[baatar]

Has anyone found a refution to the "Unmoved Mover" idea? I like the argument and can't see a way to defeat it...

[bobbylight]

Originally Posted by baatar

Has anyone found a refution to the "Unmoved Mover" idea? I like the argument and can't see a way to defeat it...

From what I gather all the energy in the universe was in a tiny little area. Then it blew up, and since then the universe has been expanding.

I don't really know much about it.

[baatar]

As far as I can remember, the basics of the "Unmoved Mover" argument are these:

1a. All motion is a reaction to a cause (basic law of cause and effect)

1b. If there is movement, it has to have been caused by something previous...all the way back to the big bang, or whatever

2. If the universe has a beginning, then something outside of our physical realm would have had to have caused its inception, otherwise the "first" movement would have been impossible. Saying the first movement was caused by something in another dimension or parallel universe only delays the question to the beginning of that realm.

The presumed conclusion is that there can be no self-contained realm without an outside source of movement (read: creation) otherwise "cause and effect" would be violated.

[Dysentery]

so its dumb ... thats all you have to say after you were the ones complaining about me not refuting you? if its dumb then refute me and 85% of scientists smart guy.

[bobbylight]

Originally Posted by Dysentery

so its dumb ... thats all you have to say after you were the ones complaining about me not refuting you? if its dumb then refute me and 85% of scientists smart guy.

I'm not trying to argue if God exists or not. I think God exists, you don't, and there are many smart and stupid people on both sides for different reasons. I am just refuting that you can't reason if you believe in God. This is just stupid. Define reasoning, say some people that are good at reasoning, and show why if you believe in God you completely lack reason.

[baatar]

The point is, Dysentery, you are the one who claimed that the non-existence of God has been 100% proven. We just want to see that scientific proof--void of zealous emotion--so we can review the steps and recreate the proof. Like I said before, no real scientist would ever claim to have proven (or disproven) anything outside of the physical world.

[Dysentery]

Originally Posted by bobbylight

I'm not trying to argue if God exists or not. I think God exists, you don't, and there are many smart and stupid people on both sides for different reasons.

yea but the thing about that is is that there actually arent smart people on both sides theres only smart people on one side...

I am just refuting that you can't reason if you believe in God. This is just stupid. Define reasoning, say some people that are good at reasoning, and show why if you believe in God you completely lack reason.

You still haven't refuted my statement that if you believe in god you can't reason well/see the universe accurately without delusion.

[Dysentery]

Originally Posted by baatar

The point is, Dysentery, you are the one who claimed that the non-existence of God has been 100% proven. We just want to see that scientific proof--void of zealous emotion--so we can review the steps and recreate the proof. Like I said before, no real scientist would ever claim to have proven (or disproven) anything outside of the physical world.

This has already ready been refuted with the teapot argument. Russell's teapot - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[bobbylight]

Originally Posted by Dysentery

You still haven't refuted my statement that if you believe in god you can't reason well/see the universe accurately without delusion.

We haven't refuted it because you haven't backed it up with anything.

Here, I will give you something that you have to refute. Fedor is gay and only has a wife for show. Can you refute that? No, of course you can't. You don't have to refute it because in no way have I backed it up. I am the one that needs proof.

You would be great on the debate squad.

[baatar]

so... you don't have a proof you claimed to have? that's ok. plenty of things i believe that i can't prove either--i just don't claim to be able to.