Atheists Have No Holiday?

Originally posted by Evil Dead
Not one thing you have just posted or have ever posted is evidence that a god #1 exists or #2 is responsible for anything in our universe if he did exist. Don't feel bad.......religious folk have been talking and talking for 4000 years and still haven't provided any evidence.

Deductively speaking God (the All-powerful, All-wise Creator according to the Bible) is the only possible adequate cause for the existence of this astounding universe together with its wonderful phenomenas. All other theories fail to establish themselves as adequate causes for the monolithic amount of matter, energy, and degree of sophistication that is present in this universe. Just check out the amount of sophistication and complication exists in just one cell of the human body and yet there are an innumerable host of cells (times that by the number of humans who have ever lived up to the present).

http://nwcreation.net/abiogenesis.html

http://www.doesgodexist.org/MayJun01/NewPlanetsDemonstrateEarthsUniqueness.html

http://nwcreation.net/articles/howlifebegin.html

there is no such thing as "deductively speaking"........even if you had all the knowledge in the uninvers to deduce from.

Either something can be proven fact by physical evidence or data it emits or it cannot. That's it, end of story.

what you are left with is a "belief".........one that you can yell about until the cows come home but at the end of the day, it's still merely a belief held by you.

opinions are funny things when those who possess the opinion flaunt it around as fact.

The whole thing about God, is the theory isn't falsifiable; a Christian will have a set answer for every question. Popper would regard this as meaning that it's invalid.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
The Christians have Christmas and Easter, the Jews celebrate Passover, Yom Kippur, and Rosh Hashanah, but what do the atheists have? [B]Should there be "Atheist Day?"

Jokingly some have stated that the atheists holiday is April 1 (April Fools Day).

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=atheist+day [/B]

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
So, should there be an atheist day?

Or we could just devote all the normal days to atheists, since they aren't celebrating any religious holidays? Makes things fair, as long as I get paid vacations with all my days off due to my atheist "beliefs" lolzazz

Originally posted by AngryManatee
Or we could just devote all the normal days to atheists, since they aren't celebrating any religious holidays? Makes things fair, as long as I get paid vacations with all my days off due to my atheist "beliefs" lolzazz

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Why do atheists get married? Isn't a wedding a religious event? Isn't marriage an institution founded on religious underpinning?

Also, tax cuts.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Technically, you do not know [B]for certain that you were born on your supposed birthday, you only know what someone else typed on your birth certificate and what someone told you. Hence, you are exercising belief and/or faith in your birthdate being on the day that you have come to know and understand. [/B]

I have evidence and know it beyond any reasonable doubt.

Your pedanticism in trying to make out it is not certain is entirely useless- not to mention once again quite stupid if you actually think it is a worthwhile point.

However, JIA, you are taking this thread entirely off-topic, and if it does not get back onto it I will close.

Originally posted by Evil Dead
there is no such thing as "deductively speaking"........even if you had all the knowledge in the uninvers to deduce from.

Either something can be proven fact by physical evidence or data it emits or it cannot. That's it, end of story.

what you are left with is a "belief".........one that you can yell about until the cows come home but at the end of the day, it's still merely a belief held by you.

Early Calculations
Given the data available in 1979, Roger Penrose (a world-class mathematician) calculated the odds of our observed universe occurring by accident to be less than one in 10^(10^30). The calculation was based on thermodynamics and entropy considerations. Since 1979, additional Anthropic coincidences have been discovered, making random occurrence even more unlikely.
As you may know, in mathematics, probabilities of less than one part in 10^30 to 10^50 are typically written off as being zero. And 10^30 is 100000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000, i.e., 1 followed by 30 zeros; 10^50 is 1 followed by 50 zeros.
Penrose's calculated probability was one part in 10^(10^30), which is 1 followed by 10^30 zeros. And 10^30 is itself 1 followed by 30 zeros. So, the probability works out to be one part in 10^(100000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000), i.e., 10 raised to the power of 100000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000, or 1 followed by a thousand billion billion billion zeros (i.e., 1 followed by a nonillion zeros).
Epistemic Probability: 0.0000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 … … … … … 00001
If I were to write this number out, as 0.0000 0000 …, with all of its zeros, we would need a computer hard-drive much larger than the size of our entire universe, just to hold all of the zeros that I would have to write out.
So, what does all this mean? It means that it is reasonable to conclude that our universe did not get here by accident. The epistemic-probability is far too low for the universe to have arisen by random chance. The evidence (observation of extremely-low epistemic-probability) points to an Intelligent Designer (God) having designed, created and fine-tuned the universe.
We will continue to see this theme, of extreme low-probabilities (epistemic-probabilities), as we look at some of the Anthropic Coincidences below.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A few of the Anthropic Coincidences (Fine-Tuning the Universe)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Big-bang
The explosive-force of the big-bang had to be fine-tuned to match the strength of gravity to one part in 10000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000.
This is one part in 10^60. The number 10^60 = 1 followed by 60 zeros.
This precision is the same as the odds of a random shot (bullet from a gun) hitting a one-inch target from a distance of 20 billion light-years.
Epistemic probability: 0.00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00001

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Density-of-matter in the Big-bang
In the big-bang, the density-of-matter in the universe after Planck time (fraction of a second after the big-bang) had to be matched to the critical-density to better than one part in 10000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000.
This is one part in 10^50, which is 1 followed by 50 zeros.
Epistemic probability: 0.00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00001

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The inflationary Big-bang
In the inflationary big-bang, the cosmological constant and a particular force need to be fine-tuned for galaxies and planets to form.
The net result is a situation with an epistemic-probability of one part in 10^81, which is 1 followed by 81 zeros.
Epistemic probability: 0.00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 1

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lambda in the inflationary Big-bang
In the inflationary big-bang, bare-lambda and quantum-lambda (two components of the cosmological constant) had to be fine-tuned to cancel each other to better than one part in 10000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000, for galaxies and planets to form.
This is one part in 10^50, which is 1 followed by 50 zeros.
Epistemic probability: 0.00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00001

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Strong Force
The strong-force (which binds particles in atomic nuclei) had to be balanced with the weak-nuclear-force to about one part in 10000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000.
This is one part in 10^60, which is 1 followed by 60 zeros.
Epistemic probability: 0.00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00001

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gravity
The force of gravity had to be tuned to one part in 10000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000, for stars capable of supporting-life to exist (based on balancing electromagnetic forces with gravitational forces).
This is one part in 10^40, which is 1 followed by 40 zeros.
Epistemic probability: 0.00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00001

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Electrons & Protons
The number of electrons had to be matched to the number of protons to one part in 10000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00, for formation of stars and planets.
This is one part in 10^37, which is 1 followed by 37 zeros.
Epistemic probability: 0.00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 01

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carbon Resonance
A nuclear resonance had to be created for formation of carbon (via alpha particle collision with Beryllium-8) and then tuned to close to a specific energy, to enable a brief window of opportunity for formation of carbon.
Without this, there would be negligible carbon in the universe.
Carbon is the only element designed to be capable of forming the long molecular-chains necessary for the complexity required by life (silicon for instance forms much shorter and less versatile chains that are not specified-complex enough).

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oxygen Resonance
A nuclear resonance for formation of oxygen had to be tuned to prevent complete cannibalization of carbon (via alpha-particle collision with carbon, resulting in oxygen).
If the oxygen-resonance were half a percent higher, there would be negligible carbon in the universe and on earth. Carbon is the only element designed to be capable of forming the long molecular-chains necessary for the complexity required by life.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Particle masses
Proton, neutron and electron masses had to be fine-tuned to enable life.
For instance, free neutrons decay to form protons. If the proton mass were slightly higher, the opposite would happen, resulting in a universe full of neutronium.
There would be no elements (no hydrogen, oxygen, carbon) and no way to create the molecular-complexity required for life.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weak Nuclear Force
The weak-nuclear force had to be fine-tuned to enable life.
Slightly stronger, and no helium or heavier elements would form. And there would be no means to create the molecular-complexity required for life.
Slightly weaker, and no hydrogen would remain (to provide fuel for steady-burning stars needed as sources of energy for life).
Also, supernova explosions would not be able to disperse the medium-to-heavy elements created in stars.
Elements such as carbon (for molecular chains basic to life), iron (for hemoglobin), copper and other elements used in life-forms were originally created in stars, then dispersed by supernova explosions, to finally reach/coalesce into earth…

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dimensions
The number of dimensions in our universe had to be fine-tuned to enable life.
The topological, and physical laws of the universe need more than two spatial-dimensions, and less than five extended-dimensions for stability and the complexity required for life…
This requirement is met in our universe, with 3 extended spatial-dimensions and 1 temporal dimension.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carbon chemistry
Lee Smolin (a world-class physicist and a leader in quantum gravity) estimates that if the physical constants of the universe were chosen randomly, the epistemic-probability of ending up with a world with carbon chemistry is less than one part in 10^220.
This epistemic-probability is one part in: 10000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 0.
Epistemic Probability: 0.0000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 1

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cosmological Flatness
Lee Smolin (physicist) estimates the epistemic-probability for the "equivalent-temperature" of the universe being such as to enable cosmological flatness, to be one part in 10^32.
Epistemic Probability: 0.00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 01

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quantum Gravity & Cosmological Flatness
Looking at Quantum Gravity and what it would take to obtain Flat Euclidean 3D space upto cosmological scales (as observed in our universe) …
Calculating the epistemic probability of this occurring by random chance, using spin-networks from Roger Penrose, applied to quantum gravity by Lee Smolin and co-scientists. The number of predicted spin-network nodes in our universe would be at least 10^180. And allowing a 10% deviation from cosmological flatness, we end up with an epistemic-probability of less than one part in 10^(10^180).
This is one part in 10^(10^180), which is 10 followed by 10^180 zeros.
Epistemic Probability: 0.0000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 … … … … … 00001
If I were to write this number out, as 0.0000 0000 …, with all of its zeros, we would need a computer hard-drive much larger than the size of our entire universe, just to hold all of the zeros that I would have to write out.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The big-bang (reprise)
The big-bang had to result in a universe with relatively low-entropy (a high degree of thermodynamic-order), which could then proceed to increase in entropy with time, thus enabling formation of galaxies, stars, planets and ultimately enabling life to function once it was created.
In 1989 Roger Penrose (a world-class mathematician) calculated the precision required to create our universe with the necessary thermodynamic-order and to send it on its way (to develop in a manner compatible with life). His calculated precision was one part in 10^(10^123).
This is one part in 10^(10^123), which is 10 followed by 10^123 zeros.
Epistemic Probability: 0.0000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 … … … … … 00001
If I were to write this number out, as 0.0000 0000 …, with all of its zeros, we would need a computer hard-drive much larger than the size of our entire universe, just to hold all of the zeros that I would have to write out.
So, what does all this mean? It means that it is reasonable to conclude that our universe did not get here by accident. The epistemic-probabilities are far too low for the universe to have arisen by random chance. The numerous observations of extremely-low epistemic-probabilities, point to an Intelligent Designer (God) having designed, created and fine-tuned the universe.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The list grows
The list (above) is by no means an exhaustive list of the Anthropic coincidences. There are many more such coincidences in the literature.
As I have mentioned, these Anthropic coincidences (and the need for them) are a very unexpected turn of events, as I consider an Atheistic Universe…
The Anthropic Coincidences were one set of evidence that pointed me away from Atheism and towards an Intelligent Designer of the Universe (i.e., God).
The "Anthropic coincidences" or "evidences of fine-tuning" are consistent with Christianity, and are in fact along the lines of what I would expect if the Christian God exists (based on our discussion of the three ways God works in the universe, "naturally", "providentially", and "miraculously".)

http://www.godsci.org/gs/new/finetuning.html

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Should there be an "atheist day."

Sure why not, if it get's me off work and allows for a few drinks!

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Early Calculations
Given the data available in 1979

hysterical

Edit: I also got a kick about the quantum gravity part, which seems kind of hypocritical of you to represent considering it goes against your classical understanding of physics.

Originally posted by AngryManatee
hysterical

You are avoiding the facts.

your facts are 28 years out of date, please provide something a little more up-to-date.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
The Christians have Christmas and Easter, the Jews celebrate Passover, Yom Kippur, and Rosh Hashanah, but what do the atheists have? [B]Should there be "Atheist Day?"

Jokingly some have stated that the atheists holiday is April 1 (April Fools Day).

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=atheist+day [/B]

Atheists can have any holiday they wish too. They can even have all of them.

April's fools day should there day.Or Halloween.Anyway why give them a day?jm

Originally posted by AngryManatee
your facts are 28 years out of date, please provide something a little more up-to-date.

The facts have enduring value.

Originally posted by ADarksideJedi
April's fools day should there day.Or Halloween.Anyway why give them a day?jm

April Fool's day?

😂