tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5802793022423388420.post1791248703811443907..comments2023-03-29T17:28:56.467-07:00Comments on ARIZONA ATHEIST: A Challenge Answered? ... Not ReallyUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5802793022423388420.post-16433825195994719882010-08-24T11:08:05.278-07:002010-08-24T11:08:05.278-07:00I received a reply back from Stenger. According to...I received a reply back from Stenger. According to him, the actions of the atom dropping a level and emitting a photon are two separate actions. The atom dropping to a lower state <i>from the excited level</i> is what happens without cause and the photon firing is "delayed and unpredictable."Arizona Atheisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17377658912951142427noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5802793022423388420.post-35134630625819704562010-08-24T08:23:50.211-07:002010-08-24T08:23:50.211-07:00Brennon,
I'm looking into your source and I&#...Brennon,<br /><br />I'm looking into your source and I'll get back to you. As for your tone, no I do not like it, and as I had told you very early on in our discussion I've had to deal with some very rude and immature theists in debate in the past and I do not appreciate it when people give me an attitude. It's uncalled for and that's that. Boohoo? What's wrong with being Arizona Atheisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17377658912951142427noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5802793022423388420.post-27650905972970844762010-08-23T17:49:07.250-07:002010-08-23T17:49:07.250-07:00Huh??? Craig cited Vilenkin’s theorem as one of hi...<i>Huh??? Craig cited Vilenkin’s theorem as one of his evidences that the universe did have a beginning.</i><br /><br />Which isn't the same as saying it proves everything. It is one evidence among many.<br /><br /><i>I’m sorry but this means nothing, as I said before.</i><br /><br />It means you have no case for your own position.<br /><br /><i>When the atom is bathed in light? From my bossmanhamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14787721955360743058noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5802793022423388420.post-43130721434919088372010-08-23T17:35:58.108-07:002010-08-23T17:35:58.108-07:00AA,
I’m beginning to not like your tone
Oh boo h...AA,<br /><br /><i>I’m beginning to not like your tone</i><br /><br />Oh boo hoo. Debates include direct statements. You constantly want to play the victim in this debate, continually accusing me of having some tone you don't like. If you can't handle the debate, then don't ask for it.bossmanhamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14787721955360743058noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5802793022423388420.post-68889242716912259622010-08-23T13:59:42.237-07:002010-08-23T13:59:42.237-07:00Hi Brennon,
I’m beginning to not like your tone.....Hi Brennon,<br /><br />I’m beginning to not like your tone... You accusing me of sending “second hand” Craig’s argument against his theory, when I sent the same link you referenced, among other false claims. <br /><br />Please, just stick with the facts and no more false accusations. <br /><br />I’ve responded to the above comments as an update to the above post.Arizona Atheisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17377658912951142427noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5802793022423388420.post-9142754687514132202010-08-23T11:52:53.472-07:002010-08-23T11:52:53.472-07:00Vilenkin outright said that the theorem doesn’t di...<i>Vilenkin outright said that the theorem doesn’t disprove an eternal universe </i><br /><br />Craig never said that it did. He did say that it proved that any universe that is on average expanding would have to have an initial boundary. That is what the theorem states, and is not simplistic. Vilenkin needs to actually read Craig's account and not rely on yours or other's second hand bossmanhamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14787721955360743058noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5802793022423388420.post-73882977685838687022010-08-23T11:51:31.616-07:002010-08-23T11:51:31.616-07:00It seems that Stenger is saying that the combined ...<i>It seems that Stenger is saying that the combined actions of an atom dropping to a lower energy level and emitting a photon are the actions that seem uncaused</i><br /><br />Actually, the cause of this is fairly well known. The excited state of the atom is not natural. When the atom is bathed in light, it will eventually absorb a photon and enter its excited state. But this is not a natural bossmanhamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14787721955360743058noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5802793022423388420.post-59645275542439489722010-08-18T18:39:11.409-07:002010-08-18T18:39:11.409-07:00@AA:
I agree and my comments said the same, essen...@AA:<br /><br />I agree and my comments said the same, essentially. BTW, I'd love to see you debate Justin at <a href="http://www.thefaithheuristic.com/2009/08/standing-debates.html" rel="nofollow">Faith Heuristic</a>. He's got a standing challenge as well and seems quite knowledgeable.jwhendyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03615608336736450543noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5802793022423388420.post-10619796916146970802010-08-18T18:16:44.586-07:002010-08-18T18:16:44.586-07:00Hi Hendy,
I guess I wasn’t as clear as I’d hoped...Hi Hendy,<br /><br />I guess I wasn’t as clear as I’d hoped. I agree it’s true, but my point was that particular argument being used to bolster one’s position was illogical. Like I said, To argue that, “Well it could still be true” isn’t an argument. It’s faith. <br /><br />Hi Brennon,<br /><br />No I don’t believe it’s presumptuous since I’ve yet to see any theist use any decent arguments. Arizona Atheisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17377658912951142427noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5802793022423388420.post-19469935336848827482010-08-17T23:02:22.902-07:002010-08-17T23:02:22.902-07:00Lol, a little presumptuous to title the post "...Lol, a little presumptuous to title the post "A Challenge Answered...Not really" don't you think? I mean I've only posted one response as of yet. Not to mention that I don't think you fared too well in the combox discussion we had.bossmanhamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14787721955360743058noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5802793022423388420.post-38079727218076954382010-08-17T18:14:21.148-07:002010-08-17T18:14:21.148-07:00You said: "I also believe the following is an...You said: <i>"I also believe the following is an illogical claim:"</i><br /><br />In response to <i>"An opponent's arguments could all fail, and your opponent's position could still be correct."</i><br /><br />I believe the original statement is actually true. Take a hot topic currently: that of the mind. Currently, either side can hold that the other's fails and jwhendyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03615608336736450543noreply@blogger.com