Show of HandsShow of Hands

Show Of Hands November 23rd, 2019 7:23am

Do you believe that the universe is a puzzle that science could eventually solve completely (given enough time)?

36 Liked

Comments: Add Comment

truenuff
11/23/19 2:25 am

The universe is not only stranger than we imagine, it is stranger than we can imagine.

Reply
ScottyDoesNo Stand back and stand by
11/23/19 2:56 am

Unfortunately “science” has become far too politicized to be of any use anymore. Global warming was debunked years ago and is a confirmed hoax yet “scientists” keep running around peddling its propaganda. They have ZERO credibility.

Reply
JoeRoberts Maryland
11/23/19 2:28 am

Man thought he learned everything God knows and challenged God. So God tosses dirt in the air and a man is formed. Man,in his arrogance,reaches down for a handful at which point God said , "hey start with your own dirt".

It's still God's creation.

Reply
BigPhatPastor Jefferson Hills, PA
11/23/19 6:55 am

How can non intelligence design anything?

Reply
BadSeed Oregon
11/23/19 12:04 pm

Our existence is beyond human comprehension

Reply
tractorman Oklahoma
11/23/19 7:31 am

ARed, the pastor is making that basic mistake of attributing things we, at this point in time, can’t understand yet and attributing these things to some creator (god). That’s ok because he’s in the god business and needs to believe that.
The idea that something must have a beginning is for him a given. Time is a human construct and in our limited understanding of science, it makes sense for him to say that there must be a beginning and an end. Not necessarily so.
I appreciate you discussing this topic with him in a civil way but realize that he is committed to a faith based belief system where science is just a distraction to prove his faith in something (religion) that is unprovable by science.

Reply
TierasPet
11/23/19 5:18 am

No, I think there are mysteries to the universe we will never understand.

Reply
Argonaut Yang 2020
11/23/19 7:52 am

For a tenured professor you seem to have a distinct lack of access to papers

Reply
TomLaney1 Jesus is Lord
11/23/19 11:05 pm

Science will never understand the universe until it abandons its anti-supernatural bias.

Reply
Argonaut Yang 2020
11/23/19 6:20 am

Scotty if I may ask, what’s your background in the sciences? Have you taken classes on thermodynamics, ever conducted research on the climate? Read scientific journals with papers on the subject?

Reply
ARedHerring Kentucky
11/23/19 6:55 am

But all of the laws and mathematics could easily exist in a world of non intelligent design.

Reply
IMO atoms, space, opinion
11/23/19 7:23 am

What about miracles? They tend to break natural laws as well as common sense.

Reply
ScottyDoesNo Stand back and stand by
11/23/19 7:23 am

Thank you for asking as I am a tenured professor with a Ph.D. in climatology from the University of Alabama at Huntsville. I can firmly tell you my field has become highly politicized and devoid of scientific rigor in favor of a kind of religiosity surrounding this climate change hoax. CO2 is a trace gas at 0.04% of the atmosphere and we only contribute 25% of the 0.04%. By contrast even a minuscule change in luminosity from our closet star has enormous impacts on our climate, as has been soundly demonstrated in numerous journals of scientific study.

Reply
Liberty 4,032,064
11/23/19 7:35 am

As in its present state and how things functions and interact with each other? Absolutely.

As in knowing the past and how everything came to be? Doubtful.

Reply
NHauxx57 WA
11/23/19 6:31 pm

If you asked a person from 12,000 years ago when civilization was first starting if we could eventually understand how to get into space, or how the earth orbits the sun, they would have said “no it’s too complex.” Here we are now knowing both of those things and more. Our minds can not comprehend it but future humans will.

Reply
Argonaut Yang 2020
11/23/19 6:22 am

I don’t subscribe to a creation myth, but even if it was created why does that necessarily mean we can’t understand aspects of it?

Reply
Talren Libertarian Socialist
11/23/19 8:39 am

Given relativity and quantum theory, it is anything but “straightforward.”

We used to be certain that the way time progresses doesn’t change, and that an object’s length is invariant. It makes complete sense and is extremely intuitive. Then relativity came along and upended all of that. But after all, we don’t live at relativistic speeds, so why should we expect their effects to make intuitive sense to us?

We used to think that particles and waves were mutually exclusive, and that waves must always travel through a medium. It makes complete sense and is extremely intuitive. Then quantum physics and quantum mechanics came along and upended all of that. But after all, we don’t live at quantum scales, so why should we expect their effects to make intuitive sense to us?

.

Reply
Argonaut Yang 2020
11/23/19 8:52 am

Never said it was irrelevant. But the output is relatively constant, unlike the atmosphere co2. We know from Venus and Mars the importance of greenhouse gases and and 33% increase is not negligible. It all depends on what is normal and the effects of such an increase.

Can you please provide your credentials now. Show us you aren’t lying plz

Reply
BigPhatPastor Jefferson Hills, PA
11/23/19 7:08 am

So you think that 1) natural random occurrences result in sound ordered physical and mathematical laws and 2) doesn’t that violate the 2nd law of thermodynamics?

Reply
commonsense America isnt racist
11/23/19 7:30 pm

Of course. Science can solve everything

Reply
JulesVerne Live long, and prosper
11/23/19 10:52 am

For example, when you stir sugar into tea, the situation becomes more “disorderly” as the particles of each are all mixed together, and you can’t un-mix them without putting energy into the system.

But, if you have a huge cloud of dirt out in the middle of space, gravitational attraction will cause it to converge on itself into a big round ball (since gravity is spherically symmetric). A totally natural process where the result has a lower potential energy, but the result is an orderly ball and not a disorderly cloud.

..

Reply
IMO atoms, space, opinion
11/23/19 7:19 am

There are some things, rather many things, that are undoubtedly beyond human understanding.

Reply
Biologist
11/24/19 8:45 am

Those damn scientists and their bias toward demonstrable facts. Just think of all the things we could have not discovered if they just would make things up when they didn’t know the answer to something. Not accepting claims that have no empirical evidence supporting them, I mean none at all, is so blatantly bias towards the things we can demonstrate happens and exist. I mean what a bunch of jerks! They think that really understanding how the universe works is better somehow than an explanation that contradicts much of what we have learned about the universe and has no evidence to support it! What a bunch of morons! How do they think our computers, airplanes, medicines, all of our current advancements and everything we know with a high degree of certainty came about. Evidence-based research? Evidence sucks! Assertions with no evidence rule!

It’s not like it’s biased to insist that my belief system is somehow the only way to truly understand the universe.

Reply
Savageman
11/23/19 4:43 am

Seems as if every time science gets one answer, two more questions pop up.

Reply
Argonaut Yang 2020
11/23/19 7:30 am

Do you mind providing links to the studies you are referring to? From the data I have seen we are experiencing a rather rapid increase in average surface temperature, is your claim that this is almost entirely due to variations in energy received from the sun?

Even tho we’ve contributed only 100 ppm so far why is that not significant? Everything I have seen indicates co2 is a potent greenhouse gas that accelerated warming.

Reply
ARedHerring Kentucky
11/23/19 7:33 am

Alright fine, well there-goes my morning entertainment, drat

Reply
BigPhatPastor Jefferson Hills, PA
11/23/19 7:35 am

@ARedHerring first of all I didn’t say the 2nd law of the universe, I specifically said the 2nd law of thermodynamics. So let’s start with you looking that up and making sure we are on the same page as to what is being said. Second, how is the teleological argument a false analogy. It’s a fact so please share which part of it is false and why. Third, laws are intentional and unbreakable and repeatable. They exist across all space and at all times. That defies being the random occurrence of how electrons and molecules interact not to mention there are set laws about how molecules and electrons interact. Finally, I said nothing about the universe being too complex to be natural. Go back and read what I wrote without reading into it what you think I am trying to say.

Reply
ScottyDoesNo Stand back and stand by
11/23/19 7:49 am

You don’t need “studies” to prove basic logic. You mentioned a 100ppm increase. That’s parts per MILLION, as in again, 0.04% of the atmosphere of which 75% is completely natural. We are an insanely minor contributor.

Yes that giant fusion ball in the sky, the sole thing keeping us above a natural temperature of four degrees Kelvin over absolute zero and responsible for all life on this planet, is solely responsible for all climatic variation in addition to the natural cycles of Earth’s axial tilt and revolutions around the sun. That’s why we have ice ages, glaciation and warming periods like now as we just came out of the Little Ice Age.

Reply
Argonaut Yang 2020
11/23/19 7:53 am

It’s entirely logically to over 50 of the population that greenhouse gases such as co2 are the contributing factor for global climate change so apparently we do need papers

Reply
TheMadScientist the mad laboratory
11/23/19 1:00 pm

No.

Not because the universe is special. Science doesn’t work that way.

Reply
Argonaut Yang 2020
11/23/19 8:05 am

Can you please show your credentials. And yes I would read it. Send it my way

Reply
Argonaut Yang 2020
11/23/19 8:06 am

Send me ones you’ve worked on

Reply
BigPhatPastor Jefferson Hills, PA
11/23/19 8:28 am

@tractorman the idea that all things that have a beginning must have a cause is a scientific reality. It’s called the law of causality. The idea that the universe had a beginning is a scientific reality. These aren’t things that I need to believe they’re scientific facts.

Reply
Zheeeem Outer Banks
11/24/19 12:01 pm

Pastor - you’re fine right up to the last statement. We see the laws of nature in this universe as having orderly design. However, that could also be an artifact of survivorship bias. That is, if any of the physical laws were different, we wouldn’t be here to observe it.

Reply
Talren Libertarian Socialist
11/23/19 8:39 am

And now, creationists are constantly going on about how it’s obvious why there is something rather than nothing, presenting their “law of causality” to argue why there must be something beyond the universe pulling the strings. It makes sense and is extremely intuitive. But then again, we don’t live in a universe still in its infancy, nor in a state prior to the universe’s existence (if there even is such a thing). And what have we learned from the discoveries of relativity and quantum? It’s a valuable lessons creationists have apparently failed to learn.

This is exactly why you cannot just sit in an armchair and think about stuff to solve the deepest mysteries of the cosmos.

.

Reply
STEMguy Parties Are The Enemy
11/23/19 1:46 am

Definitely considering how far we’ve come in the last 500 years.

Reply
Zardoz California native
11/23/19 10:26 am

Argonaut, having a Scotty experience?

Join the club.

Reply
Argonaut Yang 2020
11/23/19 10:27 am

Ah so he is a troll

Reply
JulesVerne Live long, and prosper
11/23/19 10:28 am

Scotty, I don’t believe you.

Reply
Zingerz Wisconsin
11/23/19 2:01 pm

Since all of the saved will dwell upon earth for a millennium under the reign of the savior, of course! We'll be enlightened by the creator who. Made all things! Will it be important then? No.

Reply
IMO atoms, space, opinion
11/23/19 8:50 am

Very well said Talren. The scientific method is the best way we have to find facts within the universe. Funny how miracles have diminished as knowledge becomes wide spread.

Reply
JulesVerne Live long, and prosper
11/23/19 10:33 am

Pastor, the universe is anything but straightforward and simple. There is no such straightforward progression of time, as Talren said, and there is no “law of causality” (at least, it isn’t a physical law I’ve heard of). And that’s not how the 2nd law of thermodynamics works, either. (Think of it in theological terms of you like: would a universe that God made be a puzzle so easily solved?)

Reply
IrishAlzheimers oakland, ca
11/23/19 8:55 am

Arguing someone on climate change is like arguing wether or not it feels good to shoot yourself in the head. There’s no point in even entertaining Scotty.
However it is interesting to pick the brain of a functioning retard.

Reply
Argonaut Yang 2020
11/23/19 8:55 am

I appeal to authority because I am not a climatologist. If you are you have gone thru more data. Also plz provide the data, I said I am more than willing. I can claim whatever I want and so can you but if there’s no data to back it up it isn’t very strong.

So 1. Show your credentials
2. Show the data, I am willing to go through it and that’s much more damning evidence than someone on the internet raving about it who hasn’t shown their credentials

Reply
SuperAgain They lie, Get Over It
11/23/19 4:31 pm

What was the question? 😉

Reply
ARedHerring Kentucky
11/23/19 6:57 am

Sorry, more of a formatting error. Not ‘non intelligent design’ like designed by non intelligence, I mean it more like without intelligent design.

Reply
JulesVerne Live long, and prosper
11/23/19 10:42 am

Scotty, if you’re really a professor, it would be very easy to give a link to a university webpage or any paper you’ve authored or co-authored.

And if you’re really a professor, you’d laugh at the statement “I don’t need to provide data, I’m just arguing from common sense,” rather than making it yourself (or whatever that was).

And furthermore, no one is willing to debate you because you haven’t made any substantive or even intelligible statements.

Reply
ARedHerring Kentucky
11/23/19 7:01 am

First you would have to prove that it was designed. As far as I can see, nothing natural in the universe was designed, and came together over time naturally.

Reply
Argonaut Yang 2020
11/23/19 10:46 am

Ikr, there’s absolutely no way he could make it in academia saying stuff like that. ^

Since he’s a troll he’s well aware that what he says has no basis. He’s just here to annoy people cuz for some reason he likes it?

Reply