Where is your proof of infinite regress? There is none - However there is proof of contingent beings, which derive from some other transcendent source. I believe in an intelligent designer. I think there are a billion planets out there, to show us how unique we truly are.

Because such an affirmation would violate the law of non-contradiction. Self-causation requires existenceprior to existence meaning that a being would be in potency and in act in the same respect. If it exists, it doesn’t need to be caused, and if it is caused, then at some logical point it did not exist. Hence, self-causation is impossible.

If the universe is finite, it must transcend phsical reality because, self-causation is incoherent. If physical reality was caused to come into being, it could not be caused by some other physical reality since that would require physical reality to exist prior to physical reality existing. It must be caused by a reality that is outside of, beyond, or transcendent to physical reality. That doesn’t bode well for a materialist worldview.

And if the universe is eternal, it still needs a transcendent cause because the universe is contingent, and contingent beings must derive their being from some other transcendent source. Since we are trying to explain the source for the existence of all material reality, obviously the source cannot be something material. The universe cannot pull itself up by its own bootstraps.

The evidence? The evidence wasjustpresented for a starting “being.” Contingent beings (i.e. things) require causes, and those causes cannotextend infinitely into the past. There must be a first cause that is itself not caused. Such a cause must be a necessary being whose existence is not contingent on anything else. Your response makes me wonder if you think “evidence” is a synonym for “empirical.” If so, you have a very flawed epistemology.

If you are curious as to what the chances for intelligent life "randomly"m happening, watch this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ClarWNaCEVM

This post was edited by herbdoc on Nov 6 2014 12:06pm

We don't entirely understand the nature of the big bang, but the best explanation I think is that the universe itself is not contingent, i.e. it has necessary existence, and the initial conditions of the big bang were not caused by anything.

The ultimate issue I have with your position is that I see no reason why the same qualities you ascribe to God (necessary, uncaused, etc.) cannot also apply to the universe.


As per the likelihood of intelligent life being produced, we don't know how likely it is. Not a clue. Part of the problem is that we're subject to selection bias in the most extreme form http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selection_bias , and that we have no other examples of intelligent life outside of Earth.

Perhaps we're the only intelligent life in the universe. But there are 10^22 or more planets in the universe, so it doesn't seem at all strange that even if life has an outrageously low chance of occurring that it wouldn't happen somewhere. It just so happens that only the place it happens would be aware that it happened.

This post was edited by Voyaging on Nov 6 2014 12:32pm

i'm not saying i believe in infinite regress, but to dismiss it as impossible without reason is what i don't accept and i haven't seen anything in your post to prove that an eternal universe is not possible

at first you're saying the universe could not have caused itself to come into existence, this has nothing to do with the idea that it never came into existence

then it looks like you're saying even if the universe always existed, the possibility that it could not exist leads you to some other ideas

this is where i say you're wrong

the material universe as we know it must exist and it is not possible for it not to exist

because it's not possible for all matter and energy to not exist

matter/energy may take various forms/shapes/sizes/distributions but it's always there

lets take it to a simpler idea

why is there something rather than nothing? it's because nothingness doesn't exist, never has never will - something is all that exists and it is not possible for it to not exist

The interesting thing about philosophy is that the majority of the time there is always an open-ended question that can not be answered, especialy when it comes to the cosmos.

If you all think that the earth and the life is sustains exists without purpose or significance in the universe, so be it.

There are billions of planets that are billions of years older than earth. yet zero trace of life.

Two sides of the eqaution:
1: Number of trials
2: Factors

All institutes searching for life elsewhere ALL use the same starting factor for the search of intelligent life
liquid water
-dissolve and transport chemical nutrients
-unmatched capacity to absorb the heat from the sun. critical to regulate earths surface temperature.

Planets distance from it's home star:
Earth is in the goldilocks zone - location location location
Orbiting main sequence G2 dwarf star (only 10% of the stars in the galaxy) If the star were smaller, we'd need to be closer. Putting us in synchronization with the stars orbit. In lesser words, bad.
Protected by gas giant planets (shielding earth from too many impacts)
within circumstellar habital zone
nearly circular orbit
Oxygen - rich atmosphere
Correct mass
Orbitied by a largemoon (stabilizes angle of axis - 23 1/2 degrees - insuring temperate seasonal changes)
Magnetic field (protecting us from solar winds)
plate tectonics (Must be 30-40 miles, Regulates earths temperature)
Ratio of liquid water and continents
terrestrial planet
moderate rate of rotation
atmosphere - 78% nitrogen 21% oxygen - 1% carbon dioxide

all these elements need to be there at the same time.
1/1,000,000,000,0000,000 of a chance

The earth is a very special place.
_________________________________________________________________________
10/24/1995
Northern India - Total Eclipse of the Sun

Requirements for producing such an event?
Luminous body(sun) - Eclipsing body (moon) - observing platform (earth) and in a straight line
The apparent size of moon has to be the same as the apparent size of the sun in the sky.
The sun is 400x bigger than the moon and it is also 400x further away.
The sun is the perfect distance to create liquid water
The moon is the perfect distance to create the appropriate tilt to create gravity and our magnetic field which protects us.

If you think our planet is here by chance, then that's your right.

blessings to you

This post was edited by herbdoc on Nov 6 2014 01:19pm

the same narrow circumstances that allow us to exist also provide us with the best overall setting for making scientific discoveries.
flash spectrum appears when the eclipse is viewed through a prism. only during a total eclipse.

GAMMA
XRAY
ULATRIOLET
VISIBLE
INFRARED
MICROWAVE
RADIO

Together they comprise the electromagnetic spectrum. Almost of these wave lengths are invisible to the eye and either lethal or useless to organic life.

Yet in this spectrum a thin sliver of radiation proves essential to plants, animals, and human beings. life couldn't evolve using gamma or xray.

as it turns out that thin sliver, that is essential to life. represent less than 1 trillionth of a trillionth ( 1/1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 ) of the universes range of natural electromagnetic emissions fortunately it is the type of light that our sun produces. that is also most easily penetrable into our atmosphere.

it's a remarkable coincidence the type of atmosphere that's needed for complex life, like ourselves, does not preclude that life from observing the distant universe. why would the universe be such that, those places that are most habitable also offer the best places for scientific discovery?

This post was edited by herbdoc on Nov 6 2014 03:26pm

There are about 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 planets in the observable universe, so this isn't surprising at all.

people still rely on the fine tuning argument ?

This post was edited by duffman316 on Nov 6 2014 03:47pm

Rely on it? Of course I do. It's there and it's factual. Did you even read what I wrote? do you seriously believe that our "fine tuning" just happened? *Poof*? Show me the evidence that you have to support that earth is completely random. Show me anything that is close to evidence.

drop a glass of milk and in a billion years, a perfect smaller glass of milk MUST form, right?


tell me, what do you suggest i believe in? What evidence do you have for your beliefs?

This post was edited by herbdoc on Nov 6 2014 04:21pm

nice open-ended response, to the 600 word post.

A+

If you don't agree with what I posted, what do you believe in? That our perfect planet just randomly formed itself?

This post was edited by herbdoc on Nov 6 2014 04:24pm

I figured my point showed how obvious it was that your premises are false. Intelligent life arising is extremely unlikely for any particular planet, but with the sheer number of planets the fact that it happened somewhere isn't surprising in the slightest.

I'm not saying you should change your beliefs or anything, just that your arguments in defense of your beliefs are based on falsities and you should look elsewhere for evidence.



No, randomness does not exist.

This post was edited by Voyaging on Nov 6 2014 04:28pm