Such a *MASSIVE* Universe, and our species is hung up on an 'identifiable' God / Creator. There is so much life out there...!! The beautiful balance and complexity of the Universe, it's mathematics are the signature of the Creator.

@paulbrocklehurst7253

3 жыл бұрын

*Such a MASSIVE Universe, and our species is hung up on an 'identifiable' God / Creator.* > But if we can't identify any god why assume it's at all likely there's one there? *There is so much life out there...!!* > How can you assume this when there isn't a shred of evidence for _any_ life out there at all? *The beautiful balance and complexity of the Universe,* > What you mean the fact that 99.99999999999999999999999999999+% of it is a lethal freezing vacuum? *it's mathematics are the signature of the Creator.* > So what mathematics shows us that there has to be a god then? I don't think you can show that _any_ is but yes you can certainly _claim_ it is but anyone can claim _anything_ can't they?

@CristinaG

3 жыл бұрын

@@paulbrocklehurst7253 Life's a journey bro, nobody can give you the answers to your questions where you'll comfortably absorb them into your paradigm... Ya got to go looking and figure it out for yourself, like I did.

@paulbrocklehurst7253

3 жыл бұрын

@@CristinaG *Life's a journey bro,* > Well in a manner of speaking perhaps sure, but how does that justify any of your claims here? *nobody can give you the answers to your questions where you'll comfortably absorb them into your paradigm...* > I'm not claiming anything about any paradim am I? I'm simply asking questions about whether your claims can be supported & you're saying you can't give me answers which doesn't surprise me one little bit when there's no justification for what you say. *Ya got to go looking and figure it out for yourself, like I did.* > If you did you ought to be capable of explaining how rather than say you can't give me answers & I'm not putting those words into your mouth am I because you''ve freely admitted you _can't_ & that doesn't suprise me at all.

@CristinaG

3 жыл бұрын

@@paulbrocklehurst7253 Claims? On my part, as just another faceless virtual ego on the vast internet, it's all rhetoric & hyperbole. You seem very triggered though, and seem to want to be able to judge me and my post which wasn't addressed to you in particular. I propose you are a very fragile person, a delicate personality, teetering on the brink of paranoid personality disorder. That's just my opinion though. In any case, not my problem. I don't have time to interact with your personality type, it's always a black hole which goes nowhere. Reply if you like, but I won't be replying to you any further!!

@paulbrocklehurst7253

3 жыл бұрын

@@CristinaG *Claims?* > Yes you know what _claims_ are don't you? - Assertions which aren't supported. *On my part, as just another faceless virtual ego on the vast internet,* > Well maybe I am but that doesn't change the fact that you can't justify you claims & will try very hard to distract from that fact _or can you justify them?_ *it's all rhetoric & hyperbole.* > Not on my part because I haven't even said you are wrong have I? All I've pointed out is that you cannot support your claims & yet again you're trying your hardest to avoid addressing that shortcoming. *You seem very triggered though,* > Well maybe I am & maybe I'm not but that doesn't change the fact that you can't justify your claims because if you could you _would._ *and seem to want to be able to judge me and my post which wasn't addressed to you in particular.* > You didn't address it to anybody so everybody can see it's open to question seeing as you cannot justify your assertions. *I propose you are a very fragile person,* > Go ahead - it only goes to show you make a lot of claims which you cannot justify so _knock yourself out!_ *a delicate personality,* > Go ahead - it only goes to show you make a lot of claims which you cannot justify so _knock yourself out!_ *teetering on the brink of paranoid personality disorder.* > Go ahead - it only goes to show you make a lot of claims which you cannot justify so _knock yourself out!_ *That's just my opinion though.* > You mean you can't justify your claims yeah? - Tell me something I _don't_ know! *In any case, not my problem.* > Then why do you burn so much fuel making out that you needn't justify the claims you make if you don't see my observations as some kind of problem then? *I don't have time to interact with your personality type,* > But _strangely_ you _can_ find the time to make claims you can never justify none the less. *it's always a black hole which goes nowhere.* > Your claims? Yes. Everyone can see _that!_ *Reply if you like,* > Don't worry I will! *but I won't be replying to you any further!!* > Of course you won't - why would you when it would only reveal that you really can't justify your claims?

Natural theology was not “rejected because of Darwin.” That is an outrageous historical error. The vast majority of arguments within natural theology are *not* related to the question of (fact of) evolution’s role in biological diversity. And those arguments (including modified versions) continued to find advocates among Darwin’s peers and shortly thereafter, and have continued to find advocates to this day (as Kuhn notes). He knows better. So it was an odd mistake for him to make.

25:00 that explains a lot we are dealing with a zombie theology.

👍 LOL .. great channel. Seems to be a meeting place for all sorts of beliefs and faiths 😀

@TheProdigalMeowMeowMeowReturns

2 жыл бұрын

Great channel, but terrible video. Very strange factual errors.

Like always, amazing.

@TheProdigalMeowMeowMeowReturns

3 жыл бұрын

It was good, except for some of the sloppy factual errors made by the host.

@2:40 he makes the claim that “in order for natural theology to have any truth value at all it must be *grounded* in science.” This is even more confused than his claim that natural theology was rejected because of Darwin... Natural theology includes discussions on *why* there is a domain studied by science in the first place, *why* there are any possible worlds in the first place, etc. which cannot be answered via scientific methods. Does Kuhn think he can answer the question “can science discern whether there’s more to reality than science can discern*” with scientific experiments? Philosophy isn’t dead. Any attempt to render it so would itself involve philosophy. The most Kuhn can say is that philosophical positions are false if they can be shown to directly conflict with established scientific knowledge, although there too we should be careful and note that what passes for “scientific knowledge” is sometimes just bad philosophy wearing a heavy coat of scientific lipstick. (* philosopher Eric Reitan phrased it that way and it stuck with me. He said, “science cannot discern whether there’s more to reality than science can discern.”)

In Tao, Nature is Tao itself. Tao mentions God too. No one can ‘prove’ the truth. Up to now, science only proved leaves and flowers of the tree of the truth. There is a truth, but no one can stop you keep on wondering around on the circle closer to truth.

I know this stoped out of school 5Th grade. Pray you All are safe today and Now thank you all thank you

Can intelligent design help demonstrate subconscious mind of cosmos?

Interesting point about mathematics describing the classical world and quantum world; maybe mathematics can provide the unity of forces being sought.

Thank you Awsome

"The evidence of the evolution of consciousness" I am a simpleton... Do we not need to `know` what conscious is first? If we know how and/or what conscious is, then perhaps we are in an AI, or in danger of creating it?

Certain phenomena of the world are more likely with God than without God. Lovely concluding thought. However, it comes tantalizingly close to the cliff’s edge of the God of the gap.

Thanks!

@TheProdigalMeowMeowMeowReturns

3 жыл бұрын

I absolutely LOVE your profile picture! 👍

What does natural theology say about human consciousness? Could subconscious mind of cosmos bring about fine tuning of universe?

Wherever you were to start the video looks like an amazing place to give connecting with god a try! It looks like the most peaceful place on earth (haha minus the geyser)!

I think a heroic dose of mushrooms and nice camp fire on a cold starlit night will give you more answers than all the academics on the planet ever can.

@cosmikrelic4815

3 жыл бұрын

@Dan : That did it for me :-)

I don't really appreciate how RLK didn't push back on Stenger's weak claims

Wow

Poking around the mind one can always find the experience they perceive true to nature

@cresenciohernandez8310

3 жыл бұрын

AND the casmos. The bible is en alegory search it you will find the new testamento is just Man talking. Cristo is a force creation is Adan the man. Adán and Jesús new this. Moses as well David and others so nos. Study the Tora

The subconscious mind of cosmos could develop natural theology, as something not physical that manifests itself in nature, including evolution.

@paulbrocklehurst7253

3 жыл бұрын

But there's no good reason to believe that the cosmos itself has a subconscious mind. Only humans & maybe some animals show evidence of having subconscious minds so there's no justification for claiming the cosmos could unless of course you can clearly demonstrate that it could instead of simply declaring it must be possible with not justification it somehow could.

@jamesruscheinski8602

3 жыл бұрын

@@paulbrocklehurst7253 pursuing human conscious awareness of subconsciousness internally and externally

@paulbrocklehurst7253

3 жыл бұрын

@@jamesruscheinski8602 What does that mean?

@jamesruscheinski8602

3 жыл бұрын

@@paulbrocklehurst7253 if you figure out let me know.

Darwinian evolution may explain how life evolves but does not explain why life evolves. I cant imagine why anything would begin to evolve without eternal force being applied first. What would an alternative be?

So now in 2020 all new and old are changes for the future perfección.

El criador ser parte del ser Amén. Truth barks at her door step. Vain all is Vain

@stevenhoyt

3 жыл бұрын

¿que parte? está una demanda empírico, físico. entonces, ¿que material, que moléculas?

Human consciousness senses / perceives God fullness, divine being, free will behind subconscious mind of cosmos.

@stevenhoyt

3 жыл бұрын

no, no it doesn't. there's a difference between thinking there's a god and the idea we sense god. supposing we were placed in one of two identical universes that only differed in that one had a god and the other didn't ... how would we know which we were placed in? in both worlds, we'd "sense" our universe would have a god. we'd only be right, however, in one of those universes. so, how much weight ought we give your claim, and why?

@jamesruscheinski8602

3 жыл бұрын

more of a starting point to look into than a claim, will follow up

God is a comcept

@darksidehendry7587

3 жыл бұрын

What about infinity

Argue God from language of conscious awareness.

Why do humans hate the idea of God the intelligent designer when we are just mere mortals? would the mere Mortal who created this universe and us please stand up?

@ferdinandkraft857

3 жыл бұрын

Because God (if existent) is evil.

Epitome of open mindedness.

Physical universe from subconscious mind of cosmos; human consciousness perceives God free will, divine being and fullness.

@S3RAVA3LM

3 жыл бұрын

What's the subconscious mind of cosmos?

You have to study words and where they derive from the intrecate order infolding unfolding of the universo its the Graetest story ever told humanity when you measure you leave no room for ignorance simple the being the creature needs to study self

God cannot be proven by argument or experiments. Realizing our true self is realising God. We live in a lower state of consciousness and miss identify our self to be body or mind.

@williamburts5495

3 жыл бұрын

You said, " God cannot be proven by argument or experiments." I agree, because if we could prove God's existence man's ability or potential would be greater than God. You said, " realizing our true self is realizing God." I agree, but while I realize consciousness ( eternity knowing and loving itself ) to be the nature or essence of God since we do exhibit a lower state of consciousness what causes that lower state of consciousness ( maya ) makes our consciousness qualified to be conditioned but God being infinite consciousness and the source of spiritual strength is beyond such material conditioning. God is super consciousness we are finite consciousness sharing the same nature or essence as God makes us qualitatively one in that respect but different as well since we are qualified to be conditioned while God cannot be conditioned since he is the source and maintainer of all that exist.

@cvsree

3 жыл бұрын

@@williamburts5495 totally agree

To prove whether God exists or not We must first know what unique attribute God has, that must be repeated in all creations, and if we find that property as signs in physics and mathematics, we can conclude that God exists. This is what I have been doing for more than 20 years and I have found many wonderful secrets about being with God. I hope one day I can publish them.

@ferdinandkraft857

3 жыл бұрын

What "secrets" have you found, Einstein?

@TremendousSax

Жыл бұрын

Should we come get you with some butterfly nets?

mathematics is The deity

@TracyPicabia

3 жыл бұрын

Those words are not maths and so make no sense

@TracyPicabia

3 жыл бұрын

The deity is the longest known diagonal in a Ulam Spiral (it starts with 41 at the centre)

@TracyPicabia

3 жыл бұрын

...that diagonal consists of a continuous string of prime numbers obviously

Where is the evidence?

@theliamofella

3 жыл бұрын

Evidence for what? There are many different theories discussed here

Theologens got stuck in history they separate the whole Creator. The dream of a dreamer. Mere words

Peace on earth 40 50 more years religiosos a gathering of the people cosmic order de are Star dust we are earth meaning the spirit is in a cosmic rock how is it in me and you. Earth is beautiful also dangerious meddiling in its affaire

Looks like you are running out of clickable subjects

William Dembski's argument is self-defeating. He should be able to see this himself if he has devoted so much energy and time to the subject. He argues on the one hand that when we look for extraterrestrial life we are confident that we can tell the difference between an intelligent signal, and one that is merely the result of nature. But then he talks about evolution and suggests that since evolution resulted in life that we consider to be intelligent, then this means that the natural world must also be intelligent to have produced it. That's a circular argument. Since he argues that this is the case, then he's necessarily arguing that there can be no difference between what we consider to be intelligent and what we don't.

@joshheter1517

3 жыл бұрын

It’s easy to point out that an argument is circular when you construct a straw man of it.

@Mystic0Dreamer

3 жыл бұрын

@@joshheter1517 No straw man required. If he's going to hold that the natural universe is clearly not intelligent compared to aliens, then it makes no sense to turn back around and claim that it is intelligent when it comes to evolution.

@joshheter1517

3 жыл бұрын

@@Mystic0Dreamer What do you mean “compared to aliens”?

@Mystic0Dreamer

3 жыл бұрын

@@joshheter1517 That was his argument. He claims that since we can easily tell the difference between an intelligent signal and a non-intelligent signal coming from outer space this must mean that there is a difference between intelligence and nature. Yet, he then wants to argue that since evolution naturally evolved and appears to us what we deem to be a sign of intelligence, then his argument is that nature must be intelligent to have caused evolution to happen. It's a self-defeating circular argument. He first tries to make the case that we can obviously tell the difference intelligence and natural phenomena, and then tries to use that to claim that natural phenomena must be intelligent because evolution appears to be intelligent to us. It's an extremely bad argument and one that he himself should be able to see the folly with. Besides, no one who understands how evolution works would take such an argument seriously. So he's also living in the ignorance of exactly what evolution demonstrates about the natural world. It doesn't demonstrate intelligent design. In fact if it did, then this would be the conclusion of science. But it's not the conclusion of science. So that should tell you everything you need to know right there.

@joshheter1517

3 жыл бұрын

@@Mystic0Dreamer Yeah, you don’t understand his argument.

Do materialists expect science to do all the work for them? So you need not do any spiritual work: meditation, chakras, kundalini(energy), mental work(cast your net to the right side), comprehend scripture, excersize emotions, righteous qualities, activate pineal, become crowned(aligned chakras). Because the greatest discoveries and innovations were done by men who had a hunch -- they were not settled with the established facts. It was once crazy to think you could fly -- slowly but surely, we can now soar the sky's. Just don't expect materialists -- modern science in general -- to discover the ethereal/spiritual. Even though our science come from the sacred occult. Knowing what the Ancients left us. It's not logic, it's the logic man is limited to. Intuition is far more superior as it's what leads one to new discoveries and breakthrough. Even if the Spiritual is proven, for men of logic, what difference would it make. You haven't it in you to even initiate chakra work... let alone becoming crowned.

@ferdinandkraft857

3 жыл бұрын

How do you activate your pineal?

@S3RAVA3LM

3 жыл бұрын

@@ferdinandkraft857 research what it is first -- the location, position in the brain, its function. Recognize the correspondence & symbology it depicts in the brain. To truly activate pineal requires that your other chakras be activated; aligned. The heart chakra needs be symmetrical and aligned with 3rd eye to acquire being/worthy of crown. Your body is your temple -- maintain: -- emotions -- feelings -- thoughts -- conscious -- awareness -- energy -- balance -- spirit -- essence -- intuition -- mind Research, seek, long, observe, discern, practice; to know, to understand, to acquire wisdom; enlightenment. Nothing is superficial. You need to know the depths in becoming adept; acquire perspective from the height of the eagle. -- meditate -- reflect -- contemplate Synchronicity & symmetry should occur. If you're not Spiritual this is very difficult to achieve. If you are spiritual, this is difficult to achieve.

Kudos -- 444 Gematria -- 🗽

How in the hell does someone get a job talking that much bobbins! From the argument from credulity to the god of the gaps to the puddle analogy. If that’s all it takes then give me a tenure at a prestigious university and I’ll laugh all the way to the bank.

@joshheter1517

3 жыл бұрын

I guess everyone on those tenure committees... and the peer reviewers at the academic philosophy journals... and the editors at the top publishers... all must think those objections you mentioned are pretty shitty. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Prepare for a flood of open-mindedness here in the comments section. 😬

@SumNutOnU2b

3 жыл бұрын

@Troll Trollsen only open-minded people are capable of recognizing open-mindedness in others. So those who don't have it won't see it