3.2 is NOT established.
Everything that follows is, therefore, moot.
I could, like others, ramble on as to why…but it is YOUR job to establish your points, not for me to prove them wrong.
Merry Christmas.
2 Likes
You could also cite where word definitions come from, if as you claimed, they are not to be found in dictionaries?
You might also demonstrate some evidence for your erroneous claim that unbelief in a deity is a claim that no deity exists?
The fact you made those erroneous claims, then when asked, refused to justify them, and resorted to ad hominem, and then left, makes you just as dishonest as the theists who refuse to address rebuttals to their arguments.
Did you think your dishonesty would simply be forgotten because you’ve got atheist written in your profile, and ran away rather than honestly address your error?
Which do you think you should be more embarrassed by, incorrectly defining a word, or when challenged on it with the dictionary definition, making the asinine assertion that dictionaries “do not contain word definitions?” Then refusing to reply to any posts challenging that idiocy?
4 Likes
Because for persons within those various frames of referenced, time seems to proceed at the usual rate. Thus the rate of clock ticking may be altered, but so then are the rates of metabolism in living beings, and so are the chemical and physical interactions between the constituent’s, (atoms, molecules, gases, liquids etc.), within the frame of reference. Thus everything within that frame of reference is altered, and by exactly the same amount, (percent wise), which seems to me to be the epitome of time itself having slowed.
It is a fact that the effects of time dilation occur in reality, both in differing gravitational fields, and/or in differing rates of velocity, for those reference frames. Have you heard of the twin paradox? Iif not, look it up. One might choose not t believe, but if one does, then what one is doing is rejecting what the mathematics tells us should happen, and when we observe exactly that, decide to say that Occam’s Razor is a defeater. I’d say that the agreement between theory and observation would tell us by Occam’s Razor, the actual dilation of time is a real effect, more likely than not.
Cheers
Mutorc S’yriah
Imagine you have a toothache and phone your dentist for an appointment. The receptionist gives you a day and time to be at the office.
That office is located in 3 dimensions, X, Y, and Z (corner of East and West streets, 3rd floor in the building). But the time for that appointment is the fourth dimension. If that fourth dimension (that we work with every moment) did not exist, then you would not know what time to be at the scheduled appointment.
2 Likes
This is an extremely important point that most people unfortunately never really get to see presented.
For those who haven’t seen it, Einstein provided a very simple and powerful argument about how an extremely simple clock would appear to slow down when viewed from the outside (with there being a large velocity between this observer and this clock).
But who cares about Einsteins simple clock? I want to know what a real clock, or someone’s biological clock will do! Here is where the Principle of Relativity comes in. By postulate is is impossible for someone to determine their velocity without making an outside measurement.
If I locked you in a box, knocked you out, then maybe I started your box moving away from me, and maybe I didn’t. When you wake up, there is no experiment you can do completely inside your box to determine your velocity with respect to any object outside the box.
However, Einstein showed that if any clock didn’t show the exact same effects of his ridiculous simple light clock; then you would be able to determine your velocity inside the box by measuring the difference between these two different kinds of clocks (both clocks being inside the box). In other words: all clocks inside the box must run at the same rate.
In other words; if one clock in the box slows down; they must all slow down; even the complicated ones we don’t totally understand (like your biological clock).
I just enjoyed an episode of Voyager where their ship is locked in their “space-time” OVER a planet which operates in a different “space-time”…
They were worshipped by the people on the planet for thousands of years. Meanwhile “they” were there for less than a week.
Kinda like the “fly in the car”
Buzzing around even though the car is travelling so fast … (yah flat earthers - fucktards…)
1 Like
Yeah, I remember that. My second favourite episode. My favourite is the first time we see jerry Ryan in that sprayed on cat suit. Fair dinkum, that’s nearly enough to raise the dead.
1 Like
Einstein’s Theory of Special Relativity was worked out in mathematics, and it later predicted that light could be bent by gravity, the existence of black holes, and that time changes based on the effects of gravity. All have been tested and proven.
This is an example where the researcher did not set out to reinforce their opinion, but that the results brought about hidden discoveries.
You go an unnecessarily long way around stating that the universe had a beginning, but I accept that premise.
Argument 3, premise 3 fails. This universe had a beginning but it could be simply the explosion of energy following a big crunch, in an endless series of universes expanding and contracting.
What you grandly call an aetiological argument is simply Aquinas’ first cause argument, or the prime mover, or the uncaused causer or the unactualized actualizer. It has many names and it is wrong.
You use logic to take us back to a point where something must have caused the universe to happen, to be created. But you then conveniently abandon your logic and make a special pleading for God. Why is God not subject to your strict logic? If everything has to have a beginning, where was God’s beginning. Who created God? If you will not allow that universes might have an infinite regression, why shouldn’t the same apply to God?
Ultimately, you begin from a position of faith and try to make the argument fit your agenda. The reality is we simply do not know the origin of our universe and probably never will. Therefore, any answer you make up is just that, made up.
4 Likes
The universe could spontaneously pop into existence, because of it’s initial size.
If the universe did indeed have a beginning (we do not know for certain) then your argument completely falls apart. In black holes since time is slowed down so much that it practically stops, before the singularity nothing could exist because there was no time before it.
I’m sure the others pointed out the logical fallacies but here are two (of the many) scientific reasons why your argument is not true.
1 Like
God is a joke that nobody laughs at.
Pithy claim, but not an argument.
Perhaps take the time to explain why you think such a thing.
So far @Tapring93 appears only capable of thoughts that are less than one liners.
Yeah. That makes it hard to form an opinion.
Is the person a 12 year old who has stumbled upon our forum? An ignorant and/or not very bright adult? A shy person feeling his/her way? A common or garden variety troll? Too cool for school? Or something I haven’t considered?
In any case, pretty boring. Don’t think I’ll bother with him/her until something interesting is posted. Right now it’s only click bait.
Yah - too many possibilities, not enough posting 
Ummmm? Perhaps you could explain these then…
Two boys were misbehaving… …so their mother went to the local priest to look for advice. The priest thought it would be best if the boys learned integrity, by way of understanding that “God is everywhere, and He sees everything you do so you shouldn’t misbehave.”
The mother and the priest thought it best that the priest talked to the boys, so the mother agreed to take the boys in one at a time to talk to the priest.
She brought the first boy (Ray) to the church and left the second boy (Jim) at home. She took Ray into the priest’s office and stayed outside while the priest and Ray talked.
“Where is God?” The priest calmly asked expecting to make the point that “God is everywhere”. Ray, petrified, said nothing. So the priest asked again slightly louder, “Where is God?!”. Ray still said nothing. So the priest stood up and slammed his hands on the desk yelling, “WHERE IS GOD?!?!”. Ray stood up and ran out of the office, past his mother, and ran all the way home.
He came screaming in the front door and ran straight to Jim’s room. He opened the door and said, “GOD IS MISSING AND THEY THINK WE TOOK HIM!”.
Why did God create Adam before he created Eve?
So no one would tell him how to make Adam.
OKAY, ONE FOR WHITE
Adam is sitting about on a large rock one day, looking extra pensive.
God notices and calls his name. “Adam?”
“Yes God.”
“You look worried. What’s going on?”
“Well… I’ve been thinking.”
“Hmmm… Thinking about what?”
“Uhhh, I was wondering. …”
“Yes.”
“Well… ummmm… Why did you make Eve so beautiful?”
“Ha ha ha ha ha … Adam! I made her that way so you would fall in love with her.”
“Ohhh.” (Pensive Pause) “But … God?”
“Yes Adam.”
"Well… Why is Eve so damn stupid! "
“Ha ha ha ha … Adam… That is so she will fall in love with you!”
2 Likes
I know an episode of “Star Trek TNG” that had something like this, but can’t remember the name.
I do!!! I do like my men smarter than me 
… Uh, man I love my man smarter than me
AND you’re soooo smart - that’s why it’s just you 
So basically, the mom took them to the priest, for the priest to tell them about the adult version of Santa Claus…because “God” is Santa Claus for adults. And yet, religious adults ridicule children for having imaginary friends? Hypocrites!
Awww - you missed the punchline!
1 Like