A test for true "Atheism?"

Discussion in 'Parapsychology' started by Dennis Tate, Mar 21, 2021.

?

Are you a true Athiest? Will you take the "Cyrus challenge?"

  1. Yes... I already did this... now I am waiting for answers

    1 vote(s)
    33.3%
  2. No... I will not do this... this is silly....

    2 vote(s)
    66.7%
  3. I will think about this and I want some more information on how this works?????

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  1. Dennis Tate Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    812
    OK..I will send you several in a private message... they go to another discussion forum.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Dywyddyr Penguinaciously duckalicious. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    19,179
    Yup, he's a wannabe not a theoretical physicist.
     
    Dennis Tate likes this.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Dennis Tate Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    812
    He certainly got me asking a bunch of all new questions though.

    ....

    ....

     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Dywyddyr Penguinaciously duckalicious. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    19,179
    Oh, thanks for those quotes.
    I didn't previously notice the third one when I read the links you provided.
    He's not only not a "truly impressive Theoretical Physicist" he's also an utter loon.
     
    Dennis Tate likes this.
  8. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,408
    Well, except our closest neighbor - which is heading toward us - and will collide with us in a few million years...

    But what do scientists care about accuracy...
     
    Dennis Tate and Dywyddyr like this.
  9. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,225
    Would that be the No True Atheist fallacy?

    Yikes. Was he still aroud in the 90's? I thought he had been discredited off the face of the earth long before that.

    I think that's too early to be an atheist. At that age you should have been deciding what your favorite color of M&M was.
     
    Dennis Tate likes this.
  10. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    35,782
    The red flags should really start going up as soon as somebody sees a plethora of ALL CAPS. Because, as we all know, all TRUE information is more RELIABLE when it is SHOUTED!
     
    Dennis Tate and Dywyddyr like this.
  11. Dennis Tate Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    812
    In his defence....
    he lives in Israel and is Jewish.....
    so he may well have somewhat more than his fair share of chutzpah!
     
  12. Dennis Tate Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    812
    Good point about that being a bit young for true "Atheism" but....
    I did convince a number of deeply religious young elementary school friends of mine to swing over to my Atheistic view of the world.....
    from what they had been taught in church?!?!
     
  13. Dennis Tate Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    812
    Any attempt to simplify and explain M-Theory will tend to have that effect on even the most well prepared audience......

    https://www.thecrimson.com/article/...e states that,shaped by our human limitations.



    and.....

    https://blogs.scientificamerican.co...ew-theory-of-everything-is-the-same-old-crap/


     
  14. Dywyddyr Penguinaciously duckalicious. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    19,179
    Agreed.
    It doesn't change the fact that he's a loon.
     
    Dennis Tate likes this.
  15. river

    Messages:
    16,216
    Now what ?
     
    Dennis Tate likes this.
  16. Dennis Tate Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    812
    If you decide to read the rest of the article it does a good job of explaining why the audience was somewhat shocked by what Dr. Stephen Hawking tossed out to them.

    This blog does a great job of both explaining how difficult it would be to actually test String Theory.....
    but it also does a good job of explaining the logic of why there could have been many universes go through a process before the Big Bang event of 13.8 billion or so years ago.

    https://blogs.scientificamerican.co...ew-theory-of-everything-is-the-same-old-crap/
     
  17. Dennis Tate Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    812
    If you have taken the challenge from the first post and the poll I assume that
    what will happen with you will to at least some degree correlate with what I experienced beginning around 1990. I was led to answer after answer after answer to questions that had been troubling me for years or even decades..... but I was also led to some whole new questions that I hadn't really faced before. In retrospect.... the whole thing was kind of awesome!
     
  18. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,234
    Well yes, StarWars is also awesome, but its fantasy.

    Unless we can definitively establish how this Universe began, it is kinda meaningless in speculation about how many universe could have begun. For all intents and purposes this Universe and how it must have begun is the only way we can possibly begin to understand anything about how other universe could have begun.
     
    Dennis Tate likes this.
  19. Dennis Tate Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    812

    While he was alive.....
    I suspect that Dr. Hawking might have been rather offended by my suspicions that Dr. Hawking might.....
    be something of a "closet Evolutionary Theist" after reading "Stephen Hawking's Universe" but........
    at this time I suspect that he is kind of glad that some of us feel that he set us up for something that could turn out to be significant years, decades and even centuries in the future.


    https://blogs.scientificamerican.co...ew-theory-of-everything-is-the-same-old-crap/

     
  20. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,234
    I'd say that if it takes 4.7 billion years for an organism to become acclimated to local conditions, the environment is not fine tuned to its existence. It would be more like the organism is fine tuned to existing conditions.

    I am again reminded that there are organisms (extremophiles) that would die if exposed to conditions in which humans thrive.

    It appears then that the universe offers evolutionary opportunity to a wide range of life from iceworms ( which melt unless frozen)
    https://glaciers.nichols.edu/iceworm/

    to extremophile microorganisms
    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-44440-8

    And potentially in many places in the universe

    As Hazen observes there is most likely not a single origin of life but that life can emerge in many forms in many ways in many places. Dense molecular clouds in deep space already produce organic molecules (Lou Allamandola, NASA). All that life requires to emerge is some fundamental but abundant chemistry, large spaces, and lots of time. Life is not precious, it is abundant throughout the universe. Humans, remarkable as they may be, are but one expression of living organisms, and certainly not alone as can be observed by the incredible variety of life on earth alone.

    There seems to be no limit to the appearance of life in some form even in the most inhospitable conditions. There is not fine tuning of the universe for life, life seems to fine tune itself to universal conditions. I believe it's called evolution.
     
    Last edited: Apr 7, 2021
    Dennis Tate likes this.

Share This Page