The Science Illusion

asep48garut60 wrote: Dear Tim the plumber, If so, anything that has happened or the history happened like what, obviously I believe in the word of Allah that at the time it happened a big flood. Thank you. Regards, Asep

I don't understand your reply.

Are you saying that there was a flood which covered all the world with Noah's arc landing on a mountain in what is now Turkey or something else?

Perhaps that there was a big flood and the story has grown in the telling?

Do you get that the world's surface says that there was never a world flood?

@QE

I can�t see any basis for your claim that a no-Creator based model will need lesser assumptions compared to a Creator based model.

I gave you (some of) my reasons, they were in my initial list to which you never replied to.
-------------------------------------------------------

In fact a no-Creator based model will always have more assumptions as such a model leaves man with the onerous task to explain everything which clearly he is not capable of. I can give you many examples; here we go with a few...

Ok, I take the challenge. I suggest I will start to give you my answers sometimes accompanied with a related counter question which you answer with your logic until we`re thru.
Once done we summarize, so let's go:
--------------------------------------------------------

What suggests universe can get self-created?

Did you read the articles I posted ? It is clearly explained. The keywords are "Quantum fluctuations" and Heisenbergs Uncertainty principle.

So my counter question was (and still is): How did God create the Universe according to you ?
--------------------------------------------------------

Why should the universes get self-created?

For the same reason an apple falls from the tree - the (everlasting) laws of nature.
--------------------------------------------------------

Why among the zillions of galaxies (self created??) one attained a special status (again by itself?)?

Regarding how galaxies formed we have a rather clear idea on how it came this far. Starting with the big bang, formation of quarks, later electrons, protons, gravitational pull, Hydrogen burning to He and heavier elements (i.e. during super novaes), subsequent condensation which formed planets and the earth as we know it today.
The reason why our galaxy seems special to us is the Antropic Principle. In a nutshell this means that our Galaxy/solar system seems special because we are in it/here to watch it. It is us that name/make it special !
------------------------------------------------------

Why amongst the millions of normal stars, the solar system got chosen (again by itself?) with a provision of life in earth (again by itself?)?

See my answer above. Again: Nobody (outside) has chosen our solar system - we identified it as such, that's all.
Much easier isn't it ?
--------------------------------------------------------

Why after billions of years of earth�s existence it got decided (again by itself) to self create life on earth and from that moment this process of self creation got terminated by itself so that no human is able to witness this fantastic process?

First your statement is plain wrong: Life emerged almost immediately after the conditions (i.e. Temperature) became right. Before it was just too hot to bear life. (so not after billions of years as you claim).
Of course you hammer on this point because you do know that we have (so-far) no conclusive theory. Having said so your answer is "because God" created it. What you miss however is a model on how he did it.
So my counter question is again: How did he do it ? I'd like to get a description that goes beyond: He can do as he pleases!
-------------------------------------------------------

Why the self created intelligence of humans have somehow fallen short of the self created intelligence of this self created universe so that humans are still left to look for answers with no success so far?

For being honest, I truely don't understand this question. What has the fact that we do not know everything got to do with the idea of a creator ?
Do you silently assume: "Since we do not know everything someone else has to ?"
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Why is it that whilst man is able to think and make choices about his life to some extent, he doesn�t have the absolute ability to carry out his will? For e.g. he cannot say I don�t want to die. � Why?

Again I don't see what you try to say. Of course can you say "I don't want to die" but I don't think that the biological clock that evolution has wired into our genes will care much about this statement.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Why did life come into existence?

For the same reason as before: Because the laws of nature are such that they allow/favour the formation of life.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Why man cannot create life?

We are only two steps away from it
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Why man cannot stop death?

Who says that we can't ? It is likely that will we manage to extend life to hundreds of years, may be even "for ever". This will however not stop death because accidents will continue to happen.
Tell me if you want the scientific references to this subject.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Why should the self created planets then get in to a self initiated, self sustained motion?

It is (deliberately ?) misleading from your side to claim that planets self create. Either you really don't know and in this case you should rather abstain from this kind of discussion, or you do know and in this case you try to reroute the discussion with cheap rhetorical tricks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Why should the self created life then manifest itself in male-female pairs under various life forms?

C'mon QE! As before - in the best case you are kidding
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Why do humans have a conscience?

If you manage to give me a clear definition on what "conscience" means I will try to answer your question.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Why is man the way he is? Why cannot he self design himself?

Again, you're out of phase. The knowledge we have acquired in genetics would of course allow us to alter the human being. I think there are good reasons that we shouldn't.
Tell me if you (truly) want the scientific references to this subject.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Why there are physical barriers in this self created universe that prevents man from carrying out his will?

Almightiness is a religious construction. Why should we be almighty ? What would it prove ?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Why there are predefined parameters that provide different set of skills to different people?

Because we have different genes, different education and different societies. Not sure what you want to prove with this question.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Why there are inequalities in the distribution of resources in this world?

There are many good models about this. I am willing to discuss them if you give me a good reason why this should be relevant in this context.
Two lines are too short and would come out as w(h)ishy washy as the Quran.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Why is man unable to bridge all such inequalities?

It is not that we are unable, but we have a heavy evolutionary burden which prevents us from being efficient in it. A good starting point would be if you read Richard Dawkins "The selfish gene".
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Why is it that some people have to go through sufferings while some others seem to enjoy a better life and such disparities never get fully balanced in this world?

This is exactly the question I asked you when it came to the two year old child dying of malaria. See below.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

How was time created?

A indeed difficult question. In the articles I send you time came into existence when the universe formed on the basis of everlasting laws of nature. I consider this as the most likely answer. Quarks, electrons and Protons where also absent before, why should time not ?
I could attempt a more physical answer based on the time independent Schr�dinger equation but I doubt that you'd follow and I am admittedly not sure whether my attempt would make it through the scientific reviewer committee.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

...The point is very relevant�Creator is a matter of choice and is clearly beyond the realm of an evidence based approach.

I am pleased that you admit that you do not claim the existence of a creator as being evidence based.
This is a reasonable starting point for discussion.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There is no basis to assume that a no-Creator based model will require less number of assumptions.

As you already understood this is where we disagree. Besides the trait "everlasting" (which we both need for our theories) you make the additional assumption of the existence of a (superior) being and if this was not already enough you overload this being by characterizing it with human attributes (Merciful, forgiving etc).
To make this already bad situation worse you add (without any evidence whatsoever) that this being (where you admit that you do not have any proof for its existence) must be omniscient and -even worse- almighty.
This is my core point, and I'd like you to reply to this argument on logical ground (= without irrelevant Quran citations)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So the fact that things remain beyond your comprehension cannot be a criterion while exercising the choice in the matter of a Creator.

Correct, but Occams razor can.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Whereas it should be an eye opener for any thinking man that when his evidence based approach fails, he need to look for alternatives.

In a way yes, but so far I have always surprised how cheap the alternative explanations I've seen are. And again, like it or not: You are competing with 2000 religions which are all equally convinced to be true.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And that�s where Quran comes in as a perfect fit

Believe it or not, I have been reading large sections of the Quran. I am not exaggerating if I call this book the biggest intellectual disappointment I have ever read.
If it speaks to your heart- fine with me- but don't extrapolate your feelings to other people and cultures.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

it clearly puts forward the case for a Creator based model

The Quran proposes a creator model ? Whacky !
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

But your model is not short of assumptions. In the scientific method, Occam's razor is not considered an irrefutable principle of logic or a scientific result; the preference for simplicity in the scientific method is based on the falsifiability criterion. (Occams razor wiki says so)

That Occams principle is not "foolproof" is indeed a valid comment. But it is the best weapon we have against people that claim that the world was created by silverish unicorns, that committing suicide would lift us to a spaceship behind the Hale-Bopp comet, or that fiery beings called Jinns lurk at unknown places.
Talking about "falsification" : When physics tries to test a law (like Heisenbergs Uncertainty Relation (HUR) which is likly to be (partly) underlying the creation of the universe ) it must and does stand to the logic of "falsification". If you manage to determine the place and the momentum of a small particle simultaneously the HUR is dead at the very same moment.

BTW. How do your theories behave in this respect i.e. when it comes to Jinns and the creation of the universe ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As I have made clear in other discussions previously, my endorsement of the idea of an ultimate Creator is based on a faith based belief

Ok, fair enough, I appreciate your honesty.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

...that has the sound backing of a book that has withstood the test of time.

When it comes to the "scientific claims" in the Quran this/your statement is outright nonsense. I would also add that the interpretation of the Quran changes almost every day (and depends also on the person, country and background) But again, if its poetry appeals to your heart, that's ok.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And it would be foolish to think that the Creator who could create a universe that still remains beyond the capability of the best of human minds to explain has to be proved by an imperfect tool called science created by his imperfect creations.

Neither the existence nor the nonexistence of a creator can be truly scientifically proven. Where did I say so ?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

But your model does not take in to account any such intelligence behind the whole creation, so why should something that you believe came into existence without any intelligence behind it remain beyond human intelligence to explain?

Again, where did I say so ?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On a scientific level a no-Creator model is only a speculation.

Correct, as it is the case for a creator model. See my reply above
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On a moral level, the 2 aspects of 1) there is more to it than meets the eye and 2) the full and final recompense on the day of judgement, explains any calamity that befalls man in this world.

I can understand the human desire to hope for compensation when it comes to injustice. It is not only human but also monkeys share this trait with us. However, the fact that we feel unhappy about it, is by no means a prove that higher justice has to exist. I think it is essential to not confuse feelings and facts in these discussions.
Hoping for a day of judgment (where the unpleasant neighbour who mows his garden on a public holiday will get finally punished) is all too human, if not "monkiish".
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have already answered the killing innocent babies scenario. Allah gives the assurance that nobody will be wronged in the overall judgement, but can anyone rejecting a Creator in this world give such an assurance?

You answered exactly the way I anticipated: Your Moses example is of the "God must have good reasons to kill" type.
Go(o)dness me: He's almighty in your eyes and he can't even prevent a mosquito to bite a two year old child ?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Coming to your question A: There are multiple references in the Quran (32:4, 10:3, 11:7, 25:59, 57:4, 50:38, and 7:54) about Allah having created the heavens and earth in 6 stages. If you are looking for a step by step explanation like in a science book, then my answer is I don�t know.

Pleased that you admit that. That's all right, but just to comment: Opposite to your claim it is a direct consequence that the Quran does not give absolute but (in the best case) only relative guidance. I.e. no relevant guidance at all in this question.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

you have asked for a Quranic reference that specifically provides the precise reason for creation of the �universe�, I must say I am not aware of one, and I am not too interested in pure speculation. There are multiple verses in Quran (21:16, 38:27 and 3:191) that says Allah did not create the earth and heavens in vain.

If you are not interested in pure speculation rather don't cite the Quran at all !

Look:
21:16: And We did not create the heaven and earth and that between them in play.
Wow, I'm impressed by this deep thought. It boils down (again) to "he must have good reasons". Do you really consider this as a valid explanation ?

38:27: And We did not create the heaven and the earth and that between them aimlessly. That is the assumption of those who disbelieve, so woe to those who disbelieve from the Fire.
No difference to 21:16 i.e. what bored me the most when I read the Quran: Self repeating, self citing and essentially zero information content.

3:191: Who remember Allah while standing or sitting or [lying] on their sides and give thought to the creation of the heavens and the earth, [saying], "Our Lord, You did not create this aimlessly; exalted are You [above such a thing]; then protect us from the punishment of the Fire.
It's getting worse and worse...

And you try to tell me the Quran is the answer to all questions if it can't even tell me why god [should have] created the universe ?



Well: Airmano



Edited by airmano - 31 October 2016 at 3:11am

asep48garut60 wrote: Dear Tim the plumber, ----------- I don't understand your reply. Are you saying that there was a flood which covered all the world with Noah's arc landing on a mountain in what is now Turkey or something else? Perhaps that there was a big flood and the story has grown in the telling? Do you get that the world's surface says that there was never a world flood? ----------- I stated that in Noah's day there was a big flood, in spite of covering the surface of the earth or not, and I believe that the flood in the days of Noah were really happened because God is telling us about it. Regards, Asep

Was this an unusual flood that has never happened before or since?

Did it need a special boat to get all animals out so they could repopulate the world?

Because it did not happen.

@QE

This discussion is getting a bit out of bonds.
In your last post you did an impressive number of calls to Allah and an equally impressive number of Quran citations I never asked for.

I have the impression that your avalanche of questions (15 ?) was only to not answer what I defined twice as my core point and to which you never even attempted to give an answer.
So:

QE: There is no basis to assume that a no-Creator based model will require less number of assumptions. Airmano: As you already understood this is where we disagree. Besides the trait "everlasting" (which we both need for our theories) you make the additional assumption of: - The existence of a (superior) being           and if this was not already enough you overload this being by: - Characterizing it with human attributes (Merciful, forgiving etc).           To make this already bad situation worse you add (without any evidence whatsoever) that this being (where you admit that you do not have any proof for its existence): - It must be omniscient and -even worse- almighty. This is my core point, and I'd like you to reply to this argument on logical ground (= without irrelevant Quran citations)

My point -that my model needs lass assumptions- is independent of Islam. It is a question I could equally ask a Christian or a Jew.
So can I please -for the third time- ask you to answer this question on logical ground (= without unrelated Quran citations) before we carry on ?

Obviously, if you have problems in understanding my question I'm always there to help.

And, as a last "please": Keep it short.


Thanks: Airmano

Edited by airmano - 07 November 2016 at 9:59am