Sabitlenmiş Tweet
Alan West
7.8K posts

Alan West
@Greshark
He/Him. BA: Screen & Media; polsci(minor). I bring sort of a silly goose vibe to the timeline that serious geese don't really like.
Hamilton, New Zealand Katılım Haziran 2009
673 Takip Edilen141 Takipçiler

@au_border_force This got me laughing so hard. This afroman stuff is out the gate.
English

@HarlanJake2003 @Rraklez2 @McClureShawn I know the main exercise here is to make fun of you, but prior to the expansion of the universe it is not believed that everything was in a single point, that is a common strawman by theists. We are only just starting to crack into quantum physics which begins to explain this.
English

Ok, then we are done here. There is no natural explanation, it is supernatural. What you are arguing is no longer atheism. The supernatural singularity creates the universe. I mean, give this singularity a mind to explain how it initiates this expulsion of matter and you have yourself a basic deistic god.
English

@HarlanJake2003 @Greshark @McClureShawn Nope it didnt change, it is part of its nature to be expelling material, it does not have nor is it limited to the properties that necessitate an external cause like causation or physicality.
English

@HarlanJake2003 @McClureShawn You claiming all these things doesn't just make it so. You seem to be missing the point which is that the entirety of your claims are based off of vibes of how you THINK the universe should work and how you THINK an external, all powerful deity should work. We can do the same.
English

1. Not an objection.
2. What does it mean for the universe to not be constrained by time. For God it makes sense, God exists simultaneously at all points in time. This doesn’t make sense for a pre-expansion universe because its existence has a temporal limit. Also, you would still need a cause for the expansion that does not fall into naturalist scenario 1, 2, or 3
English

@HarlanJake2003 @McClureShawn 1. No, you are just wrong.
2. Okay, the universe pre-expansion was not constrained by time.
English

@Greshark @McClureShawn It does matter, and I can.
1. If you have to appeal to it just happening then you are admitting defeat.
2. God is not constrained by time.
English

fuck you for making the entirety of new zealand a legitimate war target buddy

Postcode Apparatchik@MaoistStdEn
lol, lmao
English

@TheIshikawaRin Yet they only started to crop up 12-24 hours after everyone decided they hated it. Very organic defence campaign, one that starts 12-24 hours after a backlash.
English

@HarlanJake2003 @McClureShawn Doesn't matter, you can't state how your god was supposedly just always there.
English

@HarlanJake2003 @McClureShawn Okay then, didn't decide, just started. The fact is that every argument you can make for god can be made for the universe generally, they are nothing claims based on vibes.
English

@Greshark @McClureShawn How did it decide? A decision is made in a mind… if the universe decided to start expanding, congratulations, you’re no longer an atheist, you’re a pantheist.
English

@acteduweininger How do I get brain damaged enough to think this is the case?
English

@HarlanJake2003 @McClureShawn Okay, maybe the state of the universe before expansion was eternal, and it just decided to start. There is as much basis to this belief as there is to yours.
English

@Greshark @McClureShawn Being eternal means it never originated it always was, not that it originated from nothing.
English

@HarlanJake2003 @McClureShawn Because something doesn't come from nothing, as you said, and an eternal god must come from something.
English

@HarlanJake2003 @McClureShawn An eternal god is logically impossible. What now?
English

You would need a naturalistic method to do so, and I argue that it is impossible for a naturalistic method to function in that way. No matter how you start, true nothingness, an eternal static universe, or an eternal causal universe, the first two lack a means for initiating causation under naturalism that wouldn’t have happened infinitely long ago, and an eternal causal chain is logically impossible.
English

@HarlanJake2003 @McClureShawn How do you know there is no way to initiate causation under naturalism. You believe your god just was, yes? Why can't we believe the universe just started?
English

@Greshark @McClureShawn Because there is no way to initiate causation under naturalism and an eternal causal chain is logically impossible.
English










