[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 13 KB, 633x758, 1437065426474.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8975379 No.8975379[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

>scientists have to invent pseudoscience BS like the multiverse just to avoid the fact the fined tuned argument is solid evidence of God's existance, therefore making their atheism obsolete
>mfw I though scientists used to believe in shit like Ocam razor and looking at the evidence without ideology
>tfw science can't escape ideology

>> No.8975385

you are a smart guy

>> No.8975399

>>8975385
For you.

>> No.8975400

>>8975379
http://www.4chan.org/rules#sci
See if you can find which one you broke, brainlet.

>> No.8975402

>>8975400
I'm not talking about religion retard.
I'm talking about how scientists don't accept the fined tuned universe because of ideology.

>> No.8975403

>>8975379
>solid evidence
Hahahahahhaha
Oh wait, you're serious?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
All joking aside, weak bait

>> No.8975411
File: 11 KB, 528x286, godel ontological.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8975411

>>8975379
this is true, it can also be shown mathematically using modal logic as in Kurt Gödel's Ontological Proof

>> No.8975419

>>8975403
he is referring to the fine tuning constants of quantum electrodynamics which have been measured to many decimal points to be very precisely defined real numbers

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine-structure_constant

>> No.8975420

>>8975411
The Ontological Proof (at least as I've seen it explained by atheists that can understand logicianspeak better than I can) asserts that God can neither be proven nor disproven using logic, not that it's literal proof a God exists.

>> No.8975424

>>8975420
see
>>8975419

>> No.8975429

>>8975402
>solid evidence of God's existence
>not related to religion

>> No.8975430

Should there be a rule limiting /sci/ to one christfag thread at a time?

>> No.8975431

>>8975429
>he doesn't know the fine tuned constants proved intelligent design

>> No.8975440

>>8975431
The constants are not "fine tuned"
Maybe for this planet...IF we are lucky enough to get to space travel and resource harvesting...
As for the existance of God...how about I wager this.
If your God can get us all acces to space and the cosmos I will accept him in full...

>> No.8975441

Oh hey, what's this?
https://journals.aps.org/prd/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevD.95.103504
>This result suggests that there is no necessity to introduce the cosmological constant, which is required to be fine tuned to an accuracy of 10−120, or other forms of dark energy, which are required to have peculiar negative pressure, to explain the observed accelerating expansion of the Universe.

>> No.8975443

>>8975431
Saying "science proves that my religion is real" doesn't mean this isn't a retarded religion thread that belongs on /pol/.

>> No.8975444

>>8975379
The multiverse does not exclude God....
To understand the multiverse you gotta understand chaos....

>> No.8975447

Not all scientists

>> No.8975462

The laws of the universe are completely arbitrary and the fact that they are 'perfect' means nothing at all.

>> No.8975597
File: 136 KB, 930x1024, Grant Chaser's Cycle.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8975597

>>8975379
>he doesn't know how grant chasing works

kek

>> No.8975604

>>8975597
That isn't science....That is science business.

>> No.8975608

>>8975411
All ontological arguments are inherently circular. You can use it to prove that literally anything exists.