!	MODNOTE Andrew4Handel had several concurrent threads about essentially the same topic and reiterating the same points. For everyone's convenience, the threads have been merged. Durro

The alternative to god/s is nothing.

There is no alternative explanation for the existence of reality.

Noone has presented a genuine alternative except ignorance.

Crocodile Gandhi wrote:So...therefore god?

What is the other option? A universe and reality that mysteriously creates itself for no reason?

Come of it!!! Science doesn't posit any kind of real underlying explanation for the existence of reality.

Noone would accept this lack of coherent explanation on any other issue. But the entire universe appearing for non reason?

I think atheist are severely underestimating the need for a rational explanation for reality before they start promoting a godless universe.

Slag of the easy targets. Bogus Faith healers. Religious fanatics and amongst this sea of ridicule you can forget you have havent presented a coherent or logical alternative.

The entire OP is based on a false dichotomy. Do we really need to continue?

Andrew4Handel wrote:Noone has presented a genuine alternative except ignorance.

So "I don't know how, must be Goddidit!" is somehow an informed, coherent and logical explanation?

If you are looking for some answer to all existence etc. I don't know is perfectly reasonable. In fact, it's the only reasonable answer without making shit up. *It should be added that there are explanations and lines of reasoning which have a whole hell of a lot more support than <insert random god(s)>.

Edit: Addition*

Andrew4Handel wrote:...underestimating the need for a rational explanation for reality before they start promoting a godless universe.

I don`t like the idea of presupposing sentience behind the universe when accessible evidence is bereft thereof. How`s that for a rational explanation why I go living under as if there is no furtive totalitarian sky faery? That`s not even the relevant bit, what`s important is that I not only refrain from purporting outdated, regnant bronze age beliefs, but also yield to a reasonable and empirical understanding which actually presents evidence and verified data. Dissident you may be, utterly exposing a proposed dichotomy between two things (gawd or ignorance) that can compare almost similarly is not an intelligible grasp of how we begin to cogently understand things. Secondly, an alternative to the purported magic man couldn`t be nothing, unless special pleading to death counts, also leaving us with a questionable premise, commonly reiterated as where did your parody of an alternative come from when reality has yet emerged?

Andrew4Handel wrote:The alternative to god/s is nothing.

There is no alternative explanation for the existence of reality.

Well done, Braniac!

Not really setting a good example for your team if you think that's a good argument, though, are you?.

.

On second thoughts, deleted.

Give me "I don't know" as an answer any day as an alternative to pulling a non-explanation out of the fundamental posterior orifice.

Andrew4Handel wrote:The alternative to god/s is nothing.

There is no alternative explanation for the existence of reality.

Noone has presented a genuine alternative except ignorance.

Why do you pretend to be an atheist? Your entire membership here has been based on a lie. You have used that lie to protect your own specious position from criticism while you flailed around at everything. It's a type of parasitism known as concern trolling - why the mods don't squish you with the ban-hammer, I have no idea. It appears you can even admit that you've been lying for hundreds of posts now without getting so much as an advisory.


Gods are the constructs of humans. They look just like humans, except bigger. They act just like humans, except more powerful. They think just like humans, except wider. They are so obviously the childish fantasies of people who need a father figure to guide them, to be stern with their failings and proud with their successes. They are so obviously the childish fantasies of people who need a mother figure to love them unconditionally, to oversee their every step, to hold a special place just for them.

The universe is quite capable of making itself. Suns are quite capable of making themselves. Worlds are quite capable of making themselves. Atmospheres are quite capable of making themselves. Organic molecules are quite capable of joining themselves. Life is quite capable of forming itself. Species are quite capable of making themselves. Wherein lies the *need* for god except in the fantasy desires of evolved apes?

Premise: There is no alternative to god.

Some people posit naturalism and materialism as alternatives. Some posit a godless dualism of energy or whatnot.

Therefore, there are alternatives. Premise refuted.

So, can this thread die now too? I thought it was sad before having the prior threads going out into the deep end. However, this just seems to be a downward spiral, and its getting embarrassing to watch, in all honesty.

Andrew4Handel wrote:The alternative to god/s is nothing.

There is no alternative explanation for the existence of reality.

Noone has presented a genuine alternative except ignorance.

This is not how science is shaping up. Go and read: "The Grand Design".

http://www.amazon.com/Grand-Design-Step ... nskepti-20



See also:-
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Books/grand-d ... d=11568556
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/stephen-hawki ... d=11571150

You may disagree with what the book says, but it does NOT say that the alternative to "God" is nothing.

I'm suprised even at you, Andrew4Handel for coming up with an OP like this.

It's a perfect example of an argument from ignorance:


I can't explain it.

You can't explain it.

No one can explain it, yet.

Therefore, I can explain it.

RPizzle wrote:Premise: There is no alternative to god.

Some people posit naturalism and materialism as alternatives. Some posit a godless dualism of energy or whatnot.

Therefore, there are alternatives. Premise refuted.

So, can this thread die now too? I thought it was sad before having the prior threads going out into the deep end. However, this just seems to be a downward spiral, and its getting embarrassing to watch, in all honesty.

The sooner Andrew realises that logic is not a tool in his particular mental swiss army knife the better. Unfortunately, I think the dunning-kruger effect is putting up too much resistance.

Spearthrower wrote:

RPizzle wrote:Premise: There is no alternative to god.

Some people posit naturalism and materialism as alternatives. Some posit a godless dualism of energy or whatnot.

Therefore, there are alternatives. Premise refuted.

So, can this thread die now too? I thought it was sad before having the prior threads going out into the deep end. However, this just seems to be a downward spiral, and its getting embarrassing to watch, in all honesty.

The sooner Andrew realises that logic is not a tool in his particular mental swiss army knife the better. Unfortunately, I think the dunning-kruger effect is putting up too much resistance.

I really can't tell if he's even serious anymore. I mean, this thread is just incoherent really, and in others there was at least some level of rational discourse. Though for the last few threads, I have agreed with your concerns.

The alternative to God is not acting like you know why reality exists... if "Why?" is even a valid question.

Andrew4Handel wrote:The alternative to god/s is nothing.

How do you know that for sure? Do you have a coherent definition of "god" or is it just a label that you like to impose on the ultimate explanation of reality, whatever that might be? What are the properties of this god that you see as the ultimate explanation of reality? Why is this explanation "ultimate"?

There is no alternative explanation for the existence of reality.

If there is an ultimate explanation for reality, I'm quite sure that we will eventually get to it through empirical science. If this explanation turns out to be something that can reasonably be called "god", then so be it. Until then, it makes no sense to impose an arbitrary, incoherent, poorly defined label on a non-existent explanation.

Noone has presented a genuine alternative except ignorance.

Why are you in such a hurry to get an ultimate explanation? A couple of millenia ago, no-one could present a genuine explanation for thunder and lightening other than it being the handiwork of god. We're getting there. If we keep doing the small things right, and keep incrementally building layers of explanations for different phenomena, we will eventually get there. For things for which we don't currently have an explanation, it's best to say that we don't yet have an explanation. If you impose an arbitrary explanation for things without empirically arriving at an explanation, you will never be able to say for sure what the real answer is.

Spearthrower wrote:The universe is quite capable of making itself.

Show me a cake that has made itself..


Utter rubbish...

I am 100% NOT AN UNDEFRCOVER THEIST i'D ADMITT IT AT THE DROP OF A HAT IF I WERE.

drunk but no theist.