then you need to commit yourself.

    I was being a bit extreme when I said that. My depression would turn into anger.

    The reason I created this thread is because I love all of my relatives without limit (not in that kind of way), and to believe that when they die, you'll never see them again just makes me sick. If you're a fully convinced atheist then how do you cope with believing that? How the hell do you do it?

    I'm not a theist in the sense that I believe that God definitely exists, I just believe that he probably exists and I accept it and hope it.

    Theism isn't really the opposite to atheism. I believe that God exists. I don't say "God does exist" Atheists seem to say straight up "God doesn't exist".


  • Advertisement
  • #262
    Stealthfins
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,141 ✭✭✭Stealthfins


    So what you're saying is along with "yes Virginia there is a Santa Clause".


  • #263
    eeguy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,399 ✭✭✭eeguy


    Notavirus.exe wrote: »
    The reason I created this thread is because I love all of my relatives without limit (not in that kind of way), and to believe that when they die, you'll never see them again. If you're a fully convinced atheist then how do you cope with believing that? How the hell do you do it?

    It's my belief that you've only got a short time in this world.

    It's up to you to make the most of it, because when you're dead you're dead.

    So instead of fixating on what happens after death, I just focus on making myself and the people around me as happy as possible and hopefully leaving the world in a slightly better state than I found it.

    All this "sure he's in a better place" talk is just false reassurance. If someone you love dies, then you grieve and move on. It's the way of the world, whether you believe in an afterlife or not.

    The only people who'll remember you when you're gone are your children and even they will only think about you on an anniversary or something.


  • #264
    Cabaal
    Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional South East Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 28,654 Mod ✭✭✭✭Cabaal


    Notavirus.exe wrote: »
    I was being a bit extreme when I said that. My depression would turn into anger.

    The reason I created this thread is because I love all of my relatives without limit (not in that kind of way), and to believe that when they die, you'll never see them again just makes me sick. If you're a fully convinced atheist then how do you cope with believing that? How the hell do you do it

    How do you live with yourself knowing that so many Christians waste their only chance at a life by looking forward to their death as they think they'll get to have a better experience then....

    The delusion means these people waste their actual life... All for nothing.

    Fearing what happens to you after you die is as pointless as Fearing what happened to you before you were born, there is nothing to fear because you won't be aware of anything anymore.


  • #265
    Stealthfins
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,141 ✭✭✭Stealthfins


    Well I fear sometimes about how my kids will be when I die
    I also think about what ill leave behind for my loved one's both good memories and materialism such as money and property etc


  • #266
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 25,874 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Notavirus.exe wrote: »
    No, I don't know how everything started and I didn't claim that any particular "god" did it. I believe that there is a god out there.
    So you've figured out the entire secret to the universe based solely on your own gumption and gut feeling.
    But atheists are arrogant?
    Notavirus.exe wrote: »
    I didn't say it was magic. I just said that all that we see today is a bit too much to have created itself. Just think about life. It's a bit silly to say that the complexity of our brains, DNA, bodies, subconscious mind and consciousness formed itself.
    If you're so sure, please announce to everyone on this thread that you are 100% sure that there is absolutely no way for everything that stinks of intelligent design to have been created by any supernatural being.
    .
    So then how did God do it?
    Wiggle his nose? Wish on a star?

    Did he do the same for those parasites that make children go blind when they drink tainted water?


  • #267
    Notavirus.exe
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 832 ✭✭✭Notavirus.exe


    eeguy wrote: »
    If someone you love dies, then you grieve and move on. It's the way of the world, whether you believe in an afterlife or not.

    I simply can't do that. When someone I love dies I can't go "Ah, sure that's life".

    I just can't describe the emotions of losing someone. And I don't know how an atheist can either especially with their beliefs.


  • #268
    eeguy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,399 ✭✭✭eeguy


    Notavirus.exe wrote: »
    I simply can't do that. When someone I love dies I can't go "Ah, sure that's life".

    I just can't describe the emotions of losing someone. And I don't know how an atheist can either especially with their beliefs.

    But that IS life. Life and death.

    People are born and people die.

    Knowing that people will die makes you cherish your time with them. I spend a huge amount of time with my grandparents because I know they'll be gone in a decade and I miss my grandparents that have died.

    If I thought there is going to be a big reunion in Heaven then I wouldn't bother.

    And if you truly believed in an afterlife then why would you mourn the dead? Sure you're gonna see them soon enough again?


  • #269
    Notavirus.exe
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 832 ✭✭✭Notavirus.exe


    Cabaal wrote: »
    Fearing what happens to you after you die is as pointless as Fearing what happened to you before you were born, there is nothing to fear because you won't be aware of anything anymore.

    That part has upset me (I know everyone by now is probably thinking that I'm some depressed weirdo with a sad life or something).

    It upsets me for two reasons:

    Firstly, I don't want to not exist. That sounds horrific. Just imagine it, you're a dying old man/woman surrounded by your loving family who have been with you through thick and thin, and you believe that you're going to close your eyes soon and die. Maybe not existing isn't that bad because you won't know at the time, but the belief that you won't exist before you don't exist is what upsets me.

    Secondly, I wouldn't want my life to turn out to be pointless. My family is special to me, as yours is to you. I don't want them to be meaningless to me after I die and I don't want to forget about them and I don't want to lose contact with them. I can't explain it all but it's all very depressing.


  • #270
    endacl
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,443 ✭✭✭✭endacl


    Notavirus.exe wrote: »
    I simply can't do that. When someone I love dies I can't go "Ah, sure that's life".

    I just can't describe the emotions of losing someone. And I don't know how an atheist can either especially with their beliefs.

    Well, one thing I'm sure we can all agree on is that everybody dies. It's inevitable.

    Without going into the fact that atheism is not a belief, the fact that you find it difficult, in a very particular way, to lose somebody you love, and the fact that you can't conceive of how I, for example, might be even less equipped to deal with a similar loss..?

    Well, to paraphrase the inestimable Dr. Phil re your own personal understanding of Life, the Universe, and Everything. "How's that working out for you".

    There's no point coming on to the A&A forum and having a go at posters because you're experiencing some sort of crisis in your own personal irrationality. It's a bit .... projecty ...? Deal with it.


  • Advertisement
  • #271
    endacl
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,443 ✭✭✭✭endacl


    Notavirus.exe wrote: »
    That part has upset me (I know everyone by now is probably thinking that I'm some depressed weirdo with a sad life or something).

    It upsets me for two reasons:

    Firstly, I don't want to not exist. That sounds horrific. Just imagine it, you're a dying old man/woman surrounded by your loving family who have been with you through thick and thin, and you believe that you're going to close your eyes soon and die. Maybe not existing isn't that bad because you won't know at the time, but the belief that you won't exist before you don't exist is what upsets me.

    Secondly, I wouldn't want my life to turn out to be pointless. My family is special to me, as yours is to you. I don't want them to be meaningless to me after I die and I don't want to forget about them and I don't want to lose contact with them. I can't explain it all but it's all very depressing.
    Two points in response. Just something for you to consider.

    1. I don't even know the names of my great grandparents. This affects them how? And affects me, how?

    2. Before you existed. Was that horrific for you?

    Edit: probably better to swop points 1&2 around...


Advertisement