[SuchFriendsAreDangerous]

Originally Posted by dead_battery

PS. - i forgot the most important thing about post christianity, which is that it totally fails to do away with the fucking atrocity at the core of christianity, which is the myth of creation. we basically still worship this myth only we want artists and entertainers to embody it. the idea of creation is the idea of a supernatural self that has agency above and beyond causality. and if this part of the myth is intact, then post christianity, atheism, secularism etc. are just as bad as what they want to replace..

Yet, even with all its eloquence and equations, the current cosmological explanations fall short of explaining the Big Bang any deeper than when Saint Augustine affirmed that the material world was "created" ex nihilo. All our current observations break down in the fraction of a second just after the Big Bang. Further, we have two contradicting scientific philosophies, one at the macro and the other at the micro, which currently have yet to be mathematically reconciled..

[dead_battery]

no, sorry. they don't.

christians constantly constantly say things like that, every little bit of wonderous unexplained fantasticalness in science is used to wedge god in there.

its called "the god of the gaps".

eg. "so we dont know what happened between point a and point b yet" "god did it." "but just because we don't yet-" "god did it."

and then when we do know, it becomes "well we don't know what happens between point b and point c, so you never know! my anthropomorphic fantasy of creationism that makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside might be proved by this massive explanatory gap! you scientists can't technically prove me wrong yet! hehehe"

[dead_battery]

also its just outright dishonest to say that your ignorance of science equates to what science actually knows. im sorry but they know a hell of a lot more than augustine did. a hell of a lot more data.

[Rob Instigator]

Originally Posted by SuchFriendsAreDangerous

Yet, even with all its eloquence and equations, the current cosmological explanations fall short of explaining the Big Bang any deeper than when Saint Augustine affirmed that the material world was "created" ex nihilo. All our current observations break down in the fraction of a second just after the Big Bang. Further, we have two contradicting scientific philosophies, one at the macro and the other at the micro, which currently have yet to be mathematically reconciled..

No one is trying to explain the Big Bang. It is unexplainable, as time/history/matter/energy were all created in what is referred to as a big bang. to study that moment itself, or anything before it, is to undertake theology, not science.

[SuchFriendsAreDangerous]

Originally Posted by dead_battery

also its just outright dishonest to say that your ignorance of science equates to what science actually knows. im sorry but they know a hell of a lot more than augustine did. a hell of a lot more data.

Its not MY ignorance of science, its science in general. Currently, quantum mechanics and conventional "Newtonian" physics can't be reconciled mathematically. Its almost like they're describe two different Universes, yet, we trying cosmologically to understand the one Universe we all live in. Also and again, I'm not a physicist, but even in high school physics its taught that when we rewind the cosmological clock all the way to the micro-seconds just AFTER the Big Bang, all our wonderful observations and mathematical formulas become incoherent. Also keep in mind that currently there isn't a single mathematical explanation to the concept of "dark matter/energy" to explain the observed balance we see in the material world of subatomic particles. Lastly, you'd be surprised how scientifically advanced the world of Saint Augustine was, in fact, they have technologies and capabilities which even todays most impressive technology STILL CAN'T DUPLICATE. It is a self-aggrandizing anachronism to assume the past was inherently more primitive to the present

[Rob Instigator]

The Big Bang is actually an attempt to explain why every single thing in the Universe is moving away from every other thing in the Universe. (there is indisputable evidence for this, but too many cannot bother with looking at evidence) If you go "backwards" in time, then eventually you reach a time/place where everything that exists was very very close to everything that exists. That initial expansion is what is referred to as "the big bang," which is NOT what scientists call it, but what laymen call it because they need everything simplified into grade school terminology.

[Rob Instigator]

science is not technology. technology is engineering.

science is the codified rules by which information is gathered about the universe in order to back up or refute theories.

[Rob Instigator]

Egyptians had amazing engineering. AMAZING, but their science was a crock of shit.

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by SuchFriendsAreDangerous

Currently, quantum mechanics and conventional "Newtonian" physics can't be reconciled mathematically.

and the immaculate conception postulates a haploid christ

[Rob Instigator]

Watched this on Sat with wife as it was on cable.

 

made me think it was sourced from a novel and lots of stuff was left out.

[dead_battery]

Originally Posted by SuchFriendsAreDangerous

Its not MY ignorance of science, its science in general. Currently, quantum mechanics and conventional "Newtonian" physics can't be reconciled mathematically. Its almost like they're describe two different Universes, yet, we trying cosmologically to understand the one Universe we all live in. Also and again, I'm not a physicist, but even in high school physics its taught that when we rewind the cosmological clock all the way to the micro-seconds just AFTER the Big Bang, all our wonderful observations and mathematical formulas become incoherent. Also keep in mind that currently there isn't a single mathematical explanation to the concept of "dark matter/energy" to explain the observed balance we see in the material world of subatomic particles. Lastly, you'd be surprised how scientifically advanced the world of Saint Augustine was, in fact, they have technologies and capabilities which even todays most impressive technology STILL CAN'T DUPLICATE. It is a self-aggrandizing anachronism to assume the past was inherently more primitive to the present

yeah, because newtonian physics is wrong! and its widely recognized as being so. newton was a christian who was intending to explain gods laws btw.

it's widely recognized that the newtonian model was necessary to get us to where we are today but that obviously like all theories in science, it's subject to be disproved once better data comes along. scientists routinely say that newtonian thinking still resides in the culture at large but they are well beyond it. they've pointed out numerous times that this is the case and that the rest of us haven't caught up to them yet.

but you christians want to freeze us in this eternal post modern dark ages of "but we just can't know certain things!"

[Rob Instigator]

The Gnostics believe that "Christ" was God made manifest on Earth and he only pretended to suffer his Passions, as he could feel no pain, being a god and all.. he played it all out for our benefit.

[dead_battery]

Originally Posted by Rob Instigator

No one is trying to explain the Big Bang. It is unexplainable, as time/history/matter/energy were all created in what is referred to as a big bang. to study that moment itself, or anything before it, is to undertake theology, not science.

bullshit. its science and scientists are doing it and have been doing it for a while now.

[SuchFriendsAreDangerous]

Originally Posted by dead_battery

yeah, because newtonian physics is wrong! and its widely recognized as being so. newton was a christian who was intending to explain gods laws btw.

Newtonian physics isn't wrong, the evidence is tangible. The equations of Newtonian physics are those which were used and are still used by NASA for space exploration and configuring artifical satellites..

it's widely recognized that the newtonian model was necessary to get us to where we are today but that obviously like all theories in science, it's subject to be disproved once better data comes along.

You're talking out of your ass, no actual scientist would ever claim that Newtonian physics is innaccurate or outdated..

Originally Posted by dead_battery

bullshit. its science and scientists are doing it and have been doing it for a while now.

Bullshit. When they try to "add it all up" nothing makes sense. At this stage in the game, the instant of the Big Bang and the theoretical singularity of matter which preceded it are mathematically speaking impossible, hence Rob's correct assertion that such is really bordering on speculative cosmology rather than substantive science.

Originally Posted by Rob Instigator

The Big Bang is actually an attempt to explain why every single thing in the Universe is moving away from every other thing in the Universe. (there is indisputable evidence for this, but too many cannot bother with looking at evidence) If you go "backwards" in time, then eventually you reach a time/place where everything that exists was very very close to everything that exists. That initial expansion is what is referred to as "the big bang," which is NOT what scientists call it, but what laymen call it because they need everything simplified into grade school terminology.

Yes, but when we "rewind" the clock using math, the results begin to stop making mathematical sense. Currently, science can't explain how all the matter in the universe existed as a singularity because the equations don't add up. Could they in the future? Possibly. But wishful thinking isn't exactly hard facts of science. Also and again, the two prevailing cosmologies work indepentently, but don't mutually explain each other. So there is a gap. I'm not promoting God(s) as a cause or bridge of these gaps, that would be intellectually disingenuous of me. However, REAL science it to at the same time be perfectly honest about its current limitations. Read some Stephen Hawkings about the concept of "time" .. very interesting stuff. And yes, contrary to you prejudice against me dead_battery, I am more informed about science then you'd like to admit

[Rob Instigator]

BTW, Newtonian physics was not wrong. It was 99.999999% correct and most of it still functions as intended. It was in the small details, the edges of the theory, where it fell apart. Most of it is till totally valid.

[Rob Instigator]

Originally Posted by dead_battery

bullshit. its science and scientists are doing it and have been doing it for a while now.

Nope. Go read about it man. They make guesses as to what could have been but that is not science. They admit that it is just fools guessing. actual science deals with verifiable experimental results. anyone trying to explain the initial state of the Universe, is doing metaphysics.

[dead_battery]

you two should go read scott bakker who is unfortunately a weepy narcissitic post christian moralist who whines about our precious "souls" too but actually has a complete theory of consciousness which is waiting for a definitive test to come along and prove or disprove it.

sorry that science does not tell you what you want to hear about your insignificant place in the universe and realities indifference to your vanity but you know, we got to start from where things really are not where we want them to be, yeah?

[Rob Instigator]

Originally Posted by SuchFriendsAreDangerous

Bullshit. When they try to "add it all up" nothing makes sense. At this stage in the game, the instant of the Big Bang and the theoretical singularity of matter which preceded it are mathematically speaking impossible, hence Rob's correct assertion that such is really bordering on speculative cosmology rather than substantive science.



Yes, but when we "rewind" the clock using math, the results begin to stop making mathematical sense. Currently, science can't explain how all the matter in the universe existed as a singularity because the equations don't add up. Could they in the future? Possibly. But wishful thinking isn't exactly hard facts of science. Also and again, the two prevailing cosmologies work indepentently, but don't mutually explain each other. So there is a gap. I'm not promoting God(s) as a cause or bridge of these gaps, that would be intellectually disingenuous of me. However, REAL science it to at the same time be perfectly honest about its current limitations. Read some Stephen Hawkings about the concept of "time" .. very interesting stuff. And yes, contrary to you prejudice against me dead_battery, I am more informed about science then you'd like to admit

actually, no one has ever verified that all matter./energy was in a singularity. singularities may not even exist, not even in black holes. they are just a sign that our math is wrong, like infinities.

[dead_battery]

Originally Posted by SuchFriendsAreDangerous

Bullshit. When they try to "add it all up" nothing makes sense. At this stage in the game, the instant of the Big Bang and the theoretical singularity of matter which preceded it are mathematically speaking impossible, hence Rob's correct assertion that such is really bordering on speculative cosmology rather than substantive science.



Yes, but when we "rewind" the clock using math, the results begin to stop making mathematical sense. Currently, science can't explain how all the matter in the universe existed as a singularity because the equations don't add up. Could they in the future? Possibly. But wishful thinking isn't exactly hard facts of science. Also and again, the two prevailing cosmologies work indepentently, but don't mutually explain each other. So there is a gap. I'm not promoting God(s) as a cause or bridge of these gaps, that would be intellectually disingenuous of me. However, REAL science it to at the same time be perfectly honest about its current limitations. Read some Stephen Hawkings about the concept of "time" .. very interesting stuff. And yes, contrary to you prejudice against me dead_battery, I am more informed about science then you'd like to admit

it only "doesn't make sense" because the math we are using is wrong. it will make sense eventually unless we go extinct before working it out. at least you admit this.

you probably are more informed about physics than me cos i dont know much.

also, the problem here is that if you are western/christian descended when you do metaphysics you are nearly 100% of the time crippled by your unconscious cultural biases. therefore you are actually looking for narrative, a beginning middle and end, and creationism.

in buddhism reality is a perfect mandala whose centre and edges are not definable. this is a better way of looking at the universe than trying to do the impossible, which is posit a void of pure nothingness and then try and come up with a reason why something appeared in that void. cos you can't.

[SuchFriendsAreDangerous]

Originally Posted by dead_battery

you probably are more informed about physics than me cos i dont know much.

.

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to dead_battery again.

Originally Posted by !@#$%!

and the immaculate conception postulates a haploid christ

Yes, that is exactly why the Orthodox Church explicitly rejects the Latin heresy of the Immaculate Conception of Mary because the result would be an imaginary Jesus with not real humanity. As Rob said, such is merely a rehash of Gnostism.

Originally Posted by Rob Instigator

Nope. Go read about it man. They make guesses as to what could have been but that is not science. They admit that it is just fools guessing. actual science deals with verifiable experimental results. anyone trying to explain the initial state of the Universe, is doing metaphysics.

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Rob Instigator again.