Have you heard of Ray Comfort's supposedly scientific proof of god's existence?
It goes as follows:
A painting proves that there was a painter who painted a painting.
A building proves that there was a builder who built the building.
Therefore, the universe proves that there was a creator who created the universe.
I would like to explain why this nonsense.
While it may sound logical that a painting proves that there was a painter, upon closer examination it turns out to be a tautology (a tautology is a form of circular reasoning without in-between steps; in other words, you say the same thing twice but word it differently).
For you see, a painting is by definition something which has been painted by a painter.
If something has not been painted by a painter, you cannot rightfully call it a painting.
So by calling something a painting, Ray Comfort already assumes his conclusion, namely that the object he is referring to has been painted by a painter.
The same goes for the building.
So now it becomes obvious why Ray Comfort's analogy is flawed: In order to conclude that the universe had a creator, he has to presume that the universe is a creation - the same way he presumed that something is a painting or building before - which is the very thing he is trying to prove, which makes his reasoning circular.
I hope everyone understood that.
Ray Comfort is such a nimrod. This argument is a variation on the watch-maker argument*. There's a reason you'd assume that a watch had a creator; we know watches are created. If watches appeared naturally then we might have a genuine mystery on our hands. Watches aren't self replicating systems.
Like Tom said, Comfort is assuming the conclusion in his premise. We know that paintings have painters. Who has never seen someone painting? We know buildings have builders. Who has never seen builders at work. The universe however is something that is just there. We don't know why or how really. We've never seen other examples of a universe being "created", so we cannot assume anything about it. We have to study it to figure out how it came to be, or even IF it came to be. We can go back to within a certain time limit (Planck time) 'after' the theoretical Big Bang, but before that limit, we can make no assumptions.
People like Ray Comfort revel in their own ignorance. They wear it like a badge of honour. For him, not knowing is better than knowing, because then he can inject his god into the gaps of his knowledge. Take his 'Atheists Nightmare' banana example. He is obviously completely unaware, a least at the time he first made the video, that modern bananas are an artificially selected species; a domesticated plant. Wild bananas bear very little resemblance to the domestic banana, which completely blows his stupidfest out of the water. I'm certain this would have been pointed out to him by now, so if he insists on making that same argument, he has not only revealed his ignorance, but he has reveal his unwillingness to learn; commonly known as wilful ignorance.
Why anyone gives Ray Comfort any air time is beyond me. He prays on ignorance. He prays on people who just don't know any better or are to lazy to investigate for themselves. Comfort pisses in the well of human knowledge and thinks he's offering us Champaign.
*For those not familiar with the watch-maker argument see this wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watchmaker_analogy).
Yeah, the banana thing was pointed out to him on a radio show, and his only response was that the video as it exists on the internet was "taken out of context." But if you look at the whole WOTM video, it doesn't say anything else about the banana, and he never gave the proper context for which he meant it. So yeah, he's weaseling.
Quote from: MrBogosity on November 01, 2008, 09:30:41 AM
Yeah, the banana thing was pointed out to him on a radio show, and his only response was that the video as it exists on the internet was "taken out of context." But if you look at the whole WOTM video, it doesn't say anything else about the banana, and he never gave the proper context for which he meant it. So yeah, he's weaseling.
Ray Comfort weaseling? No way!
(http://smiley.onegreatguy.net/jawdropper.gif)
I have read that Ray Comfort has given up on his banana argument (however, his followers still love to use it).
Anyway, what did you think of my rebuttal? Good? Bad? Found any mistakes?
Quote from: Tom S. Fox on November 01, 2008, 11:17:23 AM
I have read that Ray Comfort has given up on his banana argument (however, his followers still love to use it).
Anyway, what did you think of my rebuttal? Good? Bad? Found any mistakes?
I thought your rebuttal was spot on. It pretty much lays bare the fallacy in Comfort's argument. As you said, Comfort assumes that the universe was created and therefore concludes it requires a creator, while he ignores the fact that at no point has he explained why we should assume the universe was created. It's more a begging the question fallacy than a circular argument, though the two are related.
Quote from: Textra1 on November 01, 2008, 12:37:02 PM
It's more a begging the question fallacy than a circular argument, though the two are related.
Are those two not the same?
Quote from: Tom S. Fox on November 01, 2008, 12:43:33 PM
Are those two not the same?
They're similar, but not entirely the same. A circular argument generally requires basing two conclusions on each other. A circular argument might look like,
Person A: 'The Bible is inerrant.'
Person B: 'How do you know?'
Person A: 'Because God wrote it.'
Person B: 'How do you know that?'
Person A: "Because it's written in the bible.'
Whereas begging the question is more like, 'Who created the universe?' The 'who' part is the begging the question part, since there's no reason to assume a 'who'.
Edit: Actually, is more like saying, 'The universe was created', since that implies a creator; begging the question, 'Who created it?'.
Check wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question) for a better explanation.
Quote from: Textra1 on November 01, 2008, 10:04:50 AM
Ray Comfort weaseling? No way!
(http://smiley.onegreatguy.net/jawdropper.gif)
YES WAI!
I don't what you guys are thinking....this logic seems flawless to me.
[yt]7sanplNTr6c[/yt]
Edit, see if that works.
BZ987654, the YouTube ID is faulty.
Quote from: Tom S. Fox on November 02, 2008, 12:41:40 PM
BZ987654, the YouTube ID is faulty.
Thanks, I fixed it, must have messed up coping it.
Quote from: BZ987654 on November 02, 2008, 12:16:59 PM
I don't what you guys are thinking....this logic seems flawless to me.
[yt]7sanplNTr6c[/yt]
It's flawless indeed. I mean, we all know that bananas aren't grown on trees, but a god makes them :)
Quote from: FelleAndersson on November 02, 2008, 02:57:25 PM
It's flawless indeed. I mean, we all know that bananas aren't grown on trees, but a god makes them :)
I wish things were that easy.
Hypothesis: Cancer arises from a number of mutations that cause several checkpoints in the cell cycle to be lost leading to uncontrollable cell division. We believe gene X may be mutated at a high rate in this (insert cancer type).
Answer: God did it
That was really easy.
Quote from: BZ987654 on November 02, 2008, 04:54:48 PM
I wish things were that easy.
Hypothesis: Cancer arises from a number of mutations that cause several checkpoints in the cell cycle to be lost leading to uncontrollable cell division. We believe gene X may be mutated at a high rate in this (insert cancer type).
Answer: God did it
That was really easy.
It's great isn't it. One doesn't need to know anything at all. You can just inject
Magic Man Dunnit and away you go.
[yt]KdocQHsPCNM[/yt]
Quote from: Textra1 on November 02, 2008, 07:23:46 PM
It's great isn't it. One doesn't need to know anything at all. You can just inject Magic Man Dunnit and away you go.
Yes, it would save a lot of trouble doing slow tedious things like......research.
There's good answers in magic. I just can't think of any right now...
Quote from: Teredona on November 02, 2008, 07:35:51 PM
There's good answers in magic. I just can't think of any right now...
How about just think of a question don't know the answer too and put magic as the answer.
Q: Where did people come from?
A: Magic Man Dunnit.
Q: Why is the moon round?
A: Magic Man Dunnit.
Q:Why does light sometimes appear as a wave and sometimes as a particle?
A: Magic Man Dunnit.
Q: Why are my legs too long for my bed?
A: Magic Man Dunnit.
Q: Why is the gravitational constant 6.67300 × 10-11 m3 kg-1 s-2 ?
A: Magic Man Dunnit.
I think we're through the looking glass here people. Call Nobel. We've just answered every question ever conceived by anyone, anywhere, at any time.
Quote from: Textra1 on November 02, 2008, 07:55:08 PM
Q: Where did people come from?
A: Magic Man Dunnit.
Q: Why is the moon round?
A: Magic Man Dunnit.
Q:Why does light sometimes appear as a wave and sometimes as a particle?
A: Magic Man Dunnit.
Q: Why are my legs too long for my bed?
A: Magic Man Dunnit.
Q: Why is the gravitational constant 6.67300 × 10-11 m3 kg-1 s-2 ?
A: Magic Man Dunnit.
I think we're through the looking glass here people. Call Nobel. We've just answered every question ever conceived by anyone, anywhere, at any time.
Here is my theory of everything:
Magic Man Dunnit
Suck on that one Albert.
Quote from: BZ987654 on November 02, 2008, 08:44:32 PM
Here is my theory of everything:
Magic Man Dunnit
Suck on that one Albert.
At long last, we have a Grand Unified Theory of Everything. Oh joy of joys. Now we just have to figure out how engineers can apply 'Magic Man Dunnit'. I wonder if we can make 'Magic Man Dunnit' in powdered form? That way when engineers are having a problem they can sprinkle it over their design schematics.
POOF! The problem goes away. Ooo, I have an idea. I'm going to create the worlds first pollution free, free energy machine. And beer that never goes flat. The applications are endless.
(http://smiley.onegreatguy.net/beer.gif)
Quote from: Textra1 on November 02, 2008, 11:37:07 PM
At long last, we have a Grand Unified Theory of Everything. Oh joy of joys. Now we just have to figure out how engineers can apply 'Magic Man Dunnit'. I wonder if we can make 'Magic Man Dunnit' in powdered form? That way when engineers are having a problem they can sprinkle it over their design schematics. POOF! The problem goes away. Ooo, I have an idea. I'm going to create the worlds first pollution free, free energy machine. And beer that never goes flat. The applications are endless.
(http://smiley.onegreatguy.net/beer.gif)
MY theorry of everything:
Nature dunnit.
Quote from: Real Captain Olimar on November 03, 2008, 07:54:39 AM
MY theorry of everything:
Nature dunnit.
God wrote the bible and in the bible it says god is real.
Magic man > nature
Quote from: Textra1 on November 02, 2008, 11:37:07 PM
At long last, we have a Grand Unified Theory of Everything. Oh joy of joys. Now we just have to figure out how engineers can apply 'Magic Man Dunnit'. I wonder if we can make 'Magic Man Dunnit' in powdered form? That way when engineers are having a problem they can sprinkle it over their design schematics. POOF! The problem goes away. Ooo, I have an idea. I'm going to create the worlds first pollution free, free energy machine. And beer that never goes flat. The applications are endless.
(http://smiley.onegreatguy.net/beer.gif)
I was thinking we can get magic man dunnit spray. For those times you need things on the run.
Quote from: BZ987654 on November 03, 2008, 09:41:36 AM
I was thinking we can get magic man dunnit spray. For those times you need things on the run.
Excellent idea. We could even have perfumed versions of it. You know, for the ladies on the go and those metro-sexual, make-up wearing
julios. Maybe even a kiddie branded version.
Bratz Magic or
God the Builder in a can.
God the Builder!
Can we do it?
God the Builder!
No, we can't!
Quote from: Textra1 on November 03, 2008, 11:22:02 AM
Excellent idea. We could even have perfumed versions of it. You know, for the ladies on the go and those metro-sexual, make-up wearing julios. Maybe even a kiddie branded version. Bratz Magic or God the Builder in a can.
I am going to do the paper work to patent it now. This will be a cash machine.....wait, isn't that what religion is anyway.
Quote from: BZ987654 on November 03, 2008, 09:40:19 AM
God wrote the bible and in the bible it says god is real.
Magic man > nature
Magic Man is part of nature
so therefore,
Nature>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>magic man
Quote from: Real Captain Olimar on November 04, 2008, 07:43:52 PM
Magic Man is part of nature
so therefore,
Nature>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>magic man
It's actually more like
magic man made nature so
magic man > nature
magic man is a part of nature so
nature > magic
so actually it's
magic man >nature >magic man >nature.....
Quote from: BZ987654 on November 04, 2008, 07:46:16 PM
It's actually more like
magic man made nature so
magic man > nature
magic man is a part of nature so
nature > magic
so actually it's
magic man >nature >magic man >nature.....
good point alert!
Magic Man > Everything
...
...
And don't y'all forget it! Lest ye receive a beating from my smite stick.
Quote from: Magic Man on November 04, 2008, 08:05:52 PM
Magic Man > Everything
...
...
And don't y'all forget it! Lest ye receive a beating from my smite stick.
So have you heard the preacher84040 read my comments on you. I guess you wouldn't have to, since your plan made me say them anyway.
Quote from: BZ987654 on November 04, 2008, 08:26:11 PM
So have you heard the preacher84040 read my comments on you. I guess you wouldn't have to, since your plan made me say them anyway.
Come on, this guy is obviously a total n00b who is pretending to be a cosmic zombie who is his own father.
Quote from: Real Captain Olimar on November 05, 2008, 03:47:42 PM
Come on, this guy is obviously a total n00b who is pretending to be a cosmic zombie who is his own father.
lol