Intelligent Design Isn't So Intelligent

[Subduction Zone]

The universe shows immense evidence of being non-chaotic and organized. I don't want to argue subjective beliefs with you, but I believe you are in denial.



You win the "silliest answer of the month" award, considering that these immense, amazing places, thought to be possibly routes through visible space via wormholes/pulsars, are now thought to be in the center of all fully formed galaxies, holding the very galaxies together by their immense power.

And no, I've never seen the inside of a black hole, nor can I "see it" since it holds in all light. A second award may be forthcoming for you.

When you have to change a question to "refute" it you prove that the question was not that silly in the first place.

 

[SkepticThinker]

The universe shows immense evidence of being non-chaotic and organized. I don't want to argue subjective beliefs with you, but I believe you are in denial.

You win the "silliest answer of the month" award, considering that these immense, amazing places, thought to be possibly routes through visible space via wormholes/pulsars, are now thought to be in the center of all fully formed galaxies, holding the very galaxies together by their immense power.

And no, I've never seen the inside of a black hole, nor can I "see it" since it holds in all light. A second award may be forthcoming for you.

I asked if you’ve ever seen a black hole.


[1505.08108] Chaos in the black hole S-matrix
Chaos around a black hole - IOPscience
Does Chaos Rule the Cosmos? | DiscoverMagazine.com
[1602.01473] Chaos in Matrix Models and Black Hole Evaporation
The Chaotic Behavior of the Black Hole System GRS 1915+105 - IOPscience
Quantum chaos - Wikipedia
Particle Motion Around Perturbed Black Holes: The Onset of Chaos
[gr-qc/9906028] Chaos around the superposition of a black-hole and a thin disk
Particle Motion Around Perturbed Black Holes: The Onset of Chaos



Yes, yes. It's very silly.

 

[BilliardsBall]

Because of the facts, measurements, observations etc. From the smallest quantum particle and atoms electron cloud, through planetary orbits, galaxies,
super clusters, filaments (as i posted as evidence), even the CMB is totally random in its temperature clusters, (more evidence)

And as far as i can see you have provide nothing to support your claim other than subjective opinion.

You are saying the universe as a whole is chaotic. Yes cosmology is rooted in observations across time based on organization.

You are saying the universe as a whole is chaotic. Yet every field of science has rules, laws and items that can measured on bell curves and similar organized scales.

 

[ChristineM]

You are saying the universe as a whole is chaotic. Yes cosmology is rooted in observations across time based on organization.

You are saying the universe as a whole is chaotic. Yet every field of science has rules, laws and items that can measured on bell curves and similar organized scales.

Sorry, science didn't make the universe, people made science and gave it rules.

No scientist will say his measurements are 100% accurate, there is always a margin of error. Part of the reason for that margin is chaos

Did you see the super blue moon the other night? Do you know why it was visually different from the norm ? Chaos.

You perhaps have false view of chaos, chaos is everywhere from the dripping of a tap to the tumble of a water fall, from your spending habits to the wall street financial market. From a speck of dust floating in the breeze to gravitation attraction of billions of masses in a galaxy.

Chaos is beautiful and without you could not exist.

 

[BilliardsBall]

Sorry, science didn't make the universe, people made science and gave it rules.

No scientist will say his measurements are 100% accurate, there is always a margin of error. Part of the reason for that margin is chaos

Did you see the super blue moon the other night? Do you know why it was visually different from the norm ? Chaos.

You perhaps have false view of chaos, chaos is everywhere from the dripping of a tap to the tumble of a water fall, from your spending habits to the wall street financial market. From a speck of dust floating in the breeze to gravitation attraction of billions of masses in a galaxy.

Chaos is beautiful and without you could not exist.

Would you have said the super blue moon, since I read articles about it before it occurred, was predictable? Why was it predicted accurately, would you say?

 

[ChristineM]

Would you have said the super blue moon, since I read articles about it before it occurred, was predictable? Why was it predicted accurately, would you say?

Reasonably accurately, as previously stated no scientist will claim 100% accuracy.

Stability of the Solar System - Wikipedia

"Though the planets have been stable when historically observed, and will be in the short term, their weak gravitational effects on one another can add up in unpredictable ways. For this reason (among others) the Solar System is chaotic,[1] and even the most precise long-term models for the orbital motion of the Solar System are not valid over more than a few tens of millions of years.[2]"

 

[BilliardsBall]

Reasonably accurately, as previously stated no scientist will claim 100% accuracy.

Stability of the Solar System - Wikipedia

"Though the planets have been stable when historically observed, and will be in the short term, their weak gravitational effects on one another can add up in unpredictable ways. For this reason (among others) the Solar System is chaotic,[1] and even the most precise long-term models for the orbital motion of the Solar System are not valid over more than a few tens of millions of years.[2]"

We should be worried then, and not say, "the Sun will rise tomorrow".

 

[ChristineM]

We should be worried then, and not say, "the Sun will rise tomorrow".

The sun doesn't rise, the earth rotates. I thought even second graders knew that.

Don't worry about waking up in the morning unless one of those asteroids chaotically zooming around the solar system collides with earth and does another K2.

It's estimated that the sun will be around for another 5 billion years.

 

[BilliardsBall]

The sun doesn't rise, the earth rotates. I thought even second graders knew that.

Don't worry about waking up in the morning unless one of those asteroids chaotically zooming around the solar system collides with earth and does another K2.

It's estimated that the sun will be around for another 5 billion years.

What should I worry about? Death?

Your answer reminds me of this "cute" cartoon:

How Do You Explain A Sunset If There Is No God?

The point is the woman is actually referring to the beauty of the sunset. How did the woman evolve to come to love a sunset's beauty, and how did evolution waste our time loving sunsets when we could be foraging for food, nesting, or killing predators?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

What should I worry about? Death?

Your answer reminds me of this "cute" cartoon:

How Do You Explain A Sunset If There Is No God?

The point is the woman is actually referring to the beauty of the sunset. How did the woman evolve to come to love a sunset's beauty, and how did evolution waste our time loving sunsets when we could be foraging for food, nesting, or killing predators?

For the same reason bees are instinctively attracted to colourful flowers - humans developed a generalized recognition of shapes and formations that we find attractive because doing so, in many cases, confers advantages. Humans are naturally drawn to bright, fresh, red foods, but are generally put off by foods that are dull or blue. That doesn't mean we can't eat them, but we have a sort of in-built aesthetic preference because one appearance gives us an instinctive reaction of food being fresh and healthy, while the other gives a reaction of it being old or poisonous. In this sense, we find the sun attractive because we recognize it as a source of light and life, and we find its presence comforting.

Furthermore, "beauty" is not an intrinsic facet of something, but a very subjective things based on a mixture of instinct, environment and perception. To argue that "beauty" is a demonstration that there is some supernatural facet to the Universe's formation is fundamentally flawed because of this, not to mention the myriad of things people find subjectively "ugly" in the world. I doubt anyone would ask how an atheist would explain the beauty of a viper feeding on a mouse, or a mallard duck copulating through gang rape.

 

[ChristineM]

What should I worry about? Death?

Your answer reminds me of this "cute" cartoon:

How Do You Explain A Sunset If There Is No God?

The point is the woman is actually referring to the beauty of the sunset. How did the woman evolve to come to love a sunset's beauty, and how did evolution waste our time loving sunsets when we could be foraging for food, nesting, or killing predators?

You are the one who said "We should be worried then, and not say, "the Sun will rise tomorrow".

I am an artist, i revere beauty, no god involved.

And what has some woman with zero comprehension of astronomy or orbital mechanics to do with the chaotic universe?

Are are you attempting to back out of that discussion?

 

[BilliardsBall]

You are the one who said "We should be worried then, and not say, "the Sun will rise tomorrow".

I am an artist, i revere beauty, no god involved.

And what has some woman with zero comprehension of astronomy or orbital mechanics to do with the chaotic universe?

Are are you attempting to back out of that discussion?

There's nothing to back out of, I've already explained, atheists see less beauty in the universe, less order, than the religious. They must believe, despite the evidence, that the universe is chaotic, to make sense of their meaningless existence. That is, to provide ORDER for their existence. ;0

The very fact that you assert that I have to move forward or else back out of our discussion shows that you believe in an organized universe. Why should I discuss anything with you at all? Why should I "organize" our chat?

 

[BilliardsBall]

For the same reason bees are instinctively attracted to colourful flowers - humans developed a generalized recognition of shapes and formations that we find attractive because doing so, in many cases, confers advantages. Humans are naturally drawn to bright, fresh, red foods, but are generally put off by foods that are dull or blue. That doesn't mean we can't eat them, but we have a sort of in-built aesthetic preference because one appearance gives us an instinctive reaction of food being fresh and healthy, while the other gives a reaction of it being old or poisonous. In this sense, we find the sun attractive because we recognize it as a source of light and life, and we find its presence comforting.

Furthermore, "beauty" is not an intrinsic facet of something, but a very subjective things based on a mixture of instinct, environment and perception. To argue that "beauty" is a demonstration that there is some supernatural facet to the Universe's formation is fundamentally flawed because of this, not to mention the myriad of things people find subjectively "ugly" in the world. I doubt anyone would ask how an atheist would explain the beauty of a viper feeding on a mouse, or a mallard duck copulating through gang rape.

I predicted that some skeptic would provide an evolutionary reason for why "sunsets are pretty", yet without explaining how it is not helpful to sit and look at the sunset for 30 minutes, when we could be mating, foraging for food, or killing prey.

Nor has any skeptic explained the evolutionary necessity of trolling religious-minded forums.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I predicted that some skeptic would provide an evolutionary reason for why "sunsets are pretty", yet without explaining how it is not helpful to sit and look at the sunset for 30 minutes, when we could be mating, foraging for food, or killing prey.

I already explained why we find looking at the sun pleasurable. It should be pretty easy to deduce why engaging in a pleasurable activity for long periods of time is desirable, evolution or no.

Nor has any skeptic explained the evolutionary necessity of trolling religious-minded forums.

This is a religious DEBATE forum.

 

[ChristineM]

There's nothing to back out of, I've already explained, atheists see less beauty in the universe, less order, than the religious. They must believe, despite the evidence, that the universe is chaotic, to make sense of their meaningless existence. That is, to provide ORDER for their existence. ;0

The very fact that you assert that I have to move forward or else back out of our discussion shows that you believe in an organized universe. Why should I discuss anything with you at all? Why should I "organize" our chat?

Don't talk total nonsense. The explanation of a fundamental christian on the mindset of an atheist has how much credibility? Atheist have only one thing in common the disbelief in god. Other than that all bets are off.

There is no belief involved, measurements and observations show the facts but your projection is noted. Some Christians must belief, despite the facts that the universe is precise and ordered otherwise it reflects badly on there dream of god magic.

Say what? I never said any such thing, i asked a question, that young refused to answer and instead tried to twist my question into a command shows precisely how honorable you are as a person.

So far i have provided 2 evidences of the chaos, you have made unfounded assertions and stomped your foot.

Here is some more

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.285.9516

[1510.01909] Deterministic chaos in the large-scale universe: data versus speculations

[0911.2525] Chaotic universe in the z=2 Hovava-Lif****z gravity

 

[Sapiens]

There's nothing to back out of, I've already explained, atheists see less beauty in the universe, less order, than the religious. They must believe, despite the evidence, that the universe is chaotic, to make sense of their meaningless existence. That is, to provide ORDER for their existence. ;0

Your statement is easily falsified with a short list of atheists who not only saw great beauty in the universe but described it: Christopher Marlowe, Georg Christoph Lichtenberg, John Milton, Percey Bysshe Shelley, Simone de Beauvoir. The vast majority of members of the National Academy of Sciences are non believers and they have seen, discovered and revealed more order that all their contemporary thiests.

 

[BilliardsBall]

I already explained why we find looking at the sun pleasurable. It should be pretty easy to deduce why engaging in a pleasurable activity for long periods of time is desirable, evolution or no.


This is a religious DEBATE forum.

You're not debating anything in religion. You are saying de facto 100% of all religious belief, tradition and practice is wrong. That is, you're playing devil's advocate.

 

[BilliardsBall]

Don't talk total nonsense. The explanation of a fundamental christian on the mindset of an atheist has how much credibility? Atheist have only one thing in common the disbelief in god. Other than that all bets are off.

There is no belief involved, measurements and observations show the facts but your projection is noted. Some Christians must belief, despite the facts that the universe is precise and ordered otherwise it reflects badly on there dream of god magic.

Say what? I never said any such thing, i asked a question, that young refused to answer and instead tried to twist my question into a command shows precisely how honorable you are as a person.

So far i have provided 2 evidences of the chaos, you have made unfounded assertions and stomped your foot.

Here is some more

CiteSeerX — Chaotic Universe: From the Planck to the Hubble Scale

[1510.01909] Deterministic chaos in the large-scale universe: data versus speculations

[0911.2525] Chaotic universe in the z=2 Hovava-Lif****z gravity

You are posting to me reasoned, ordered, logical, non-chaotic posts, from organized scientists, who use as axiomatic laws of physics, math and logic to back their assertions to say the universe is chaotic? Interesting.

Perhaps this will help. Is the Earth chaotic? The animal kingdom or the plant kingdom?

Clearly, the Bible is true--the Earth was created.

 

[BilliardsBall]

Your statement is easily falsified with a short list of atheists who not only saw great beauty in the universe but described it: Christopher Marlowe, Georg Christoph Lichtenberg, John Milton, Percey Bysshe Shelley, Simone de Beauvoir. The vast majority of members of the National Academy of Sciences are non believers and they have seen, discovered and revealed more order that all their contemporary thiests.

The great beauty and great precision they see makes an eloquent case for God's existence. Thanks for sharing this fact.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

You're not debating anything in religion. You are saying de facto 100% of all religious belief, tradition and practice is wrong. That is, you're playing devil's advocate.

Now you're just outright lying. I have never said anything of the sort.

And no, that is not playing "devil's advocate". This is a DEBATE FORUM, designed for people OF NUMEROUS BELIEFS AND PERSPECTIVES to debate their views. It is not a religious promotion forum, designed only for the exchange and promotion of explicitly religious views.