Anti-creationism is just as arrational as creationism

[Fickle]

There is another theory...
What is creationism fundamentally?, it is that something has the capacity to create and self-organize and we already know nature does this all the time. The short sighted thermodynamics people told us all would end up as a diffused soup however this is not the case. Stars are born and die, galaxies are born and die and everything out there is in perpetual motion do to a force know as gravity.  All things tend to gravitate, transform and self-organize then later diffuse and transform repeating an endless cycle so far as we know.

The boys at MIT did a wonderful experiment when they were trying to create Life. All had failed before them then one researcher tried to "animate" inanimate cells in a petri dish using a high voltage discharge ala Frankenstein. It worked and they discovered the obvious, extreme external change invokes internal change. Which comes full circle back to us and the fact what we know as the mind is  simply electrical impulses travelling to cells in the brain which store and sort these impulses we perceive as information. We use this electrical network we call information to define our perception of reality.

Which puts a new twist on information, knowledge, logic, psychology and philosophy doesn't it?. Fundamentally all we know is dictated not by some imaginary forces but something we know...electrodynamics. Thus our mind is never truly our own, how could it be our own when fundamentally everything we think we think is dictated by a network of electric fields?. Which begs the question, what do you think you are fundamentally?, I understand we feel like so much more than we are however feeling and thinking is seldom the true reality of being.

It truly is a quagmire and the mind in itself, unknown to us, continually creates it's own imaginary world of false perceptions. I am... but what am I?. Personally all this talk of correct terminology, of the proper way of thinking, of proper logic and reason seems somehow superficial or foreign to me. It seems somehow disingenuous not unlike a computer virus which has started overwriting it's own primary code infecting others until it has no true form or function with respect to it's purpose. Round and round we go...where we stop nobody knows.

[Sargon The Grape]

7.It is equally unreasonable to disbelieve in hydra if there is not a sufficient amount of evidence.

Pff, I wish hydras weren't real, because then they wouldn't be able to harass our Lord and Lizard.

[SGOS]

I know Hydra is real.  Sometimes Hydra clicks on my "like" button and I experience a rise in endorphins.    I don't believe he's a god, but he's pretty high up there in my reality.

[DeltaEpsilon]

Simulation hypothesis in particular has been debunked.

http://web.stanford.edu/class/symbsys205/BostromReview.html

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Simulated_reality

http://futureandcosmos.blogspot.com/2013/10/why-you-are-not-living-in-computer.html

We live in the information age. Google it for fucks sake. Any claim made of a Creationist nature I am aware of has been debunked. could we please once and for all get rid of William Lane Craig and the other meatbrains that propose this crap?

And its "arational" not "arrational".

And it still is not science nor does it follow scientific method. Carry on.

Fair enough. I also already apologized for my misspelling arational.

[Fickle]

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Simulated_reality

The concept of simulated reality rests on older concepts such as solipsism, and the conundrum that we can never truly know whether the evidence of our senses and memories are merely illusions. The simulated reality hypothesis applies existing or hypothetical technology as possible explanations for the illusion.

This is partially true, it has been proven that the mind rejects 99% of what the eyes see. The eyes see everything inverted and the mind filters this information so it appears right side up in our mind. You do not see anything anymore than a USB camera does because what you see is sent as electrical impulses to the brain. I can show you 20 pictures and 10 minutes later 99% of the detail is missing and then you just start making up random shit which was never actually there. 100 people can observe something and almost every one of them has a different interpretation of what they think they saw. In time the memory of what they think they saw becomes skewed bearing little resemblance to what actually happened.

The eyes are like a camera and see everything, now look around the room for a few seconds and try to recall what you saw. Are you stupid?, no your semi-delusional and your mind has filtered out 99% of all the detail concerning what your eyes saw. Your mind creates this illusion for you to protect itself from an information overload. Otherwise you would be able to recall every single detail down to that speck of dust on the floor right in front of you. So yes we do live in a simulated reality of sorts proven through decades of psychology following the scientific method.

There is a saying in psychology...the only ones who are truly insane are the ones who think they are not in some way. In essence if you have no doubt, if you believe you must always be correct then there is a very good chance you have lost your marbles.

[josephpalazzo]

Sorry...not...;-)

[stromboli]

Sorry...not...;-)

You big (possibly midsize) meanie.

[kiekeben]

There are reasons for disbelieving in a creator. Here's one simple argument: assuming that a creator is a being with a mind who is responsible for the existence of the physical universe, we have good reasons for disbelieving in such a thing based on evidence that there must be matter in order for minds to exist.

There are also reasons for disbelieving in the existence of any gods. In my book The Truth about God (by Franz Kiekeben), I present an argument that all gods are impossible.

[stromboli]

Welcome professor. Got some good reviews on your book on Amazon. The mods frown on self promoting, but I'm personally glad you brought this to us. I will certainly read it. Btw, your football coach used to coach my Alma Mater U of U. One of my favorite people. Stick around, we need input from enlightened minds.

[DeltaEpsilon]

There are reasons for disbelieving in a creator. Here's one simple argument: assuming that a creator is a being with a mind who is responsible for the existence of the physical universe, we have good reasons for disbelieving in such a thing based on evidence that there must be matter in order for minds to exist.

There are also reasons for disbelieving in the existence of any gods. In my book The Truth about God (by Franz Kiekeben), I present an argument that all gods are impossible.

That seems like a valid argument.

[DeltaEpsilon]

There are reasons for disbelieving in a creator. Here's one simple argument: assuming that a creator is a being with a mind who is responsible for the existence of the physical universe, we have good reasons for disbelieving in such a thing based on evidence that there must be matter in order for minds to exist.

There are also reasons for disbelieving in the existence of any gods. In my book The Truth about God (by Franz Kiekeben), I present an argument that all gods are impossible.

Oh, also. I'll be sure to order what you claim is your book. I am on Amazon right now.

[kiekeben]

Welcome professor. Got some good reviews on your book on Amazon. The mods frown on self promoting, but I'm personally glad you brought this to us. I will certainly read it. Btw, your football coach used to coach my Alma Mater U of U. One of my favorite people. Stick around, we need input from enlightened minds.

Thanks, I'll stick around for a while and lurk at least.

[Mike Cl]

Thanks, I'll stick around for a while and lurk at least.

Checked out your book.  It is now on my read list.  If Strom gives you a thumbs up, you can't be all bad! :))  Have you read Richard Carrier's latest book--On The Historicity of Jesus--and if you have, what do you think of it???

[kiekeben]

Oh, also. I'll be sure to order what you claim is your book. I am on Amazon right now.

I appreciate that. For the specific argument I mentioned, see the introductory part of ch. 7 and the section later in that chapter titled "Why there definitely is no God." (The two sections in between, "Minds and brains" and "Near-death experiences", deal with a different topic.)

[kiekeben]

Checked out your book.  It is now on my read list.  If Strom gives you a thumbs up, you can't be all bad! :))  Have you read Richard Carrier's latest book--On The Historicity of Jesus--and if you have, what do you think of it???

No, but it's on MY list! (I am convinced Jesus existed, but am interested in what Carrier has to say about that.)