Quantum Mechanics and validity of God and creation

[Haruko]

On another forum, another user responded to my following post:

"God" is a redundant term, and that's why it is never found in any legitimate scientific theory.

God is outside the observable universe. Even if he does exist, we don't know his mechanism, or the how. Therefore, to include God in theories is to resort to miracles, to point to the unknown and say that that's God's work, and that goes against the scientific method.

His response was this:

Kinda like quantum mechanics?

I responded with the following:

• "So how is shamanistic or theological or New Age doctrine different from quantum mechanics? The answer is that even if we cannot understand it, we can verify that quantum mechanics works. We can compare the quantitative predictions of quantum theory with the measured wavelengths of spectral lines of the chemical elements, the behavoir of semiconductors and liquid helium, microprocessors, which kinds of molecules form from their constituent atoms, the existence and properties of white dwarf stars, what happens in masers and lasers, and which materials are susceptible to which kinds of magnetism. We don't have to understand the theory to see what it predicts. We don't have to be accomplished physicists to read what the experiments reveal. In every one of these instances -- as in many others -- the predictions of quantum mechanics are strikingly, and to high accuracy, confirmed."

• • -- Chapter 14: Antiscience (page 250); The Demon-Haunted World: Science As A Candle In The Dark by Carl Sagan.

His response:

So then, we don't have to understand creation or God to see what it or he did either, right?

I mean, we can clearly see that we exist, and the Pope exists, and the Catholic Church exists. So then, isn't it as valid as quantum mechanics, given that we can see the results of both?

Mine:

God cannot be confirmed. He's outside the observable universe. I already pointed that out. Quantum mechanics, on the other hand, can and has been observed and confirmed.

Also, creationism is not a scientific theory. Even if it did somehow qualify, there's no mechanism, only appeal to authority.

Any suggestions, criticisms? What do you think I should tell him or should add? What shouldn't I have said?

[Haruko]

By the way, the first line of the first post is quoted from Michael Wong's site. I added the reference to the top saying" Posted by Michael Wong on his site, creationtheory.org:" and that first sentence is supposed to be in a seperate quote.

[GrandMasterTerwynn]

God as a theory is entirely meaningless. You cannot use God to make scientific predictions. However, you can make predictions using quantum theory, and you can observe the universe and see how closely the universe's behavior matches predictions in quantum theory. And you can use the maths derived by quantum mechanics to solve real-world problems. You can't do that with God.

That is the principle difference between quantum mechanics and God. Quantum mechanics can be put to work in a useful fashion. God, on the other hand, is useless.

[Haruko]

GrandMasterTerwynn, in addition to my last reply to him, I quoted this post of yours and put your username at the end like this "-- GrandMasterTerwynn; SD.net"

His next reply was a concession. First time anyone ever conceeded to me, but then again, I hardly engage in debate. >.<

[Nephtys]

Here's something. You can use any scientific theory to make a prediction about something that's going to happen based on what happened previously. You can't look to tomorrow and say... you know what? I think it's going to flood 40 days and 40 nights.

Science is reproducable, reducing the number of other things that could have caused it, leading us to very probably deduce it's source or mechanism.

God is irreproducable, fickle and never verifiable. There are infinate possibile causes of anything, and yelling out 'it's a miracle', is the equivilent of 'I don't know what just happened or how, but it's something I like'.

[DPDarkPrimus]

That was quite fast. Nice to see someone actually admitting their errors.

[Molyneux]

That was quite fast. Nice to see someone actually admitting their errors.

Quite refreshing...I wish more people were willing to actually put their beliefs on the line. I change my ideas when I'm proven wrong...I'm just rarely proven wrong, is all

[Nephtys]

That's amazing. A concession when beat. I'm refreshed and feel good about the world now. Almost.

[Alliance SpecForceTrooper]

Any suggestions, criticisms? What do you think I should tell him or should add? What shouldn't I have said?

I don't think there was anything else you could have or should have said. God, if there is one, is outside the observable nature of the universe as we understand it.

As for the 40 days and 40 nights...heh...I think its somehow a legend leftover from some group of human survivors at the end of the last Ice Age distorted through the lense of time and religion. Whatever is on Mt. Ararat, its a huge fucking rock and not a boat.

[Darth Wong]

The idea that everything we see validates the existence of God is a classic "post hoc" false cause fallacy. The logic is easily shown to be broken, as follows:

How to prove that A caused B:
Step 1: Show that B occurred.
Step 2: Therefore, A caused B.

To call this "logic" is an insult to the term, and this is precisely what your small-minded friend tried to do when he claimed that the existence of the world proves that God created it. In the case of quantum mechanics, one can do controlled experiments to determine whether A causes B.

[Ford Prefect]

Why can't they just be happy with believing? Why must they set out to prove something?

[Lord of the Abyss]

Why can't they just be happy with believing? Why must they set out to prove something?

I think it's a combination of jealousy and fear.

Jealousy - Because science CAN prove itself and CAN accomplish real work.It makes religion look bad.

Fear - Because the comparison with science can shake people's faith , and religion NEEDs faith to work -it has no proof,and makes no logical sense.

[Haruko]

Much more often and much more so fear, though, I believe.

[Lord of the Abyss]

Much more often and much more so fear, though, I believe.

Maybe,but remember the fundamental arrogance of religion.Since they have no evidence,it boils down to "I'm right because I say so !!"

Someone who thinks like that is going to hate it when someone comes along and puts up a better show "You say so,but I have proof!"

It must be embarrassing.

[Nephtys]

Any suggestions, criticisms? What do you think I should tell him or should add? What shouldn't I have said?

I don't think there was anything else you could have or should have said. God, if there is one, is outside the observable nature of the universe as we understand it.

As for the 40 days and 40 nights...heh...I think its somehow a legend leftover from some group of human survivors at the end of the last Ice Age distorted through the lense of time and religion. Whatever is on Mt. Ararat, its a huge fucking rock and not a boat.

Penetration with sonar has shown pretty much that the object on Ararat is a huge rock shaped like an oval, with iron veins running through. Some people can't seem to tell funny shaped piles of ore from boats, it seems.

[Alliance SpecForceTrooper]

Some people can't seem to tell funny shaped piles of ore from boats, it seems.

Hehe....yea. Besides, any 'boat' that had 'Noah' would be at the bottom of the Med, not on Ararat.

[Darth Wong]

How the hell would a huge wooden boat turn into a giant oval hardened solid object anyway? Do these people see boulders when they walk on the beach and say "aha! An ancient shipwreck!"?

[Lord of the Abyss]

They probably think it's the same thing that produces petrified forests ...

God's Will !

[Surlethe]

Why can't they just be happy with believing? Why must they set out to prove something?

The desire to be rational in an irrational area. Humans tend to desire consistency, and since science has supplied it, people want to apply that consistency to religion. However, since religion is fundamentally irrational, they end up looking like idiots.