Another Atheist

#atheist #atheism

One of the more frustrating things about dialogue with Christians is they never seem to listen to your questions. For example, if you ask

“What evidence do you have that substantiates your claim that god exists?”

they seem to hear

“let’s spend lot’s of time in debating what evidence really means so I can take whatever answers you provide and try to misrepresent them until I think I can spot a tiny gap. At which point allow me to throw a truckload of bullshit at that gap- over your objections of dishonesty- asserting that this meets the standards of evidence.”

If I’m asking for evidence, that’s what I want.  Not a prolonged, agonising exercise in wordplay until you think the opportunity to drop a whole bunch of assertions that aren’t evidence, into the debate as evidence, is created.

There are simple standards of evidence that are used in scientific or legal settings that stress the elements of corroboration and objectivity. That’s the standard you need to reach to make a god-claim credible.

@BtheCalvinist Ok, the short potted version is:
1) a singularity is a super-hot, super-dense object of largely compressed subatomic particles and lots and lots of energy.
2) As it expanded energy was converted to matter based on Einstein’s equation (E=MC2), this rapid process left behind largely hydrogen and helium (one of the predictions is that helium should make up about 25% of the universe’s matter, which has been confirmed).
3) as part of the expansion it created space-time (from relativity theory, space-time is one parameter, not two dimensions). This is why all galaxies are moving away from each other- there’s not a centre- space-time is created as the expansion starts. There is in effect, no void or empty space the singularity was situated. This is also why asking what happened before the big-bang is a bit like asking what’s north of the north-pole. It’s incoherent. (And also why an explosion doesn’t fit- there’s no space for the ‘bit’s to fly into and there’s no ‘centre’).
4) There are several theories as to why the singularity began to expand. One is that there was a quantum fluctuation- the quark/antiquark balance in the singularity was momentarily thrown off balance. This suffices to initiate such an expansion. Another uses gravity. Gravity in special circumstances can be a repulsive, not an attractive force. Such circumstances could have arisen in the singularity. In string-theory we could also employ colliding branes (with the added inference that the universe could be ekyprotic, undergoing an eternal cycle of expansions and collapses). We don’t actually know what the trigger was. We do know that there seems to be several natural ways it could happen however.
5) Once a singularity expands it can be shown it will do so very rapidly. In doing so it should generate a universe that is flat, homogenous and isotropic. These are all the parameters we observe of our current universe.
6)Other evidentiary support for a big-bang expansion is the presence of cosmic background microwave radiation in the universe, a prediction that was famously confirmed in the 1960s.

#atheist #atheism -

One thing I’ve discovered talking to believers, is they’re often quickly discomforted by the fact I don’t take them at their word.  To me, this seems to be a given. It seems to be a hard thing for them to accept. 

I think I understand why.  A believer is coming from a community where they do have authority.  In that community, their knowledge and claims are treated with respect- because in that community, the believer has obtained a degree of authority. And it’s hard to let go of that.  The result is that many Christians or Mulsims I’ve debated, just start by assuming I will concede they have a similar degree of authority.

Well, let me burst your bubble. Outside your community- in the bright light of the internet- your authority counts for squat- nada- nothing- zero.  I’m not going take you at your word for anything.  If you want me to treat you as an authority on these issues, you have to start from scratch.  You have to establish the veracity of your claims with solid evidence. Your word is not going to suffice.

#evolution #atheist #atheism -

Until I got on to the web and started interacting with creationists again, I’d never heard this term before.  Lets be clear- I reject it, utterly and totally. 

I am a biologist, not an evolutionist.  That means I’ve spent years at University getting an advanced education.  That means a lot of practical work in the field and in the lab.  It means that I know the difference between a monkey and an ape. I have traveled to, and worked on 4 different continents with a variety of wildlife.  In the course of this work, I have discovered and published things.  I have been exposed to various hazards along the way. I have lost colleagues to fatal diseases and accidents.

At no point in time, have I taken a course in evolutionism.  There are no journals on evolutionism.  There are no academic or government positions that have evolutionist as the title.  The term only exists as a pejorative attempt by creationists to create the fiction that an entire scientific discipline is a mere dogma.

If your claims are built entirely on what you have read on creationist websites and sources, then your beliefs are dogmatic.  There is no symmetry between creationism and biology. Until you get off your arses, stop trying to appropriate other people’s research, and start doing your own, not one iota of credit can be given to the creationist view.

- #atheist #atheism -

The cosmological argument for god seems to be quite popular amongst theists. I guess if you’re going to conjure a proof for god, it’s hard to beat finding one that occurred about 14 bn years in the past. Because all that evidence is so clear cut now right…

Okay, so clearly you’re an expert on cosmology and have a solid grasp of the nature of space-time, quantum-mechanics and general relativity.  I’m going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you haven’t learned all your physics of some creationist website.  You’re not going to make elementary errors like assuming that time is an absolute metric. Or tell me that the big-bang is an explosion. Because that just means I can dismiss your claim based on your transparent ignorance.

So, here’s what I need you to do to make your claim the universe was created by your god credible:

Question 1: How many dimensions are there to the universe?

Ok, this should be easy.  The creator god exists in some dimension outside space-time of this universe.  Clearly you have information on the nature of the universe that has baffled physicists for decades.  So, tell me how many dimensions there are, which one your god is located in, and the scientific proof you have for this number. 

Question 2: When was the universe created?

Again, this should be simple.  Clearly you have been able to solve the Hawking-Hartle no-boundary condition and can identify the exact moment the universe was created.  Please tell me when that was and the scientific proof you have used.

Question 3: Elimination of natural causes

A quantum-fluctuation (a pertubation to the quark/antiquark balance in a singularity) is recognised as a feasible and natural mechanism by which a universe could start a big-bang expansion. Please supply your proof of why this is actually impossible.

Question 4: Elimination of alternatives

Expansion of a big-bang singularity is not the only explanation we have for the universe.  There are also ekpyrotic models which describe endless cycles.  As physics has not been able to eliminate these alternative models, please supply the scientific proof that has so far eluded all of these cosmologists.