God: The Failed Hypothesis - Video 5

On April 5, 2007 Dr. Victor Stenger gave a presentation of his book, God: The Failed Hypothesis at Ryerson University in Toronto, Canada. This video is property of the Centre for Inquiry Ontario

Category:

Entertainment

Tags:

• God
• the
• Failed
• Hypothesis
• Dr.
• Victor
• Stenger
• Centre
• for
• Inquiry
• Ontario
• Toronto
• Ryerson

[PRIMEx420]

I'm supposed to have insight into something you couldn't verbalize well enough to make a point? k. suck my dick slowly. you're missing a huge point. nothing has been solidified as "the beginning" or otherwise. because its SCIENCE. science is always looking to become more accurate in its understanding of the universe. and your 'point' is still a nonsequitor because even IF there was a "beginning", the answer "well it's god then" is still as simple and childish as it was in the bronze age. go away

[Gwyo]

1) He doesn't claim to be talking about HOW matter came into being.

2) "There will never be a SECULAR explanation for it" -> so you think there is / could be a RELIGIUOS explanation for it?

[SwineNahNah]

Wow! So, there is an mechanism to keep an order in the Universe, so perhaps there will be no Final Day, when all comes to end (including our kids of our kids in generation n)? This is something really new to me.

[judaserebus]

@SSat155 Actually, the more data we acquire, the more it seems definite that our universe is unguided. That is a fact. You have your 'book' from an MIT professor-- do you have a degree yourself, to understand the math he spoke of? I'm not being rude, I'm asking.

[Eshto]

Where and when did Dawkins say this? Citation please.

[SSat155]

The thing you're not getting is, these arguements cannot be disproved using your own standards, the math does not lie. There is no model for beneficial mutation leading to higher complexity, even Dawkins when he tried to do this, imposed a self-referential 'agent', with a memory, in order to keep the arrow of progress going in the right direction. There is nothing neutral about directed 'intelligence'. A.E. Wilder Smith made evolution look like a childs fantasy when he was alive.

[SSat155]

Start to make sense? Would that be the books by former MIT professors that I have, aguing in favor of an 'external agent', based solely on their understanding of math? I'm really not too worried about a few mistakes on YT. And the pre-historic scribblings you speak of show an understanding if science as much as 3000 years in advance. Further, sanctimony it's not, the more technology and 'data' we acquire, the more it shows the impossibility of an undirected ascention.

[PRIMEx420]

1. U come at me with sanctimony, and you'll get its match vulgarity coming back to you every time. You criticize my "verbosity" yet can't spell "implications". Your only surprize should be that you don't get more vulgarity, more often. 2. Our existance makes no sense to you because you look to almost pre-historic scribblings to explain the universe. Try reading some modern philosophy with roots in neuroscience and psycholgy, and everything will start to make sense, mathematically and otherwise.

[SSat155]

Another vulgar contribution from the 'rationalists', what a surprise. The fact that our existence makes no sense, in any respect from a purely mathematical position, the most deterministic way you can look at something, 'should' give people pause, but no, there is always the knee jerk response, "There must be another explanation". Have fun with your conditional and relativistic truth. The Bible will continue to point things out, well before our science does.

[SSat155]

An overly verbose reply with no insight at all into what I said. Read this slowly. Secular science scoffed at the idea of a 'beginning', the obvious inplications of that being a very inconvenient thing. When Penzias and Wilson solidified its existence in '64, it should have sent up a red flag, that several millennia of scientific thought was on the wrong path.