Enter the RAZOR
Created on: September 7th, 2006
Whetstone thinks he's got some killer arguments for why you just GOTTA believe in God. Enter: THE RAZOR.
Sponsorships:
| user | amount | user | amount |
|---|---|---|---|
| No one has sponsored this site ( ._.) | |||
| Sponsor this site! | Total: $0.00 | Active: $0.00 | |
Vote metrics:
| rating | total votes | favorites | comments |
|---|---|---|---|
| (3.84) | 68 | 0 | 38 |
View metrics:
| today | yesterday | this week | this month | all time |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3,064 |
Inbound links:
| views | url |
|---|---|
| 45 | https://www.bing.com |
| 5 | http://www.google.com.hk |
| 3 | http://216.18.188.175:80 |
| 1 | http://www.google.com |
| 1 | https://google.com |
I'll 5 it because I love Ockham's razor. Only I apply it differently. Seeing as how we are intended to use it to cut away multiplied entities, I see one intelligent being causing the universe far more plausible than an obscene amount of chance. Snip Snip there goes the chance. Thank you Mr. Ockham! :)
So let me get this straight: an intelligent being that by its nature must be far far more complex than the universe itself is more plausible to "just exist" than the universe which is pretty darn chaotic?
Besides, that's just another begged question: you can't figure the "chance" of anything, and find a particular outcome unlikely, unless you know the odds, and you can't: nobody has any clue.
Do you ever listen to yourself babble?
Juuuust fooling. Anyways, yes chance can be calculated. Whether we agree with those statistics is another matter. But Sir Fred Hoyle calculated the odds of only the proteins of an amoebae arising by chance as one chance in 10^40,000. How much higher the odds of an entire universe arising by chance goes I'm not sure. I see design and I see a designer. Ockham's razor cuts away the fat of so much useless chance. But you're a smart guy, I'll not waste any more of your time.
"Anyways, yes chance can be calculated."
No, not in the way you're doing it.
"Whether we agree with those statistics is another matter."
Well, if they are wrong, then I'm going to disagree with them, yes.
"But Sir Fred Hoyle calculated the
odds of only the proteins of an amoebae arising by chance as one chance in 10^40,000."
What's that have to do with anything? No one thinks ameoba's popped out of nowhere: they evolved from far simpler life (amboebas are already the result of 1.5B years of
And trying to calculate the odds of the universe being the way it is is pure nonsense. We have no idea what made the universe like it is, or what other possible universes are like. For all we know, they are even more complex an interesting, and ours is quite dull, simple, and chaotic. Your calculating the odds is like trying to bet on a dice throw when you don't know what numbers are on the dice or even how many sides it has. i.e. its nonsense.
"While the opposite is not proven, no example
proves the statement "something came from nothing", and plenty of observation favors the
opposite."
This doesn't even make sense. The reality is that nobody knows anything about how universes begin or even if they begin. There are no observations. So if you are goig to assume, assume what's least elaborately goofy.
Bold
Italic
Underline
Code
User Link
Site Link