Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: J_F_Shepard who wrote (584434)	9/5/2010 10:22:34 PM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1577870

We could say that anything that begins had a cause. David Hume, an atheist, said that. We could note that the universe is finely tuned such that life can exist. We can note that life is based on a system of encoded information. These things are very suggestive of the cause of the universe having a purpose.

To: J_F_Shepard who wrote (584434)	9/5/2010 10:34:55 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1577870

Can the god folks tell us more ?? In a certain very narrow and unscientific way it might be said yes. But with that sort of qualifier its could be reasonably consider to be "no". But I don't consider this question very interesting, or more to the point relevant. Interesting is just subjective, not much point in explaining that, your either interested or you aren't. But its not relevant because there is no need for them to tell us more, or even tell us anything at all, in order to deal with the issue under discussion. Its not a comparative issue, what other disciplines or areas of thought, or groups, or sets of ideas can (or mostly can't) tell us about the beginning of the universe, doesn't change the fact that (at least for now) science can't tell us much about the issues we are discussing. The point is what science can or can not do, not trying to pump up science vs. religion, or religion vs. science. Any claim about God is unscientific, whether its made by a religious person or a prestigious atheist scientist. That doesn't mean there is anything wrong with him making such a comment, just that it doesn't and reasonably can't amount to evidence against the idea of God. You could turn around and say "but you don't have evidence for the existence of God". Some people here might disagree, but I wouldn't. I'd agree with the statement, but accepting that doesn't refute any other point I have made in this conversation. Its hardly as if I was claiming scientific proof that God exists. In fact my point is incompatible with such a claim. My point is that science can not answer such a question.