we all agree there's no god, right?

[uahphysics 0]

No I am not a scientists nor do I pretend to be one, but I know that the rules of nature state that something cannot come from nothing. I dont have to understand every rule of nature(or pretend to like the great expert Smasharoo)to understand that an effect must have a cause.Everything that exists has to have been created, it is insane to think otherwise. YOU MUST HAVE A CAUSE TO HAVE AN EFFECT.

Doesn't the last part of this in fact hurt your arguement for the existence(I think that might be spelled wrong) of a God? If God exists, then God himself would have to have been created and whatever created him would have to have been created and so on and so on farther back in time as an infinite loop of creation that still yields no answer.

[Spademan 94]

No I am not a scientists nor do I pretend to be one, but I know that the rules of nature state that something cannot come from nothing. I dont have to understand every rule of nature(or pretend to like the great expert Smasharoo)to understand that an effect must have a cause.Everything that exists has to have been created, it is insane to think otherwise. YOU MUST HAVE A CAUSE TO HAVE AN EFFECT.

If evertying that exists has to be created, then your god had to be created. YOU MUST HAVE A CAUSE TO HAVE AN EFFECT! Duh.The "the universe has peferct conditions for us to be here, SOMEONE MUST HAVE SET IT UP" is moronic.Do you know what the probability of an event having happened after it has happened is? 100%. You can't look at the universe and say "the odds of us being here are remarkable!!" Not really, we're here. Odds were 100%Aardvarks are here too, again, 100%.

[Smasharoo 0]

There is clearly no deductive argument that can posit the existence of a god from the mere fact that we exist.Nor any particularly compelling inductive ones.To me anyway,

[inz 0]

Is there a god? The only truth about god is that it is dog spelled backwards.Most things on earth live with balance to nature and they do not believe in religion, they act according to their nature. However, humans believe in so many weird things the probability of people being stupid and decieved is too high. However, the philosophy of way or tao is more complete, and it can be applied to many things, it could be used for martial arts, art of war, medicine, nature and balance and poker. The whole yin yang concept in my opinion is where you have not just ONE thing (god), but I would say heaven and earth, sun and moon, night and day, male and female, life and death, creator and destroyer, empty and full, success and failure, passive and agressive, skill and luck...etc. One cannot exist without the other. Water is an excellent example to things, it can give life by watering plants, and for drinking by animals and plants, but it can also take life by flooding and drowning people like the flood in asia. (Remember that zero animals died, and about 150,000 humans did, and who believes in more Gods?)Back to poker, you must believe in yourself first cause you are on earth (skill long term), then you can believe in heaven next (luck short term). If you want to win the WSOP you must have skill and luck, and that's when you can Thank Yourself and the Heavens!

[DCWildcat 0]

Far too much credit is being given to humanity in these posts.Ideas such as "conscious beings" and that humans are "naturally set apart" are, scientifically speaking, ridiculous.What distinguishes us from animals is that our prefrontal cortex is much more highly developed than any other species on the planet. If dolphins had prefrontal cortices like ours, they'd be just as capable of reasoning as us. If theirs were more developed...surprise....

However, humans believe in so many weird things the probability of people being stupid and decieved is too high.

This is illogical. A hundred million people in Africa believe AIDS can be cured by sleeping with prepubescent virgins. The chances of them being deceived? Evidently quite high. The impact of culture is disturbingly deep, and it would explain some of the notions of "god" that have persisted through the centuries.

[Smasharoo 0]

This is illogical. A hundred million people in Africa believes AIDS can be cured by sleeping with prepubescent virgins.I heard that 20 year old college girls sleeping with 32 year old romance noevelists cures..whatever...everything.

[crowTrobot 2]

Reason dictates there cannot be an infinite regression.

human reason is based on incomplete information and perspectival bias, and is probably flawed

[Allie 0]

The Irony of this PostWhile reading this thread, and the debate raging about this existence of God, creation, matter, physics, etc…..I had an epiphany! God is here, God is among us, we have found God.And his name is Smasharoo.You see, the rest of us mere mortals have opinions, theories, ideas, beliefs…but the one thing we all share is…..that none of us know for sure. Throughout the ages, down through history….this question has been discussed and theorized , with no clear answer.Except for Smash. He has the facts, the answers, he doesn’t debate or theorize….because he knows! And the only logical conclusion to how is knows is….that he himself, is the supreme being. Now that I have found God (because I was an agnostic up to this point), and have been enlightened….and I’m going off to bed, and will sleep very well, I’m sure.

[Acesgotcracked 0]

My statement on cause in effect is stateing that under the rules that govern the natural world we live in, you cannot have an effect without a cause. This is the whole point of a god, an all powerful creature would not be restricted by the natural laws of our universe, I made this clear that this is what I am saying. You people seem to be able to disregard these simple ideas and facts. There had to be a creature outside of the rules of the universe for the universe to have come into existence, the very rules of nature by which we live make the idea of the universe coming about without a creator absolutely insane.

[Acesgotcracked 0]

Human opinion is flawed, the laws of reason that were established by the Greeks and Aquinas are impecable. Again, "reason dictates that there cannot be an infinite reggression". -ARISTOTLE

[crowTrobot 2]

My statement on cause in effect is stateing that under the rules that govern the natural world we live in, you cannot have an effect without a cause. This is the whole point of a god, an all powerful creature would not be restricted by the natural laws of our universe, I made this clear that this is what I am saying. You people seem to be able to disregard these simple ideas and facts. There had to be a creature outside of the rules of the universe for the universe to have come into existence, the very rules of nature by which we live make the idea of the universe coming about without a creator absolutely insane.

you are thinking you know the rules of nature when you don't. nobody does. you should read up on the basics of quantum mechanics, and how it has turned our long-held ideas about natural "rules" upside down, particularly the simplistic ideas about cause and effect you are basing your argument on.

[Acesgotcracked 0]

If you choose to deny cause and effect thats your stupidity. I on the other hand live in the real world, where if something happens something else causes it.

[crowTrobot 2]

If you choose to deny cause and effect thats your stupidity. I on the other hand live in the real world, where if something happens something else causes it.

if so then what caused god??anyway your reasoning is based on limited human perspective which has been proven over and over by quantum mechanics and general relativity to be incomplete. the logic of everyday human experience is flawed and clearly cannot be applied to the "beginning" of the universe without modifications which we don't fully understand yet.and i wasn't getting personal, no reason for you to.

[Acesgotcracked 0]

If already said, that because the laws of nature dont supply the means for the creation of the world in which we live, clearly a force of higher power(God), which does not need creation bestowed upon because it is the all powerful supremem being(the big god man if you will).

[vaglvr 0]

the other arguments for fine tuned universe being some form of an infinite array of varying universes, so no coincidence that we find ourselves in one fine tuned for life no matter how rare (weak anthropic), or some form of (non-intelligent) evolution of the universe or succession of universes. smolin proposed a theory of evolving universes involving black/white holes.All efforts to unradnomize life.  Largely because we have egos and the realization that life is a tiny insignifigant, likely common part of massive universe is difficult for some people.Random makes a lot more sense given the time span and numbers of places it could (and maybe has) occured.There's no scientific to persue unrandomizing it.There are, of course, other reasons.Life's not any more unique than the structure of Hydrogen.  Was the universe designed so Hydrogen could have it's structure?Seems a lot more likely considering how much of it is relative to life.

I have a question smash, at what point do you stop thinking something is completely random. It would seem most of science was developed on our quest to "unrandomize" parts of existence.

[MilesZS 0]

I choose to not believe in a damned thing. You are welcome to believe in whatever you want, and I'll believe in nothing. Is it called apatheism? hahaAlthough, I can at times become athiest when someone decides to force their god on me. I don't like that, so I point out their logic flaws (most people who think they need to force a god on you are not knowledgeable enough to argue with you) until they just get pissed and call me a dirty word, then I point out that their god probably wouldn't like that, and they are probably going to hell now, and THEN they get confused as to why I am now talking about their god and their hell ... it's really hilarious. Some people cry.But mostly, I want you all to believe what makes you happy. I prefer people be happy, it makes everyones' lives a lot easier.

[closetwin 0]

This thread certainly applies to the "general poker" forum. Oh, yeah. It's not like this is bound to clog the forum with a bunch of posts (from people who tend to agree on everything poker) heralding their dogma as fact.For god's sake, what's the point of this thread? People believe what they believe.Frankly, I believe in aces in late position in an NL ring game where two people have gone all-in before me (both having me covered, btw). Stop arguing about god.CTEDIT: Thanks Jayson. This was in general. Good move on moving it over to off-topic.

[crowTrobot 2]

If already said, that because the laws of nature dont supply the means for the creation of the world in which we live, clearly a force of higher power(God), which does not need creation bestowed upon because it is the all powerful supremem being(the big god man if you will).

respectfully, that is a close-minded simplistic, and outright ignorant of the facts of science, train of thought most christians use to justify their faith. things are not that simple - again you do not know what the laws of nature supply. to think you or anyone else fully understands them is egocentric, not to mention as the collective majority attitude in society it is detrimental to the long term survival of the human race.

[TJ_Eckleburg 0]

not to mention as the collective majority attitude in society it is detrimental to the long term survival of the human race.

Maybe a tad over the top, no?Not to speak for him, but I think the statement exists not to say that we understand all the laws of nature, but we acknowledge that they exist, and from what we understand of them they don't provide answers to the questions about the origins of the universe.It's a belief some humans have had since philosophy was first recorded to paper. I'm not particularly worried about it's possible "detrimental effect" to the "longterm survival of our race."

[crowTrobot 2]

not to mention as the collective majority attitude in society it is detrimental to the long term survival of the human race.

Maybe a tad over the top, no?Not to speak for him, but I think the statement exists not to say that we understand all the laws of nature, but we acknowledge that they exist, and from what we understand of them they don't provide answers to the questions about the origins of the universe.It's a belief some humans have had since philosophy was first recorded to paper. I'm not particularly worried about it's possible "detrimental effect" to the "longterm survival of our race."

i don't consider it over the top. the human race/society needs to mature beyond its pointless emotional need to invoke god/religeon if long term survival is a goal. it was good for a while, part of the maturing process of society, but we are starting to stagnate and need to move on.i was trying to point out that the laws of nature as we are starting to understand them from a modern perspective DO provide insights into possible answers about the origin of the universe. we have a long way to go in understanding, but there is no reason to invoke god because we don't fully understand everything. doing that is archaic, egocentric, and ignorant.

[TJ_Eckleburg 0]

I don't deny that there are people out there that "blame" things they don't understand on religion. It makes things easy for very simple minds.That doesn't mean that there aren't things that will always be beyond our finite and limited comprehension. And, the fact that a few misguided or uninformed people throughout history have got it wrong doesn't mean the message isn't right.I was raised Catholic, after all, so I would know lol.

[dkcards 0]

Atheists = "there is no GOD"Not the Atheist position.Maybe the "Hard" atheist position.Not the common one, though.

Wrong againMain Entry: athe·ist Pronunciation: 'A-thE-istFunction: noun: one who believes that there is no deity- athe·is·tic /"A-thE-'is-tik/ or athe·is·ti·cal /"A-thE-'is-ti-k&l/ adjective- athe·is·ti·cal·ly /-ti-k(&-)lE/ adverb

[dkcards 0]

Was there oxygen 1000 years ago? Oxygen was not identified them but it was still there and supported life.Was the earth round 800 years ago? Everyone thought it was flat but did that change that it truly was round. Were there really dinosaurs? Have you ever seen one alive and kicking? Sure you have seen fossils and bones but does that mean they really were alive? What other new things are we going to discover that we now have no proof of? New things are discovered everyday. To say there is absolutely no God because he hasn’t been proven is limiting yourself. Just because you can’t touch something or see something doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. Oxygen was present even though nobody could see or identify it long ago. The earth has always been round even though at one point in time they could not prove that. Have you seen a living dinosaur or are you just taking someone else’s word that they truly did exist?Faith and belief is something that everyone has. If you drive a car you have faith that the oncoming driver will stay in his lane. If you follow evolution you have a belief that we evolved from a microorganism. It is just a mater of what you have your faith in. I just have to look at this planet and mankind and I come to the conclusion that there is a God. How complex we are and how complex the support system (earth, plants, and animals) is that sustains us logically could not have happened just by chance. It is far easier to believe there is a creator then that this all happened from nothing. Once you acknowledge there is a God we can start having a theological discussion on Christianity and other religions.

[rsmbox 1]

wow...i had to read all the way to the end of the 10th page before reading something that made sense?

[crowTrobot 2]

Was there oxygen 1000 years ago? Oxygen was not identified them but it was still there and supported life.Was the earth round 800 years ago? Everyone thought it was flat but did that change that it truly was round. Were there really dinosaurs? Have you ever seen one alive and kicking? Sure you have seen fossils and bones but does that mean they really were alive? What other new things are we going to discover that we now have no proof of? New things are discovered everyday. To say there is absolutely no God because he hasn’t been proven is limiting yourself. Just because you can’t touch something or see something doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. Oxygen was present even though nobody could see or identify it long ago. The earth has always been round even though at one point in time they could not prove that. Have you seen a living dinosaur or are you just taking someone else’s word that they truly did exist?Faith and belief is something that everyone has. If you drive a car you have faith that the oncoming driver will stay in his lane. If you follow evolution you have a belief that we evolved from a microorganism. It is just a mater of what you have your faith in. I just have to look at this planet and mankind and I come to the conclusion that there is a God. How complex we are and how complex the support system (earth, plants, and animals) is that sustains us logically could not have happened just by chance. It is far easier to believe there is a creator then that this all happened from nothing.

faith and accepting something as logically likely to be true (or at least as being a useful approximation of truth) are not the same. faith by definition is 100% belief in the absense of logical supporting evidence. there is no direct tangible, logical evidence for a creator as there is in the sense of the earth being round or oxygen existing in the past or dinosaurs living. those comparisons don't make sense. statements like "all i have to do is look at the complexity of the planet and mankind and know there is a god" are just more emotionally biased, egocentric reasoning. how presumptuous to assume that humans know enough about themselves and the universe to even be remotely capable of reasoning out conclusions at that level. it is not at all easier to believe in a creator in a logical sense, although when our relatively simplistic thought processes are faced with all the complexity around us it is certainly more emotionally fulfulling and comforting to do so.