platypus_plumba

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago) (1 children)

If it is falsifiable or not depends on how you define it.

It could be defined in many falsifiable ways, give it a try, pretty sure you can find many.

My point about Dark Matter is that it isn't something we will likely have the means to falsify soon given the nature of the problem. It is also a pretty weak theory that contradicts many of the facts that we already know about the universe. So I could also create a very weak falsifiable argument about the existence of a creator and then call it a day.

"The creator was physically present in the origin of spacetime". In theory, if we could look back in time, we could verify this. There are plenty techniques that allow us to "look" back, we may just need to discover a better one.

"God is physical and exists in the universe"

Making something falsifiable isn't a problem.

You're saying the concept of a god used by traditional religions isn't falsifiable, which is right. But there's no reason to limit the idea of a god to those traditional definitions.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago) (1 children)

I have experienced them, pretty sure you have too. It's something common and it isn't the type of guess I refer to. We have knowledge and experience about people behaving that way towards others. It's based on knowledge.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 hours ago
[–] [email protected] 1 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (3 children)

OK, so if maths were so clear about it, why very smart people who think logically didn't think it was the case?

Could it be because maths have said many times in the past "Hey, this could be possible"... Only to find out that, yes, it is possible in maths but not in reality.

https://youtu.be/6akmv1bsz1M?feature=shared

And yeah, we don't have the tools right now to fully unrestand the origin of the universe, so we can't know how to make falsifiable theories around it. For example, Dark Matter is non-falsifiable because we don't have enough knowledge about it.

We observe certain behavior in the universe, we call the cause Dark Matter even if we don't fully understand how to prove or disprove it. We observe the existence of reality and we assume there is a creator even if we don't fully understand how to prove or disprove it. We can observe reality, thus, theorizing about the existence of a creator isn't absurd.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 21 hours ago (2 children)

If something can't be tested with current technology or theoretical knowledge, then it isn't real?

Was electromagnetism real in the 800s?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 21 hours ago

I guess I can't change your mind about that.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago

Yeah, I also have that in common with them. I was very religious as a child and then started changing because of the nonsense of religions. I'm trying to go a bit deeper here though, I think we can assume religions are just human ideas with no basis, so these are already discarded for me. I'm talking about an actual creator, not about our interpretation of it. I don't think we have the tools, knowledge or experience to actually tell. The only thing we have is ignorance.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago (5 children)

Yes, we discovered that AFTER the thought experiment. That was possible through knowledge and experimentation. Two things we don't have about the origin of the universe... We have a lot of theories though.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

Just because I'm arguing doesn't mean it is in bad faith. I enjoy standing my ground and seeing what comes out of it. Otherwise it isn't actually a discussion. I do feel some people are getting triggered by this, but I don't care, I'm being respectful and explaining things the way I see them.

Maybe this is a bad habit of mine, but it's when the good stuff happens. I've actually learned a lot through my stubbornness in this post.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (4 children)

Exactly, because we don't have the means to prove or disprove it, we shouldn't have any belief about it. A belief in this matter is just a guess based on personal preference. There's no knowledge or evidence to back any position besides "I don't know, I can't know".

I don't think because we haven't figured out how to test it so far it means it is impossible to do so. We may just need to get a better understanding of reality.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 days ago (3 children)

Pretty sure there are plenty of atheists that are constantly on the lookout to attack people who they don't agree with. Anyways, shaping your life is not just about what you do but also about the way you think. Someone who believes God doesn't exist because there's no evidence, probably has other beliefs about things they don't really understand. Letting go of those ideas that seem logical but have no basis helps lower the ego. Letting go and accepting ignorance feels much better than forming opinions without knowledge.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 days ago (10 children)

There is zero human evidence about most of the things that are actually happening right now in the universe.

 

First of all, I have more in common with atheists than religious people, so my intention isn't to come here and attack, I just want to hear your opinions. Maybe I'm wrong, I'd like to hear from you if I am. I'm just expressing here my perception of the movement and not actually what I consider to be facts.

My issue with atheism is that I think it establishes the lack of a God or gods as the truth. I do agree that the concept of a God is hard to believe logically, specially with all the incoherent arguments that religions have had in the past. But saying that there's no god with certainty is something I'm just not comfortable with. Science has taught us that being wrong is part of the process of progress. We're constantly learning things we didn't know about, confirming theories that seemed insane in their time. I feel like being open to the possibilities is a healthier mindset, as we barely understand reality.

In general, atheism feels too close minded, too attached to the current facts, which will probably be obsolete in a few centuries. I do agree with logical and rational thinking, but part of that is accepting how little we really know about reality, how what we considered truth in the past was wrong or more complex than we expected

I usually don't believe there is a god when the argument comes from religious people, because they have no evidence, but they could be right by chance.

 

Any recommended hardware device to ensure that I won't need to transcode in order to burn ASS and PGS subtitles?

Right now I have a FireTV but it only direct plays SRT.

 

It's a good tip, but shitty.

This just happened to me in the guest bathroom of someone I barely knew. The bathroom was meters away from the meeting.

Never. Again.

view more: next ›