Lawrence Krauss on Science Debate

[relarerfhjk]

He looks like a paedophile lol

He's the extremist atheist fanatic who says he doesnt believe in logic or necessary truths or mathematical truths and thinks 2 + 2 + 5 and the Universe came from nothing with no cause.

Give us all a break, Krauss. You fucking loon

[torontoBluejays87]

I think Lawrence said it best in another clip in similar words to this..."If you believe the universe is 6000 years old, then you should not be riding in planes or cars, because the very physics that designed those things also determined that the universe is not 6000 years old but 14 billion years old".

[bloodcell9]

If americans truly believe in religious anti-science bullshit, then it's in real fucking trouble in the years ahead as a leading nation. For it is Science and Eduction that determins Technology and commence, feeding the nation's strength. If by hand such a nation then rejects the knowledge of science commiting the crime of censering only those aspects of science that does not conflict with their personnal faith, then Religious Americans cannot complain as other nations overtake their postion.

[Texmurphy51]

I dont think its Religion thats causing other nations to overtake america, its lack of basic education. You simply have to look at the school system, the students are indoctrinated rather than educated. Go to any city school & ask them about religion in their lives & there is none. I am not religious but do not blame it for problems in education. No amount of money pumped into public education will fix it.

[MrMZaccone]

@Texmurphy51 So you think that putting religious superstition into a school system will fix the lack of "basic education"? You've just proven the point of the atheist movement.

[Texmurphy51]

@MrMZaccone Never said to put religion into the school system.

Where did you get that???

Science class should not deal with Religion in any way, not to promote it or deny it.

Neither Atheists or Theist Science should be taught in schools.

The point of the Atheist Movement,(Religion) is to remove Religion from the PUBLIC.

Remove "In God we trust" from public view for instance.

Thats like removing the religious symbols from the pyramids.

They are both history of the structure.

Get a life.

[MrMZaccone]

@Texmurphy51  "students are indoctrinated rather than educated." "Go to any city school & ask them about religion in their lives & there is none." I'm sorry, I made what I thought was a reasonable assumption from these two statements. The problem with your statement "Neither Atheists or Theist Science should be taught in schools." is that the scientific method is inherently atheist.

[Texmurphy51]

@MrMZaccone

[MrMZaccone]

@Texmurphy51 Sorry, were you actually trying to post something there?

[Texmurphy51]

@MrMZaccone If students are indoctrinated then why would they have No Religion?

Scientific Method is only Atheist if taught by an Atheist. The "method" is inherently neutral. It does not assume No God, any more than No ETs or anything else.

Lets compare past Science.. Gallelo called the Vattican to see that he had discovered moons around Jupiter.

When he asked the Cardinals to look they said " we dont have to because we KNOW they are not there"

This is what you are saying about Creation.

[MrMZaccone]

@Texmurphy51 The scientific method is based on empirical evidence. You have incorrectly assumed (as many do) that all atheism is gnostic atheism. Atheism doesn't assume "no god" it only cites a lack of evidence for such and therefore PRESUMES an absence of that not in evidence until valid evidence can be shown. Got any? No? Your analogy concerning Galileo is demonstrably incorrect. I'll look at any valid evidence for creationism, unlike your cardinals, I've just never been shown any.

[Texmurphy51]

@MrMZaccone sez "scientific method is based on empirical evidence"

Of course & since there is NO way of knowing how the Universe was created, NO way of knowing what happend pre Big Bang. To say it is or is not a God is NOT Science.

My Galileo analogy IS correct because any Evidence show to you, or other Atheists, will be ignored.

Since the subject cannot be Scientifically proven either way, Belief in either direction is a Religion.

Atheists Believe in No God, Theists Believe in God.

[MrMZaccone]

@Texmurphy51 That would depend entirely upon how you define god. The more anthropomorphic and personal the concept of a god is, the more unlikely I tend to find it. This view is indeed based in science. I'll repeat myself because like most of the faithful, you obviously don't listen. I have no belief in "no god". I simply have no belief in god because of a lack of empirical evidence. NO, I never ignore empirical evidence, you just haven't shown me any.

[Texmurphy51]

@MrMZaccone I am NOT the "fathful" I am an Agnostic.

If you have used emprical evidence to disprove the existence of God then it is an "action"

You have come to the conclusion that you Believe there is No God, or you Believe in No God.

Again, you are trying to remove the word Belief from the equation because it implies the possibility of being wrong.

Atheism is simply the opposite of Theism, It is a Belief that a God does not Exist.

It however tryes to use Myth Religion to prove this

[MrMZaccone]

@Texmurphy51 You wouldn't know how to be agnostic if someone blinded you with a hot poker. I've come to the conclusion that anthropomorphic concepts of god are highly unlikely, this CAN be derived by the scientific method. Again, I have NOT come to the conclusion that I "have belief in no god " I HAVE come to the conclusion that I "have no belief in god" and they are not equivalent by any stretch of the imagination. Only GNOSTIC atheism is the opposite of GNOSTIC theism, and that's NOT me.

[MrMZaccone]

@Texmurphy51 Once again, you're head is up your ass. If atheism is a religion then NOT collecting stamps is a hobby. You're problem is that you insist that all atheism is or approaches gnostic atheism and this is simply not the case.

[Texmurphy51]

@MrMZaccone Not collecting stamps is a NON ACTION.

Atheism is an ACTION, a Belief in No God.

Let NC = Not collecting stamps.

Does NC have thousands of websites discussing the subject?

Does NC have international organizations who spread their Belief like Atheist Alliance International?

Does NC have hundreds of books on Philosphy explaining their Belief.

Does NC a "real" dictionary word exclusively describing the Belief, (not one made up by Atheists)

Your analogy is a StrawMan

[MrMZaccone]

@Texmurphy51 NO! ... Atheism is a non-action ... a non-belief in god. It is not a belief in no god. To answer your question no, Non Collecting has no websites or books but then it doesn't have a bunch of superstitious nut-balls attacking it either now, does it?

[MrMZaccone]

@Texmurphy51 No, there are many more than two states. You're just flat fucking wrong. Do the words gnostic and agnostic mean nothing to you?

[Texmurphy51]

@MrMZaccone gnostic & agnostic dont enter into this.

Either you Believe in (something) or you Believe in NO (something)

If there is another state please tell me what it is.

Let me ask you... Can an Atheist Believe in God?

Answer that question.

[MrMZaccone]

@Texmurphy51 I'll begin my answer by answering your question. Yes, an atheist can believe in god. Many christians and muslims are not only atheist but gnostic atheist with regard to Zeus, Thor, etc. not to mention thousands of gods forgotten by modern mankind and yet are gnostic theists when it comes to the god of Abraham. I've already answered your other question. The "other" state (there are actually several) is NO belief in something.

[Texmurphy51]

@MrMZaccone Your using semantics. Another Strawman argument. You mean christians are Atheists because they dont believe in a specific God? .

Atheists Believe in NO GOD(S) by definition so your attempt to steer this argument in another direction is feeble.

If however what you say is true, then my point is made. Atheism is just another Belief System. Atheists Belive in No God, if it is organized, it is a Religion. Last time I check Atheism is a very organized belief system. You spout it Tennants

[Totem91]

@Texmurphy51 said "Atheists Believe in NO GOD(S) [...] Atheism is just another Belief System [...]"

You couldn't be more wrong sir. "Belief in" and "Lack of belief in" are polar opposites. Making them "sound the same" is uncharacteristic of you age and intellect. Existence of god is unfalsifiable (ergo we got better things to do). If someone breaks down matter in a subatomic particle level and finds "god" holding vibrating strings together, it will be a scientist. Not a religious nut-job.

[Texmurphy51]

@Totem91 "Belief in" and "Lack of belief in" are polar opposites"

Correct but I didnt say simply Believe in, I said Believe in NO God. That modifier NO makes it the same.

Existence of god is unfalsifiable, you then say you have bettery things to do.

If Atheists have better things to do then why are there thousands of videos on disproving God?

You are mixing man made myth Religion with the possible Creation of our Universe.

There is no connection between the two. Your disproving RELIGION not God

[Totem91]

@Texmurphy51 Spot on sir. Atheists are "level 6 agnostics" for the existance of a deistic god, but full blown out atheists to all religion. "Many" videos "disproving god" on youtube? Religion poisons everything, and my guess is (most of the) atheists (that make these videos) like (almost) everything. As far as the deistic God argument and the "same/opposite" goes, you are trying to prove something that can neither be "proven" or "disproven" (sic), a vicious cycle of non existant arguments. :)

[Texmurphy51]

@Totem91 sez "Atheists are "level 6 agnostics"

Do Atheists catagorize people by how much they Believe in No God like the Church does?

Do we have Saint Atheists who are Pure Believers? Ha Ha. This statement just proves Atheism is a Religion.

"Religion poisons everything"

We now see the source of your Believe System is a Hatred for Religion rather than logic.

"you are trying to prove something that can neither be "proven" or "disproven"

No Shit, so are you idiot. Thats my point.

[Totem91]

@Texmurphy51 At some point in your life, you have to understand that clinging on an unfalsifiable claim does not give you a get-out-of-jail-free card. Again, you're trying (via repetition) to make truth of your lunatic claim, that believing in something crazy and irrational is the same thing with the absence of that crazy, irrational belief. Weak sir. You're entitled to your own beliefs, but not your own facts. Maybe I am an idiot, but surely I'm insane (for even imagining I'd reason with you).

[Texmurphy51]

@Totem91 Since how the Universe came to be is unknown to Science, to say it was NOT created by some being is as much of an "unfalsifiable claim" as to say there IS a Creator.

Not knowing how it happened, yet just saying, "God Didnt Do It" is not a get-out-of-jail-free-card.

Your trying,(via repetition) to make true your statment that Creation is Impossible,(yet you have no proof of HOW it happened) You simply say you know how it Did Not happened, again with no proof.

Atheism is Religion

[glagos93]

@Texmurphy51 You have proven nothing. Non-belief is based upon the unscientific nature of religion. There is zero evidence for the existence of God. Having said that, I will paraphrase Dawkins' "The God Delusion"... If someone says that a teapot is orbiting the sun, and it's so tiny that not even our best telescopes can see it... Does it mean that I have to be agnostic with regards to the teapot? Would it be religious ideology if I believed in the inexistence of the teapot?

[Texmurphy51]

@glagos93 "There is zero evidence for the existence of God"

In the traditional sense of an omnicient, all powerful god. However to say no evidence exists is an opinion of Atheists not a Scientific Fact as you try to imply.

The Teapot is a strawman argument because it is a KNOWN myth/fallacy. Since how the Universe was created is unknown you cannot simply use the Atheist Trick of Bigfoot or Teapot as a comparison.

I could make the same argument with ET life, Zero proof, like a teapot...

[glagos93]

@Texmurphy51 What other sort of God is there? What is the evidence for the existence of God? Scientific evidence is objective, the so called "evidence" for the existence of God is subjective and does not qualify as scientific evidence.

The teapot is indeed a fallacy, but it perfectly illustrates the absurdity of belief in God. There is no reason, other than our ancestor's culture and fear, to believe in a God. Why is it God, why isn't it the flying spaghetti monster?

[glagos93]

@Texmurphy51 For religious apologists, what seems like evidence are actually a bunch of logical fallacies... just look at Thomas Aquinas' proofs.

The beginning of the universe is unknown, but there is mathematical evidence based on working physical models that point towards a universe that was created from nothing (watch "A universe from nothing" - Lawrence Krauss)... atheists don't have to sit down and see how we're fed an "absolute truth" that's actually a lie

[Texmurphy51]

@glagos93 Your WRONG he didnt say it came from NOTHING.

By NOTHING he means empty space which is full of Quantum Fluctuations,(something)

The problem is that space like our, did not exist Pre Big Bang,

There is NO mathmatical evidence of what happend Pre BB. So say most Cosmologists.

Ironically,YOU are the one he speaks of who thinks they know all the answers.

Most,(him included) Believe our universe allows life because it is one of an infinite number.

His ideas disprove omnicient gods only

[glagos93]

@Texmurphy51 What evidence is there for a non-omniscient God?

[MrMZaccone]

@Texmurphy51 BTW, how is my analogy a strawman? Do you even know what the phrase strawman means? It would appear not.

[Texmurphy51]

@MrMZaccone Yes, do YOU know what it means?

It is informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.

Lets take the Unicorn or Bigfoot analogy.

Each are Known Myths, used to compare to Man Made Religion, a Know Myth.

How the Universe was created, Pre Big Bang is unknown.

To compare the two is a Strawman argument.

Existence of ETs are considered possible, yet there is no more proof than that of God.

Non existence of a Creation is based on Strawman arguments.

[MrMZaccone]

@Texmurphy51 In your explanation of "strawman" argument you just made 2 (count 'em) strawman arguments. 1. I never said anything about aliens and 2. I never said anything about creation. You must be a contortionist to be able to bite yourself in the ass like that. My analogy is NOT a strawman argument nor is ANY analogy. it's simply an analogy. It's NOT an attempt to misrepresent your position, it is an attempt to DELIBERATELY compare it to another similar position to illustrate it's flaws.

[MrMZaccone]

@Texmurphy51 As for how the Universe was created, the whole point of Krauss' work is to demonstrate scientifically that no "creation" was necessary.

[Texmurphy51]

@MrMZaccone No creation was necessary but there is no way to prove it one way or another. If you know anything about Science, then you know that Physics breaks down just before the Big Bang. What lies before that barrier is " Unknown and may be Unknowable" To explain away creation one must go with multiverses or a cyclic universe. Both have no more Scientific support than a Creator. You see its all in what you Believe & how you interpret the Data. To claim you know for sure is Religion.

[Texmurphy51]

@MrMZaccone sez "So you think that putting religious superstition into a school system will fix the lack of "basic education"

No I think that there is less religion in the school then when I went in the 60s. What is lacking IS basici education. Too much indoctrination, political correctness & lack of competition. We have no homework, slow students cannot be moved to a slow class so the whole class suffers.

Dispite being educated in a religious system Krauss is an Atheist. Imagine That.

[DrErkencho]

@bloodcell9

Couldn't have said it bettter myself.

But hey, not all americans are the way they are portrayed by some of the leading media. I belive we've got some of the best science men out there and we also have the strenght to be able to provide the testing fields and continue to do so. I think is a matter of educating the people and working politics to fight the current status quo, but politics for many reasons love the herd, they all want to be sheppers, not necesarely a true leader. ];)

[scribbidyscrappap]

religion alone should not determine an individuals moral beliefs.

[Branstrom]

I don't think you should hold any moral belief on the basis of religious claims. You should think for yourself, in all cases.

[FIGHTFANNERD3]

@scribbidyscrappap yes it should

[MrMZaccone]

@scribbidyscrappap It never does. It can't, because there's seldom enough actual morality in religious tomes to stick in your eye. The bible is a classic example.

[jeffbrown8]

looks like Belzer

[BrynWebb18]

lol

[dviesq]

What debate? God created the world in 7 days! Vote Republican!

[zeldarooles]

I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not. I think and hope you are.

[FIGHTFANNERD3]

@dviesq lol