Announcement

Collapse

Deeper Waters Forum Guidelines

Notice The ministries featured in this section of TheologyWeb are guests of this site and in some cases not bargaining for the rough and tumble world of debate forums, though sometimes they are. Additionally, this area is frequented and highlighted for guests who also very often are not acclimated to debate fora. As such, the rules of conduct here will be more strict than in the general forum. This will be something within the discretion of the Moderators and the Ministry Representative, but we simply ask that you conduct yourselves in a manner considerate of the fact that these ministries are our invited guests. You can always feel free to start a related thread in general forum without such extra restrictions. Thank you.

Deeper Waters is founded on the belief that the Christian community has long been in the shallow end of Christianity while there are treasures of the deep waiting to be discovered. Too many in the shallow end are not prepared when they go out beyond those waters and are quickly devoured by sharks. We wish to aid Christians to equip them to navigate the deeper waters of the ocean of truth and come up with treasure in the end.

We also wish to give special aid to those often neglected, that is, the disabled community. This is especially so since our founders are both on the autism spectrum and have a special desire to reach those on that spectrum. While they are a special emphasis, we seek to help others with any disability realize that God can use them and that they are as the Psalmist says, fearfully and wonderfully made.

General TheologyWeb forum rules: here.
See more
See less

Why Neil DeGrasse Tyson Should Stick To Science

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by Apologiaphoenix View Post
    Good science does not necessarily equal good philosophy. http://deeperwaters.wordpress.com/20...ck-to-science/
    "If, Jesus rose from the dead, not a single fact established by science could overturn that." Now come on now AP, you're smarter than to make a statement like that. "If" if's and but's were candy and nuts, not a single fact of science could overturn that either, but they're not. Can science prove that you didn't walk on water yesterday AP? No it can't, science is empirically based and you can make any unfounded assertion you like and science can't disprove it.
    Btw, good philosophy does not necessarily equal good science. Philosophy doesn't prove anything.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Scrawly View Post
      You do realize I am a Christian and I ultimately agree that God is responsible for the creation of all physical reality, right? However, I do not know the extent of physical reality nor understand the mechanisms involved. I think there very well could be a multiverse, in fact I can't think of any good reason why there wouldn't be.

      I simply found your comment to be skirting far too close to the God-of-the-gaps and I thought I would call you out on it.
      and I mirrored your dumbass skit to show you what I meant by it is harder to believe the universe just popped into existence from nothing for no reason, than it is to believe in an all powerful God.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Sparko View Post
        Announcer: So what caused the universe to be here?
        Scrawly: Nothing. There was no cause.
        Announcer: So how come there is a universe?
        Scrawly: dunno. It just appeared out of nothing.
        Announcer: nothing? What do you mean?
        Scrawly: well some people think it was caused by vacuum fluctuations...
        Announcer: Isn't vacuum nothing?
        Scrawly: Yes, that is why I said the universe appeared out of nothing.
        Announcer: But before the universe was here there wasn't even a vacuum, right? because there was no space, no time, nada.
        Scrawly: uh... well, strings! yeah strings did it. or maybe branes.
        Announcer: what evidence do we have of these strings or branes?
        Scrawly: evidence? how can there be evidence of something outside of the universe that existed before the universe existed? There is no evidence. You just have to have faith and stuff.
        Announcer: riiiight. I thought you said there wasn't any cause?
        Scrawly: There isn't. I mean.. well... shut up!!!
        To be clear , Sparko , strings and branes and quantum vacuums are physical stuff within the universe. Any attempt to explain the way the universe is with things like vacuums , strings or branes only explain how the present state of the universe came about from an earlier state. So its an open question what the earlier state of the universe was like. You can accept theories involving strings or branes. The question of an absolute beginning remains unanswered however.
        Edward Feser's quote is applicable

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by LaplacesDemon View Post
          To be clear , Sparko , strings and branes and quantum vacuums are physical stuff within the universe. Any attempt to explain the way the universe is with things like vacuums , strings or branes only explain how the present state of the universe came about from an earlier state. So its an open question what the earlier state of the universe was like. You can accept theories involving strings or branes. The question of an absolute beginning remains unanswered however.
          Edward Feser's quote is applicable
          Well strings and branes are actually things that supposedly exist in higher dimensions that interact to make our universe. They are "in it" only in so far as the interaction is causing the universe.

          But they are just mathematical models, with no way of checking them out. No evidence of them exists and none actually could.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by JimL View Post
            "If, Jesus rose from the dead, not a single fact established by science could overturn that." Now come on now AP, you're smarter than to make a statement like that. "If"
            Yeah. It might surprise you, but if something is a fact, it's a fact, and any fact in any other field cannot overturn that. I realize that might be difficult to grasp, but facts don't contradict.

            if's and but's were candy and nuts, not a single fact of science could overturn that either, but they're not. Can science prove that you didn't walk on water yesterday AP? No it can't, science is empirically based and you can make any unfounded assertion you like and science can't disprove it.
            Correct. Science cannot disprove miracles happen. That is a separate question. Science only tells you about what happens if there is no outside interference. It cannot tell you there is no outside interference.

            Btw, good philosophy does not necessarily equal good science. Philosophy doesn't prove anything.
            This would be relevant if I had said good philosophy equals good science. You can have good philosophy and be a terrible scientist. You can have bad philosophy and be a brilliant scientist.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Sparko View Post
              and I mirrored your dumbass skit to show you what I meant by it is harder to believe the universe just popped into existence from nothing for no reason, than it is to believe in an all powerful God.
              Correct me if I'm wrong, but you are assuming God caused the big-bang, right? Well, I think that is folly - God-of-the-gaps. The proper answer would be: I don't know. Scientists are investigating this.

              As stated previously, it may very well turn out that we live in a multiverse and creation is far more vast and exciting than previously thought. You don't want to paint yourself into a corner by zealously rushing in to see the face of God where only his mechanism exists.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                Well strings and branes are actually things that supposedly exist in higher dimensions that interact to make our universe. They are "in it" only in so far as the interaction is causing the universe.

                But they are just mathematical models, with no way of checking them out. No evidence of them exists and none actually could.
                But branes are physical stuff all the same. It just pushes the question back to an earlier physical state.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Apologiaphoenix View Post
                  Yeah. It might surprise you, but if something is a fact, it's a fact, and any fact in any other field cannot overturn that. I realize that might be difficult to grasp, but facts don't contradict.
                  Very good. If something is a fact, it definitively is a fact, but whether or not it is a fact can only be proven through empirical science. Magic feigns reality, but only science can confirm it.


                  Correct. Science cannot disprove miracles happen. That is a separate question. Science only tells you about what happens if there is no outside interference. It cannot tell you there is no outside interference.
                  Thats true, and if people choose to believe in the miraculous they are free to do so, but as far as they are concerned it is only a belief, not a fact.


                  This would be relevant if I had said good philosophy equals good science. You can have good philosophy and be a terrible scientist. You can have bad philosophy and be a brilliant scientist.
                  Sure, but science trumps philosophy every time.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by JimL View Post
                    Very good. If something is a fact, it definitively is a fact, but whether or not it is a fact can only be proven through empirical science. Magic feigns reality, but only science can confirm it.
                    The sad thing is that nothing in this can be proven through empirical science. Sorry Jim, but scientism is dead. I have no reason to believe it and embrace many truths that are not known through science.



                    Thats true, and if people choose to believe in the miraculous they are free to do so, but as far as they are concerned it is only a belief, not a fact.
                    Atheistic presuppositionalism is so cute. Believing in miracles is just belief but asserting that they have never ever happened is not belief apparently. I suppose you have a response to Craig Keener's "Miracles." Right? Or is it again that your mind is made up. Forget the evidence.



                    Sure, but science trumps philosophy every time.
                    Sure. Let's have some fun then.

                    Scientifically demonstrate that the world outside of your mind is real.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Apologiaphoenix View Post
                      The sad thing is that nothing in this can be proven through empirical science. Sorry Jim, but scientism is dead. I have no reason to believe it and embrace many truths that are not known through science.
                      You can embrace whatever it is you believe, your belief is why you embrace it, but whether those beliefs are truths or not you have no knowledge of without science.




                      Atheistic presuppositionalism is so cute. Believing in miracles is just belief but asserting that they have never ever happened is not belief apparently. I suppose you have a response to Craig Keener's "Miracles." Right? Or is it again that your mind is made up. Forget the evidence.
                      Hate to break this to you AP, but believing in miracles is just a belief. Believing that they never happened is just a belief also. My mind is made up on the subject, just as is yours, but feel free to change my mind if you think you have convincing evidence.




                      Sure. Let's have some fun then.

                      Scientifically demonstrate that the world outside of your mind is real.
                      If that is ever proven to be the case AP, then it will be science, not philosophy, that proves it.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by JimL View Post
                        You can embrace whatever it is you believe, your belief is why you embrace it, but whether those beliefs are truths or not you have no knowledge of without science.
                        Nothing in this statement has been proven by science. If it true, it defeats itself. If it is false, then things can be known without science.

                        Dang. That's easy.





                        Hate to break this to you AP, but believing in miracles is just a belief. Believing that they never happened is just a belief also. My mind is made up on the subject, just as is yours, but feel free to change my mind if you think you have convincing evidence.
                        Already presented. Keener. Your refutation?





                        If that is ever proven to be the case AP, then it will be science, not philosophy, that proves it.
                        No. Science can never prove it because science has to presuppose it. It would be like somehow proving you are not in a dream by looking at everything around you. You might as well try to prove you're not in the Matrix.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by Apologiaphoenix View Post
                          Nothing in this statement has been proven by science. If it true, it defeats itself. If it is false, then things can be known without science.

                          Dang. That's easy.
                          Nothing in that statement need be proven by science, it is a truth prima facie. Belief means belief, which in turn means not knowing. You don't need science to uncover the meaning behind our own language.






                          Already presented. Keener. Your refutation?
                          Haven't read him, but feel free to use what you have learned from Keener about miracles to make your case in their favor and change my mind.






                          No. Science can never prove it because science has to presuppose it. It would be like somehow proving you are not in a dream by looking at everything around you. You might as well try to prove you're not in the Matrix.
                          Never underestimate science AP. The point is that philosophy never proves anything.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by JimL View Post
                            Nothing in that statement need be proven by science, it is a truth prima facie. Belief means belief, which in turn means not knowing. You don't need science to uncover the meaning behind our own language.
                            And yet earlier you said.

                            Very good. If something is a fact, it definitively is a fact, but whether or not it is a fact can only be proven through empirical science. Magic feigns reality, but only science can confirm it.
                            So unless your prior statement can be proven through science then who cares? What was the statement?

                            You can embrace whatever it is you believe, your belief is why you embrace it, but whether those beliefs are truths or not you have no knowledge of without science.
                            If this is an unproven assertion, I have no need to accept it as a fact. If it is a proven one, it defeats itself.

                            Must really suck to get scientism destroyed so easily.







                            Haven't read him, but feel free to use what you have learned from Keener about miracles to make your case in their favor and change my mind.
                            Or you could, you know, read him.







                            Never underestimate science AP. The point is that philosophy never proves anything.
                            I think you overestimate science. Science can never prove what you want it to do. It has to assume it.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              JimL, do you trust science?

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                                JimL, do you trust science?
                                The reason we do science Sparko is so that we can trust ourselves, so why wouldn't you trust science?

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by Apologiaphoenix, 01-14-2022, 10:12 AM
                                0 responses
                                12 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Apologiaphoenix  
                                Started by Apologiaphoenix, 01-13-2022, 10:16 AM
                                0 responses
                                13 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Apologiaphoenix  
                                Started by Apologiaphoenix, 01-12-2022, 11:20 AM
                                9 responses
                                87 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Apologiaphoenix  
                                Started by Apologiaphoenix, 01-11-2022, 10:22 AM
                                0 responses
                                22 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Apologiaphoenix  
                                Started by Apologiaphoenix, 01-10-2022, 11:39 AM
                                2 responses
                                29 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Apologiaphoenix  
                                Working...
                                X