The Question

[Lategreatplanet]

3) Does not follow from your assumptions, since your input assumptions are both incorrect, as is your assertion that the cause is always greater than the effect -- if that were true, nuclear and thermonuclear bombs could not exist (cause: put two pieces of metal together; effect: obliterate several square miles).

Sand sliding done a 45 degree propped popsicle stick in a sandbox is an effect of gravity, that would give you a clue as to the true cause of a nuclear explosion.

[stromboli]

Nobody else has responded to this so I will.

Huh?

[Goon]

Yea, if there is a creator he evidently doesn't care for his creations. We're just piss in the breeze.

[Mike Cl]

Nobody else has responded to this so I will.

Huh?

Come on Strom.  He is clearly saying not to play with Popsicle sticks in a sand box.  You will cause a nuclear explosion.  See.................. 

[stromboli]

Lets see....

Simile? Nope.

Metaphor? Nope.

Allegorical? Nope.

Parable? Nope.

Huh?

[Mike Cl]

Lets see....

Simile? Nope.

Metaphor? Nope.

Allegorical? Nope.

Parable? Nope.

Huh?

If you only had faith!

[dtq123]

I'd like to know who was the third one, or the first one for that matter... Come on, I was brave enough to admit it, you should too!

[Lategreatplanet]

Sand sliding done a 45 degree propped popsicle stick in a sandbox is an effect of gravity, that would give you a clue as to the true cause of a nuclear explosion.

conversion of mass to energy as in e=mc^2

[Hydra009]

the cause is always greater than the effect (a fundamental principle of science).

*coughcoughemergencecough*

[trdsf]

Sand sliding done a 45 degree propped popsicle stick in a sandbox is an effect of gravity, that would give you a clue as to the true cause of a nuclear explosion.

Wrong again.  If you're going to play the science card on me, please make sure you know what you're talking about.  I have gone through the mathematics of Special and General Relativity and understand quite well the principles involved.  You're free to question my knowledge, but you'll need to back it up with more than "but this is the definition I made up".

The more correct metaphor you're looking for is right here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XIvHd76EdQ4


And speaking of the cause not having to be greater than the effect:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8yYWILv91YU

In any case, gravity is not the cause.  It is a part of the mechanism (as, in a nuclear chain reaction, the binding energy of the atomic nucleus is), but the cause is the input event -- the single ping-pong ball in the first video, or tipping over the first domino in the second.  In neither case is the cause greater than the effect -- let's see you topple that last domino by pushing on it with the same force that it takes to tip the first one, or get as many ping-pong balls airborne with the same force as launched the single started ball.

[Hijiri Byakuren]

Yea, if there is a creator he evidently doesn't care for his creations. We're just piss in the breeze.

It could be like Sim City. We're just a simulation game that got a little too advanced, but the player doesn't realize we're sentient.

[Mike Cl]

It could be like Sim City. We're just a simulation game that got a little too advanced, but the player doesn't realize we're sentient.

We are????

[stromboli]

*coughcoughemergencecough*

Stromboli is taking notes.....

[drunkenshoe]

I voted 'nothing'.

Because simply the idea of a god; any god, gods or deities are all one and it is completely based on human desires apart from the delusion itself. There is not a definition or a description of a god in human history that exists out of that profile. There can't be. Because there is no other narrative for god out of the profile of an absentee landlord. It's human, its as various as humans and its desires.  Therefore there is no such thing as evidence for existence of a creator. It's an invalid statement. It's fantasy of a fantasy. Any evidence anyone would try to imagine as 'what if' would have to be in the limits of describing some sort of a super MAN. Not some unimaginable supreme entity that mortals cannot fathom. Humans only constantly developed the language to describe it, invented imaginary concepts, powers they liked to have- to tell those stories attached to it, but narrative has always been the same. Like children playing make belief. Because gods and religions are functional. It has always, but always been beneficial and profitable. It's trade, its politics. It's a means to desired ends.

Infact, I am going to go further and claim that it's actually impossible to believe in a creator and that actually noone does.

Because god is also a still born concept, because the moment a hominid developed the ability to think and speak;describe any experience he had stepping out that reality he experienced it; voice what's in his mind about a possible creator, imagined stories of it, rather than just feel, love, fear, live and die with it, the idea of god died there at that moment. Because he alienated and seperated himself from that supposed omnipotent nature of that idea of supreme being and its supposed existence. He existed outside of it. He developed the consciousness regarding to his own existence apart from the nature. Process of intelligence. The kind of self awareness and consciousness only one animal on the planet that we know evolved to possess. The cognitive process we developed makes the idea of god impossible. Yes, I said impossible. And no this is not a belief.

If any of you can imagine a god outside the presented category, please come forward explain and then I'll reconsider 'The Question'. However, categories of human narrative doesn't change, because we are just simple animals with simple fixed needs and we don't have any need or use for another category of a god, that's why we invented it this way in the first place . Because there isn't one, there can't be and hence the fantasy needed to be maintained.

So, nothing.

PS I am afraid to count the 'because' I typed. :/ Excuse the bad English. This is very abstract to express in a second language or some first.

[stromboli]

You do better with a second language than many of us do with a first language. Excellent post.