Misconceptions About Atheism

[MegaTherion]

if a set of thinking leads one (him) to the position of a singularity …] that is a good pointer that there is something terribly wrong about one’s (his) thinking or assumptions and that it is time to look at things differently.

Why would it indicate that something is terribly wrong?

The rest of your post is urging me to look into various areas of Quantum Mechanics and various other hypothetical areas of science that “undermine a physical only view of the universe.”

I know very little about QM and hypothetical science, but I know enough to know that it has been popularized into pseudo-mystical claptrap with which few scientists would actually agree.

There is no doubt that there is a lot that we do not know about the universe and that some investigations of matter have turned up some bizarre findings that cannot be explained by standard physics. But just because we do not know everything, it does not mean that supernatural explanations are any more likely.

These hypothetical sciences you mention are very young and not sufficiently confirmed by evidence. It’s possible that we might discover something non-physical, but it’s ludicrous to draw such conclusions already. The explanation could very easily be entirely physical as well.

Your whole line of argument smacks of “God of the Gaps” – any gaps in our knowledge must be filled by a god. I know that’s not precisely what you’re doing, but it’s similar. “We don’t know, so it must be supernatural, or the supernatural at least becomes more likely.” No. That’s not how science works.

 

[abucs]

That’s the standard atheist answer you give Megatherion. I am asking you to look into it. I am asking you to be intelligent and see for yourself. I am asking you to do research and not assume certain things.

The Copenhagen Interpretation of scientists supporting the idea of a non physical universe is almost a hundred years old.
It is not new and it is not hypothetical. Quantum mechanics is the most successful scientific explanation for the world around and has not once been shown wrong despite a barrage of scientific testing. It has stood for decades despite every attempt by materialists to knock it down. And they have tried very hard and everytime they try quantum mechanics simply triumphs with yet another scientific proof.

It goes against the faith of materialistic atheists. That is why it is so hard to accept. That is why we get the answer - ‘oh we don’t know yet but we will work something out’. That is a faith that the science will develop, work out an alternative answer and be on your side. That is faith. Plain and simple.

There is no difference from that approach and the approach of a 6 day creationist who wants to ignore paleontology (again founded by a Chrisitian) and who simply thinks that the science has got it wrong for the moment and ‘we’ll find out an answer later on through better science’. To my mind there is very little difference between the blind atheist and the blind 6 day creationist as far as their relationship to science goes.

The idea of ‘God of the Gaps’ was first coined by a Christian when trying to explain to atheists exactly what he DID NOT MEAN.

If anything the history of science has been to try and find God on the other side of the gaps and we have been spectactulary successful in closing those gaps.

The idea that Christians ‘hide behind gaps’ is another half concept pinched by atheists.

I ask you again to look into it. Don’t assume what you have been told.

 

[abucs]

Why would it indicate that something is terribly wrong?

The fact that you have ended up with all the matter in the universe contained in a dimensionless point for starters. Not a small space but a dimensionless space that is all of matter in ‘no space’.

The fact that you have ended up at a point where ther laws of physics do not exist.

The fact that there is no time at that point.

With no time and no dimension and without the laws of physics, not only is it hard to conceive of such a position but it leaves the theorists with nowhere to proceed to. It is the end of the road with nowhere to go, and at a place that is at odds and contradicts the material worldview of matter, space, time and laws - even if they have no idea of where they came from.

and the obvious question is how to you get from a place beyond the material worldview to the material worldview with nothing but a material worldview to work with ?

You can’t. That line of enquiry stops and Hawkings (sorry not Dawkings) realises that a material worldview alone is incapable to explain the big picture. Most other people realise that too.

 

[MegaTherion]

It goes against the faith of materialistic atheists. That is why it is so hard to accept. That is why we get the answer - ‘oh we don’t know yet but we will work something out’. That is a faith that the science will develop, work out an alternative answer and be on your side. That is faith. Plain and simple.

Yikes. Faith is believing something without evidence. I’m not making a claim that the physical world is all that exists. I do not hold that as an article of faith.

I do, however, reject the claim that there is an independent non-physical world (not tied to the physical world) because there is no evidence of that.

This doesn’t mean I’m asserting that the physical world is all that exists – I’m asserting that people who are arguing otherwise have not made their case. QM might turn out to work on principles that are entirely physical. We don’t know.

To my mind there is very little difference between the blind atheist and the blind 6 day creationist as far as their relationship to science goes.

There is a gigantic difference between my position and that of a young earth creationist. The YEC asserts a position that has no evidence for it and rejects a position that has a great deal of evidence behind it. My position simply rejects a claim that does not have sufficient evidence.

I mean, I suppose I should mention that even if you could demonstrate that there is a non-physical universe, you’d still be a very long way from proving that a god exists.

the obvious question is how to you get from a place beyond the material worldview to the material worldview with nothing but a material worldview to work with?

I don’t concede that whatever existed before the Big Bang was “beyond the material worldview.” I think we currently can’t make any definite statements regarding it.

Please repeat after me: nobody knows.

You’re really uncomfortable with not having all the answers, aren’t you?

 

[abucs]

I have said all along that the scientific evidence seems to say that the origins and underpinnings of our reality are beyond our physical universe. So it is no surprise to me that we ‘cannot know’ for certain many of the big questions.

We simply have to look at the evidence. I am asking you to look at the evidence of the study of our universe at the smallest most irreducable level and see whether that fits in comfortably with an atheistic view. Simple.

I looked and it didn’t. So i switched my view based on the evidence.

If you are not even going to commit to looking into it yourself - well that’s your call.

But please don’t say you are basing your beliefs on the evidence if you are not even going to commit to looking at the evidence which challenges you.