10_penn

Let's just pretend that sometime in the future science might just figure out the secret for starting life from simple proteins and amino acids. Would you still stand behind your statement? Just because we don't have the understanding for that part of science yet doesn't mean that it is not possible. Think of the ancient civilizations that had gods for the movements of the sun, moon, and planets around the earth. They also had gods of the sky, the waters, etc... The defenders of these gods and cultures at the time probably would defend them as defiantly as many religious people do today. "The fact that the sun and moon are even there at all is proof of our gods' existence." But what happened after all these phenomenon were explained by science? We look back at these cultures and gods and think of them as rediculous... "How could they possibly believe that??" But what happens if, (and this is only if...) in a thousand years, when science might be able to explain the origin of life from proteins and amino acids, and can go faster than the speed of light, and possibly travel back in time (a feat that was recently deemed impossible)... what will your argument be then?

That's pretty neat.

If you have evidence to the contrary, then please provide it.

I did not really know much about any of that. I will be doing some homework later

As for my own personal belief? I am torn right now. The evidence is really not there for the actual man named Jesus, and I am truly doubting any divinity towards him if he did exist. I'm not so educated on the Roman empire, so I cannot begin to answer that pretending like I am educated on it.

This statement is simply not true. The evidence for a mortal man named Jesus is very lacking. Of all the historians and scholars who lived at the same time as Jesus, there is no evidence that any one of them referenced him or even knew about him. Flavius Josephus is often cited as proof, but the fact is, he wasn't even born until 37 AD, 4 years after Jesus' supposed crucifixion. By the time he would come of age to actually remember names and places, it would have been a decade after. This is if you completely ignore the fact that Josephus mention of Jesus (Testimonium Flavianum) is considered by many to be a forgery. Even with this forgery, Josephus only mentions Jesus twice in all his writings. On the contrary, many other significant people of ancient history, around the same time as Jesus, do have historical records.

So, just because billions of people believe in something makes it right? You are Christian, no? According to your argument, if billions of people believe something, it must be right. What about the billions of Muslims in the world? There is a difference. The claims made by science are supported by evidence. If you had the time, money, and will, anything claimed by science can be tested by yourself and you can prove or disprove anything that science can claim. Religion... well... I guess it's all faith. So, what things have you seen to make you believe in it? I'm genuinely interested. I hate to come off like an ass, but with your responses and apparent lack of education on these issues, I wonder if it is even worth my time to reply. If you can come back with logical arguments, so that you actually sound like something other than a rambling idiot, then please do.

This claim has also been contested...

You're right, Paley's argument was great for its time. He was a Christian apologist and philosopher, so he was almost biased from the beginning. So, I think that's what his intentions were from the get-go. Dawkins is a really good read, he's written several other books. He is a professor at Oxford and has served as an evolutionary biologist for several years. He is actually a well-known critic of religion (in general) and is probably on the forefront of atheism. This allegory of Plato's was something I came across in my Philosophy classes. It's best to read and imagine, maybe even draw a picture or something while reading it to best understand the allusion he is making.

After reading the two pdf's, I actually remember reading Paley's a while ago. Hume is another philosopher that I have studied, but I don't remember reading this specific piece before. Paley's argument can basically be summarized as this - If there is a watch, there must be a watch-maker. If there is a universe, there must be a universe-maker. The complexity of a watch obviously points to a designer, as it is a work of art, not a natural phenomena. Obviously, you have read this, so there is not much more that I need to summarize regarding this. I will say, however, that other than the list of unresolved problems in science, (Wikipedia - List of Unsolved Problems in Physics), including the pre-Big Bang and the start of evolution, the majority of occurrences that we can observe in the universe can be scientifically explained. (Again, those problems are unsolved, but just because there is not an explanation for them yet, does not mean that such an explanation does not exist, if only beyond our current understanding) If you flipped a coin and wanted to predict heads or tails when it landed, you theoretically could. That is, if you had all the information needed to predict this, such as : pressure, temperature, density of the air mass, temperature, size, shape, thickness, density of the coin height of the coin before it's journey rate of acceleration upwards highest point distance to ground rate of rotation of the coin gravity (if not on earth's average of 9.79 meters per second per second) etc....... I believe his argument can be interpreted as the fact that there is life perhaps means that life itself is art, and since it is art, cannot possibly exist naturally. That's what I got out of it anyway. Paley's argument was also about half a century before Darwin's famous On the Origin of the Species. At the time he wrote this, there was no (or little) belief that all life may have originated from common ancestors. So finding an explanation for origin was probably not understood or accepted as it might be today. Richard Dawkins tackles this same watchmaker analogy in his book The Blind Watchmaker. He offers explanations based on his observations and experiences as an evolutionist. Towards the end of the book, he critiques the circular reasoning that theists often ignore, that if there were a god to create and design the intricacies and complexities of life, say specifically humans, then that god would have to have had a creator or designer as well (if not, where would he have come from?) which begs the question of where god's designer came from, then where god's designer's designer came from, and the endless cycle would continue. It could be argued that each pre-designer would logically be more and more complex than those that he designed. Hume's was a little harder to read, considering I've had little sleep the last few days. I might have to come back at a later time for a response to this one. I would also like to get your take on Plato's Allegory of the Cave... http://www.historyguide.org/intellect/allegory.html

I will definitely take a look at these pdf's, but I worked a double shift today, and am working tonight. I will get to them tomorrow, and get back to you.

I guess we will have to just agree to disagree on the extraordinary claim. I don't believe that the claim of nothing being there is more or equally as extraordinary than believing an all-powerful, all-knowing god is there. To prove the existence of a higher being, short of a physical appearance or miracles-on-demand, requires an argument of logic. But this is an area where people must be careful. Take Ray Comfort, who argued that the banana and the human hand appear to be perfectly made for each other. He claims that God, in his infinite wisdom, made the banana with 3 ridges on top, 2 on the bottom, which fits within the grooves of the hand. He goes on to say that the banana's non-slip surface made it easier to grip, the tab on the top placed there for ease of peeling to eat, and the slight curvature of the banana perfect for eating. All this is evidence of a supernatural, metaphysical being who designed the banana specifically for human consumption. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QGMuIyBK5P4 Unfortunately, many people listened to this man's absurdity. He was not just wrong, he was very wrong. The yellow banana we know of today has only been around since 1836, and was developed using genetics to gather the best attributes of other types of bananas and plantains. It quickly gained popularity and was widely distributed. Many people listened to this man because he was a friend of Kirk Cameron's, and they produced a "documentary" together. Many Christians believed every word he said, and (no pun intended) ate up the banana story. Even after it's been disproven several times since, they still cite the banana story as fact, evidence, proof of a god. I'm all about having logical arguments with people on this topic, but those who are educated enough to have those arguments come few and far between. For the big bang theory... just because we don't know something yet or cannot explain something yet doesn't mean that there is not, or will not be an explanation of it someday. I refer back to the ancient cultures, where they could not explain how the Moon orbited the Earth. This was beyond their explanation, and obviously higher power than them, so they made up a god to govern the movements of the moon. That god all but disappeared when science and astronomy were able to explain the movements of the moon, gravity, etc.. They could not explain it, they did not have the capacity or the knowledge to at the time. But this does not mean that an explanation was not possible. Centuries later it was. Maybe (just maybe) there is an explanation for the origin of the singularity, or whatever came before the big bang. We just (again) do not have the knowledge, technology, or capacity to explain it away yet. So, as of today, there is still a god. ^Not necessarily what I believe, but I try to keep an open mind.^

I guess I am unclear of your position. How is an atheist's claim of no god more extraordinary than a theist's claim that there is a god? Just because an atheist is going against the common belief? How do you prove that there is not a god? The origin of the universe still falls within the realm of philosophy/religion, as we are talking about it here. If we were to talk about the matter, heat, light, etc... then yes, it is definitely science and not philosophy. But if we are talking about the origin, and what came before the singularity, then that is entirely philosophical, as there is no way to scientifically prove anything past a certain point. Everything beyond that is speculation. I guess you're right, because I didn't have any extraordinary evidence to back up my sources. For the record, I like having educational conversations like this. I do not get mad, in fact, I like trying to take different points of view. Enlightening conversations are hard to come by. It does not happen very often in my line of work.

You have it backwards. Atheists are not making any extraordinary claims, the theists are. And as you are probably aware, "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." While this might be a difference of opinion between you and me, and respectfully so, the majority of logical, reasonable people would disagree with you. Saying that there is no God is not an extraordinary claim, where on the contrary, saying that there is a God and that the Bible is factually accurate IS an extraordinary claim. This requires the burden of proof, which there is none. And just like you said : This goes for the theists, too. The big bang theory does not ever say that there was nothing, it says that there was a singularity. A single point at which all matter in the universe existed. A point of infinite density, heat, and energy. This extraordinary claim is backed up by mountains of extraordinary evidence, from galaxies redshifting away to lab tests done in the particle accelerators of CERN in Europe.

While I do understand and agree with most of your points, the burden of proof is on the believers to prove the existence of God, not the disbelievers to prove he does not exist. A banana and a hand (a common example that theists use) is not sufficient proof for the existence of God. Neither is the Cosmological argument, where "stuff exists, it couldn't have been put there by itself, therefore, God exists." Using false reason to deduce an existence of a Deity is not proof.

If anybody has one laying around or one they can spare, please PM me or reply to the thread to let me know. I can pay money today.

I am looking to sell or trade my AEM Fluid Pressure gauge (can read oil or fuel pressure) and a Schrader-type fuel rail fitting in exchange for an AEM boost gauge. I have only had the gauge for a few months, and it appears to be in good working order now (the original sensor was faulty so it was replaced with a new one). The gauge will come with all wiring and sensor/gauge, and different color faceplates and bezels to customize it to what you want. It also comes with oil/fuel faceplates to set up what you want to read with it. I have this : AEM Fuel Pressure Gauge 0-100psi and this : Caspers Electronics 102071 - Caspers Electronics Fuel Line Tap Schrader Tee Fittings - Overview - SummitRacing.com and I want to trade for this : AEM Boost Gauge with Digital Face - Wideband O2 UEGO, Water/Methanol, Stand Alone Engine Management, Piggyback F/IC, Tru Boost Controller, Gauges, Automotive Performance Electronics Here are some pics of it installed in the car : http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b224/azn_ladie82/DSC08724.jpg http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b224/azn_ladie82/DSC08722.jpg Here it is still in the box when I first received it. It is in the smaller square box in the lower left : http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b224/azn_ladie82/DSC08683.jpg I am looking for a trade plus $50, or, if someone just wants to buy, I will sell the gauge and the fitting for $200 shipped. The gauge is valued at $210, and the fitting at around $15, so you are saving more than $25 on the parts, and shipping is included. (The AEM boost gauge is valued at around $150 for the 35psi one, which is what I am looking for. I am NOT looking for the AEM TruBoost gauge.)

cool. thanks for the advice. now just to find that tool...

yeah thats what i was thinking. you'd need to take the ring and set it in the cylinder, to make sure the end gap is ok. unless you happen to have a 86mm sleeve? lol

it's an 86 mm bore x 86 mm stroke "square engine" so, you are correct, 86mm = 3.3858 inches you are saying .02, as in 20 thousandths?

this is very good info, thanks a lot! i would need to have a tool with me doing this, as i am doing this in my garage per each cylinder, and want to make sure there are no variances between cylinders. the car currently has 59k miles on the sleeves and there may be some variance between each, am i correct in thinking this?

thanks a lot for your link, koolrayz. and thanks vinny. hopefully i can do this right the first time, i don't want there to be a second time

copy that, thank you sir.

lisle? site/company? person?

gotcha. thanks again GH