Cosmologic Evolution Model Supporting Likelihood of a God's Existence

[Kinich Ahau]

Poor Andy! I'll say something supportive for you.

You are doing really well at your three major skills, jumping through hoops, the leap of faith and pounding square pegs into round holes. If you keep this up you will be a shoe in to make the team for the next olympics for the extremely retarded. Remember, practice makes perfect.

[Sinfidel]

Andrew66 wrote

I don't know what you talking about smarty.
I assert that since Davin is incapable of saying anything supportive of me that his opinion cannot be trusted. If your too stoopid to understand this, it means that Davin is so partison (pro Atheist, anti Theist) that not matter what (regardless of what I say) he will always state negatives against me and any opinion or thought I have. It would be remarkable that everything I say or represent has no merit whatsoever, so Davin's opinion's are tainted and cannot be trusted.

Davin can prove me wrong by saying something supportive of me, but he won't (can't) - because he is blocked emotionally.

How is this a fallacy? - Sinny I'm surprised you seemed smart before.

You obviously were a classmate of JJ.

When are you gonna pay me that $10,000 you owe me?

[Sinfidel]

Andrew66 wrote

Absence of evidence is not evidence for absence!

[Sinfidel]

Andrew66 wrote

Hi Sinny
I'm flattered you long to hear my thoughts, but intelligent debate/discussion on this topic seems to have been exhausted.

The basic concept, that an infinitely old and vastly large (possibly infinitely large) physical existence (universe/ multiverse whatever you want to call it) - including what was before our universe and what lies outside and concurrent with our universe, provides a substrate for vast opportunities for evolution - therefore yielding in at least some cosmologic states a superhero with God like qualities - seems reasonable.

Its scientists, not theists, who tend to suggest nature is eternal. Theists promote that God (alone) is eternal and created a finite nature.

Again I submit, the strongest superhero evolved from the entirety of existence I hereby declare is the Atheists God!!

All of which is a mind-fuck that I have found it increasingly difficult to sustain. Especially when there is a much more credible, much simpler, much more elegant solution that easily fits the facts.

[Sinfidel]

Andrew66 wrote

- prove me wrong.

Since you haven't DISPROVEN Russell's intelligent teapot, therefore it must exist!

[Davin]

Andrew66 wrote

Say something supportive (and meaningful, not just BS) - prove me wrong.

Say something worthy of being supported and I will.

[Sinfidel]

Andrew66 wrote

Absence of evidence is not evidence for absence!

[Davin]

Sinfidel wrote

Maybe god is making that child starve to death to make sure Andrew66 appreciates all the good things it has.

[Andrew66]

Davin, if you look at all my posts regarding how mega evolution is predictive to yield being(s) more resilient and powerful than humans (even to the threshold of God like status), I thought I made it clear that the model DOES NOT necessarily predict that an ultimate being is good or moral.

The model I have proposed promotes the possibility (as evolution predicts) of simply a fitter - not nicer - being.

whether a nice being is more fit than a nasty being becomes the question, and I suppose this point could be debated

[Kinich Ahau]

The only thing predictive is that creatures will find a niche to exploit and better ways to exploit it or fail, that includes competition with other species. How long that niche is available is another matter. You fail.

[Sinfidel]

Andrew66 wrote

My daugther

Spell check much?

[Sinfidel]

Andrew66 wrote

Quote:
- prove me wrong.

You obviously didn't evolve one of these -

[Davin]

Andrew66, I'm sure that you wanted your posts to demonstrate that god-like beings are not only possible but likely if we follow the evolutionary process, but they failed even basic logical evaluations.

Worse, they demonstrate that you have a very poor understanding of evolution. It seems like you only heard about evolution from someone who misheard a single sentence abstract, instead of actually seeking to understand what evolution actually is.

If you read my posts and didn't ignore where I pointed out your errors, you would have already realized that your arguments are shit. You should already know since you've conceded to me on every point I've made.

[Andrew66]

Davin wrote

Andrew66, I'm sure that you wanted your posts to demonstrate that god-like beings are not only possible but likely if we follow the evolutionary process...

Yep, especially given the distinct possibility that the capacity of evolutionary change on a cosmic scale had been and is, extremely large, if not infinite.

Evolution over a long time -> god like beings.
Evolution over an infinite time -> God like being.

The rest of your statement is meaningless drivel, so I didn't quote it.

[Kinich Ahau]

Andy, Do you realise that you are making the fundamental mistake we see all the time from run of the mill theist theorists? That is, you are beginning with a premise and working your way backwards. Science and rational people work in the opposite direction. This is why we scoff at everything you put forward. Basically it's laughable and ill-informed bullshit.