Comments by "pinball1970" (@pinball1970) on "World Science Festival" channel.

  1.  @lawman34  Physicists have a different understanding of what nothing is and Dawkins is alluding to that whilst having a pop at theists too I think. "You can't get something from nothing' seems to be a stock answer from the religious. Ignoring the fact that's what they claim about Yhwh. Anyway, some cosmological models now infer an eternal universe so no god required anyway.
    31
  2.  @user-is3yn7xr4c  We also have faith schools in the UK. Which teach scientifically illiterate conspiracy theory nonsense. Also a big issue. Children need to be taught what current Science agrees on.
    18
  3.  @rodt9779  When did he create viruses?
    11
  4.  @rodt9779  Physicists current thinking is the universe IS eternal. No god required.
    10
  5. A good point
    8
  6.  @rodt9779  Do you in know who Satan is?
    7
  7.  @rodt9779  Read the scholarship on it. Why are you just changing what is known about this? The Hebrews did not have a soul or heaven and hell concept, it's that simple.
    7
  8.  @rodt9779  You replied to me originally. You said the universe cannot be eternal, even though that is exactly now what physicists are saying. Now you are talking about heaven and hell. Bart Ehrman wrote a book on this explaining why the Jews, including Jesus did not think this way. I would look it up on you tube
    7
  9.  @rodt9779  They don't, 'believe' it, those are the models that best fit with the data.
    7
  10.  @rodt9779  Can you explain which theory you are worried about? Please be specific.
    7
  11.  @rodt9779  Abiogenesis is nothing to do with speciation.
    7
  12.  @rodt9779  Satan?
    6
  13.  @rodt9779  No I am saying Satan does not mean that and never did in Hebrew
    6
  14.  @rodt9779  You are not a scientist so I am not sure why you think you are qualified to comment on this Rod to be honest. Are you the same with the theory of evolution?
    6
  15.  @rodt9779  Quantum mechanics, entanglement and the origin of the universe will not necessarily follow logic because men developed logic. Men did not develop the nature of matter and the universe, we are just trying to describe and understand it and develop wonderful technology on the back of that enterprise. That enterprise is called Science and it has given us the world we have today, reality, reason and the enlightenment.
    6
  16.  @rodt9779  You are making up your own science it seems. Science does not work on what you think should be happening, it's a method for finding out about the universe. It's not perfect but it's the best method we have and it works, some of it can make predictions with exquisite details. Quantum mechanics is an example of this as is current cosmology. The current models indicate an eternal universe based on the evidence not logic. I trust the scientific method because I use it every day at work and it works. I am happy with the universe being eternal OR having a beginning it makes no difference. There is a reason why I trust cosmology over personal views, the same reason I go to a dentist to fix my teeth not a mechanic or plumber. I take it you do trust some science?
    6
  17.  @rodt9779  I have already told you that the beginning of the universe will not follow logic, why would it?
    5
  18.  @rodt9779  Quantum mechanics does not follow logic, I've already told you that.
    5
  19.  @rodt9779  No it doesn't. It suggests superluminal transmission of information. That goes against special relativity. Quantum mechanics if you know anything about it is far from a logical approach. Just the simple case of polarized light defies logic.
    5
  20.  @rodt9779  These things are not based on logic at all, they are based on observation. Experimental observations facts and data, you can invent your god if you want but you cannot make up your own facts.
    5
  21.  @rodt9779  Ok but science does not think so, as I said, think dentist. You can't make up your own cosmology, you can't invent your own dentistry. You can of course but I'll wager that will not go well.
    5
  22.  @rodt9779  I do not think that there is a god, for me there is no evidence for one. If the god of the Bible exists then I reject it utterly, that creature offends all of my intelligence, humanity and moral grounding.
    5
  23.  @rodt9779  Well no that was not confusion. Satan does not mean that.
    4
  24.  @rodt9779  No, Jesus was a Jew. He thought exactly the same.
    4
  25.  @rodt9779  And yes I am interested in Biblical scholarship
    4
  26.  @rodt9779  Genetic fallacy? What does that have to do with physics and models of the universe?
    4
  27.  @rodt9779  Read what actual cosmology is saying on this, Sean Carroll or Alan Guth. Professional published cosmologists, or you can try physics forums. They will tell you the same thing.
    4
  28.  @rodt9779  Your opinion of what QM is, is not really relevant sir. It is not based on logic at all.
    4
  29.  @rodt9779  Have you studied QM?
    4
  30.  @rodt9779  Quantum entanglement does not follow logic either
    4
  31.  @rodt9779  James Tour is a chemist not Biologist and is in the MINORITY of scientists who either reject the mechanisms of Evolution or say our understanding is incomplete. He says the mechanisms could be found in the future but the vast majority of scientists have no such issue at all with the theory. This is very typical from a creationist tbh, you scour the scientific community for views that support ID or creationism (Tour does NOT support ID according to what I have read)
    4
  32.  @rodt9779  No it does not mean that. You don't get to change the meanings of words.
    3
  33.  @rodt9779  The Devil is the Greek thinking. It's a later concept like heaven and hell.
    3
  34.  @rodt9779  Is there a reason you post 'god bless,'' after every post? You know I am an atheist AND anti theist?
    3
  35.  @rodt9779  You are accusing me if a gaps fallacy? Really? It's a good job your are a very polite, lovely guy Rob otherwise I might be a tad cross right now! God bless.
    3
  36.  @rodt9779  We do not need fossil evidence to demonstrate common ancestry with other primates, the DNA evidence is clear.
    3
  37.  @2fast2block  When was god 'proven' by Science? I must have missed that meeting.
    3
  38. @MooRaw Theories do not become laws, that's not how it works. You can plug in numbers to a law, say Boyles Law and churn out a result but it tells you nothing about what's going on, the mechanism. The theory of evolution explains in detail what to expect and why, what's going on behind the curtain. Since Darwin's and Wallace's original work the theory has progressed as the data and modern DNA technology has advanced.
    3
  39.  @late8641  I would read the Selfish Gene 1976 and The Blind Watchmaker 1986 too. Great stuff.
    3
  40.  @OG-tp6qy  Dawkins was a theist FIRST, that's what you don't get
    2
  41.  @OG-tp6qy  Islam has just as many leaving as converts it's growing due to reproduction rates and younger marriage
    2
  42.  @rodt9779  Physics is a little bit more complicated than simple logic, quantum mechanics does not follow logic at all. The models that fit the data imply the universe had no beginning and you go have to understand some cosmology to grasp this.
    2
  43.  @rodt9779  The fossil evidence and the DNA evidence AGREE that we evolved from ancestral primates.
    2
  44.  @rodt9779  Read the parts where they say ID is NOT Science and that there is NO debate in the scientific community regarding TOE
    2
  45.  @rodt9779  It depends if you are interested in the science, you don't seem to be aware of the actual Science is, only the minority arguments against it.
    2
  46.  @rodt9779  Google ERVs for definitive evidence of common ancestry and ancestral primates
    2
  47.  @rodt9779  That is not how you do those comparisons? Where on earth are getting your information??
    2
  48.  @rodt9779  The vast majority of the scientific community accept the theory as the only explanation for speciation of life on earth.
    2
  49.  @rodt9779  So there is a consensus in the scientific community because the theory has stood up to scrutiny, here is a typical statement from part of that community. National Academy of Sciences 'Those who oppose the teaching of evolution in public schools sometimes ask that teachers present evidence against evolution. However, there is no debate within the scientific community over whether evolution occurred, and there is no evidence that evolution has not occurred. Some of the details of how evolution occurs are still being investigated. But scientists continue to debate only the particular mechanisms that result in evolution, not the overall accuracy of evolution as the explanation of life's history.'
    2
  50.  @rodt9779  Read the part where is says there is 'no debate.'
    2