An Open Letter to Atheists

Tiger said:
You’re some spoofer. 3rd time lucky. Friday quiz time…

If the totality of physical reality — including time, space, matter, and energy — began at the Big Bang, and you reject both creation ex nihilo and an eternal regress, then on what coherent, evidence-based ontological grounds do you assert that something existed prior to or independently of that event, and what is its causal status?
Click to expand...
See my previous post

All of this discussion is about the Big Bang theory

What does it say?
 
Obviously he has a very low IQ, but you can how brainwashed the likes of Tiger are about what the Big Bang theory isn't by creationist carnies like Lennox and Meyer
 
AN2 said:
See my previous post

All of this discussion is about the Big Bang theory

What does it say?
Click to expand...
Excellent. So that’s confirmation that you cannot answer the question.

So far the Friday Quiz score is:

Tiger 1 - 0 Jambo

Question 2

Given that all known empirical observation collapses at the Planck boundary, and no physical theory — quantum gravity, string theory, or cosmological inflation — has produced testable evidence for any 'pre-time' state, on what rational or scientific basis do you continue to assert that something existed before the origin of time, rather than concede that 'nothing' is at least as plausible as your unevidenced speculations?
 
Tiger said:
Excellent. So that’s confirmation that you cannot answer the question.

So far the Friday Quiz score is:

Tiger 1 - 0 Jambo

Question 2

Given that all known empirical observation collapses at the Planck boundary, and no physical theory — quantum gravity, string theory, or cosmological inflation — has produced testable evidence for any 'pre-time' state, on what rational or scientific basis do you continue to assert that something existed before the origin of time, rather than concede that 'nothing' is at least as plausible as your unevidenced speculations?
Click to expand...
LOL Unfuckingbelievable, groundhog day..

The Big Bang theory is not a something from nothing theory, do you understand that??
 
AN2 said:
LOL Unfuckingbelievable, groundhog day..

The Big Bang theory is not a something from nothing theory, do you understand that??
Click to expand...
Your repetition of that claim avoids the actual challenge: if the Big Bang is not a “something from nothing” theory, then please specify what it came from — and provide any empirical evidence for the existence of that “something” prior to spacetime, rather than retreating into dogmatic assertion.

Friday Night Quiz score is:

Tiger 2 - 0 Jambo

Question 3

If the Big Bang does not describe an absolute origin but merely a transitional phase from a prior 'something,' then what empirically testable mechanism accounts for the spontaneous emergence of ordered physical law, dimensionality, and low-entropy initial conditions from that 'something'—and how do you distinguish it from metaphysics?
 
Tiger said:
Your repetition of that claim avoids the actual challenge: if the Big Bang is not a “something from nothing” theory, then please specify what it came from — and provide any empirical evidence for the existence of that “something” prior to spacetime, rather than retreating into dogmatic assertion.

Friday Night Quiz score is:

Tiger 2 - 0 Jambo

Question 3

If the Big Bang does not describe an absolute origin but merely a transitional phase from a prior 'something,' then what empirically testable mechanism accounts for the spontaneous emergence of ordered physical law, dimensionality, and low-entropy initial conditions from that 'something'—and how do you distinguish it from metaphysics?
Click to expand...
LMAO

Q E fucken D

He literally does not understand that the Big Bang theory is not a something from nothing theory

It's always the same with this idiot - "Nuh-uh!"
 
The Big Bang theory, as a scientific explanation, is not a "something from nothing" theory. It describes the universe's evolution from an extremely hot, dense state, not its creation from absolute nothingness. While the theory accounts for the universe's expansion and development, it doesn't address what existed before this initial state or what caused it.
 
It's like you explain something and then he asks - Well, how does that explain this other thing?

A: It doesn't

And he absolutely refuses to accept that answer (you can tell that he hasn't had much in the way of a formal education)

Dreary me
 
AN2 said:
LMAO

Q E fucken D

He literally does not understand that the Big Bang theory is not a something from nothing theory

It's always the same with this idiot - "Nuh-uh!"
Click to expand...
Tiger 3 - 0 Jambo
 
You are absolutely free of course, @Tiger, to speculate that "nothing" existed before the Big Bang (except for your God) but that is not the Big Bang theory, and science illiterates like the creationist carnie John Lennox should stop lying about it
 
AN2 said:
You are absolutely free of course, @Tiger, to speculate that "nothing" existed before the Big Bang (except for your God) but that is not the Big Bang theory, and science illiterates like the creationist carnie John Lennox should stop lying about it
Click to expand...
Maybe it was just a Fart waiting for the Big Bang ? ! 😲
 
clarke-connolly said:
Maybe it was just a Fart waiting for the Big Bang ? ! 😲
Click to expand...
If Tiger wants to talk about something from nothing from a scientific perspective, then he should talk about that. And I don't mean something like quantum fluctuations, I mean theories like the ones Krauss and Hawking have for the creation of the universe

The Big Bang theory should be excluded from the discussion and it's not the same i.e. purely theoretical because empiricism
 
clarke-connolly said:
If you are a Believer in Atheism then you are an Atheist = = An Atheism Believer.

You have, Faith and Belief, in Atheism / A " True " Believer ! !
Click to expand...
A "true atheist" believes in atheism?

How do you define atheism?
 
AN2 said:
Why should I?

I said that I'd get to it here

I also said that as long as his name isn't mentioned again here..

But @Tiger jumped in again (underpants first, as always) and now it's becoming a case of..


View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=W4tVH7BPb-Q
Click to expand...

Why do you always copy and mimic my phrasing? Tank does that too. It’s pathetic and ghey.

I guess it’s a compliment of sorts, making me superior.

You took one hell of a beating yesterday. 3 nil. That’s gotta hurt.
 
Tiger said:
Why do you always copy and mimic my phrasing? Tank does that too. It’s pathetic.

I guess it’s a compliment of sorts, making me superior.

You took one hell of a beating yesterday. 3 nil. That’s gotta hurt.
Click to expand...
The soapbox dunce strikes again..
 
AN2 said:
A "true atheist" believes in atheism?

How do you define atheism?
Click to expand...
Atheism is the absence of belief in the existence of deities.

So, you have to have Faith and Belief in; The absence of belief in the existence of deities.

A Religion of No Religion.
 
clarke-connolly said:
Atheism is the absence of belief in the existence of deities.
Click to expand...
It isn't the slightest bit jarring to you to define an absence of belief as belief?

clarke-connolly said:
So, you have to have Faith and Belief in; The absence of belief in the existence of deities.

A Religion of No Religion.
Click to expand...
Atheism isn't a religion or faith

And that's only the first thing that doofus Lennox got wrong
 
Prima facie, it's literally a self-own..

Atheist: "You're a Christian because your parents were Christian."

Doofus Lennox: "Yes, I am. As you are an atheist because your parents were atheists."

But there's more to it (I'll get to that later)
 

Latest Threads

Popular Threads

Back
Top Bottom