Saturday, March 19, 2016

God, Science, and the Universe

Today's the day we find out "What's Behind It All?" The decision will be announced at the University of Toronto (Toronto, Ontario, Canada) by Lawrence Krauss when he educates the audience at Convocation Hall starting at 7 pm. Stephen Meyer (Intelligent Design Creationist) and Denis Lamoureux (Theistic Evolution Creationist) will also be there to learn the answer. (Spoiler Alert: the answer is "nothing.")
It's not too late to buy tickets. Email me if you want to join some of us for dinner before the event.

The event is being sponsored by Wycliffe College at the University of Toronto. This is an Anglican College that trains people to become Anglican Ministers (among other things). The college is the prime mover behind this series of events and it deserves a great deal of credit for the effort. Co-sponsors include the Centre for Inquiry, Canada and three Christian groups.


The event is being video-hosted at many locations around the world. See the list here. If you don't want to watch with others, you can see the live stream on YouTube at: Krauss, Meyer, Lamoureux: What’s Behind it all? God, Science and the Universe. It starts at 7 pm EST. (It's probably over already in Australia.)

The ID crowd is already anticipating defeat so they're preparing their audience by warning them that Lawrence Krauss will be nasty (i.e. refute their arguments) [see Watch Meyer Take on Krauss and Lamoureux, Streaming Live at Evolution News on March 19]. (Warning: check your irony meters before reading the first paragraph.)
Those on the Darwinist, materialist, atheist side of the debate that we follow here aren't normally very good at listening and responding to scientific perspectives at variance from their own. They are much more interested in condemning and ridiculing -- which has got to be a poor strategy for them if they want to persuade anyone.

With that as the background, as we noted already, it's refreshing that arch-atheist cosmologist Lawrence Krauss has agreed to participate in a public conversation with Discovery Institute's Stephen Meyer, joined by theistic evolutionist Denis Lamoureux. That will be March 19 at the University of Toronto's Convocation Hall. We're looking forward to it -- and here's the even better news. You won't have to be in Toronto to enjoy the discussion. The event will stream live here at Evolution News.


18 comments :

  1. Of course, Prof. Krauss is the only one of the three who has any credentials in cosmology to even discuss the subject.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Credentials don't matter to Meyer's argument: origin of framastat. DNA can't do anything without framastat which explains the fine tuning of life, the universe and everything including the best film ever, Free Willy.

      Simple. Krauss doesn't stand a chance!

      Delete
    2. Re Bill

      I find this comment amazing. Prof. Krauss investigates cosmology for a living. The other two guys know nothing about the subject.

      Delete
    3. Amazing in a good way? My point is that Meyer is a serial liar. It's very difficult to deal with him in good faith. So, Meyer will throw out stuff like "functional specified complexity" and "information" without ever defining the terms, which are made up, by the way. Sure, in a rational discussion Krauss would wipe the floor with Meyer, but in the bizarro world of creationists opinions are facts, assertions trump data and criticism is persecution. My point is that being a goober creationist has no bearing on a "debate" with a scientist. All creationists lie without shame and one can only unleash a Spanish Inquisition upon them with ridicule, wit, laughter and mockery. My tools of choice!

      Delete
  2. Eh, given Meyer's background I wish the atheist rep was someone with more biology chops. However, we shall see....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. But it seems to be a debate about physics and cosmology. Isn't it Meyer who has the problem? Of course he isn't all that great on biology either.

      Delete
    2. I've watched some of the event so far, and there hasn't been much physics and cosmology. Meyer did his usual schtick on "information" (and was struck by a migraine part way thru, which slowed him down a bit). And while I didn't see all of Krauss' talk, he seemed to mostly criticze the inclusion of Meyer (who he didn't know would be speaking when he accepted the invite) and gave some history of the DI and why Meyer should not be seen as a credible speaker. Lamoureux's just starting. I don't expect much cosmology from him.

      Delete
  3. Why the preoccupation with the intelligent design creationists?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Because they're lunatics and somebody has to do the dirty job of dealing with them.

      Delete
    2. somebody has to do the dirty job of dealing with them.

      Why ? Why do atheists care about the existence or non existence of God anyway ? If he does not exist, there is nothing to care of, and its irrelevant if there is people that believe in him or not. And if a theist is a happy and convinced believer in God, why do atheists try to convince us God does not exist ? Unbelief does not provide any good. On the contrary, if God does not exist, there is no ultimate justice, no punishmef for sins, no ultimate reward for doing good. There is no meaning, no morals, no values..... and the ultimate fate is distruction and death.

      Delete
    3. No one expects to convert believers to atheism. The Since the debate is sponsored by theists, the question is why theists are trying to convert atheists? Why missionaries? why evangelicals, why proselytizing? why laws against apostasy? Why stonings and beheadings and prison for nonbelievers?

      Etc.

      Delete
    4. "On the contrary, if God does not exist, there is no ultimate justice, no punishmef for sins, no ultimate reward for doing good. There is no meaning, no morals, no values..... and the ultimate fate is distruction and death."

      Thank you for telling me in no uncertain terms that you believe not because of evidence and arguments, but because you can't stand to live in the real world. You are a child telling yourself stories.

      Delete
    5. "if God does not exist, there is no ultimate justice, no punishmef for sins, no ultimate reward for doing good."

      That is a logical conclusion.

      "There is no meaning, no morals, no values."

      That does not logically follow and is wrong.

      Delete
    6. no punishmef(sic) for sins, no ultimate reward for doing good

      You're obsessed with what other people do in their private and public lives.

      You constantly inject your bronze age snuff porn derived morality into the public marketplace of ideas with no concern what so ever for their effect on human lives.

      You contaminate human discourse with an irrational and non-evidence based belief system thus diverting scarce resources better spent on increasing human well-being into non-productive "conversations" with intellectually stunted religious bigots.

      Your ideas are odious, the last 10,000 years or so of recorded human history are a chronicle of the massive amount of suffering religious fuckwittery in all it's various forms have imposed on human kind.

      Delete
  4. "Why the preoccupation with the intelligent design creationists?"

    Because it is now politicall incorrect to enjoy going to freak shows.

    ReplyDelete
  5. "Why the preoccupation with the intelligent design creationists?"

    Because they try to impede teaching scientific discoveries and principles to students, and sometimes they interfere with scientific research. If they just enjoyed their beliefs and kept out of public education and research, I wouldn't care much what they thought.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. bwilson295--

      Exactly. Intelligent design is a political ploy to undercut science teaching in US public schools. Creationists can say whatever they want in their homes, their churches, in letters to the editor, and on random street corners, if they're so inclined.

      But they have no right to undercut the education of other people's children.

      Delete
    2. "The researchers say humans are built to engage and explore using both networks.

      "Far from always conflicting with science, under the right circumstances religious belief may positively promote scientific creativity and insight," Jack said. "Many of history's most famous scientists were spiritual or religious. Those noted individuals were intellectually sophisticated enough to see that there is no need for religion and science to come into conflict."

      They refer to Baruch Aba Shalev's book 100 years of Nobel Prizes, which found that, from 1901 to 2000, 654 Nobel laureates, or nearly 90 percent, belonged to one of 28 religions. The remaining 10.5 percent were atheists, agnostics or freethinkers.

      "You can be religious and be a very good scientist," Jack said.

      The researchers agree with the New Atheists that suspension of analytical thinking--at the wrong time--can be dangerous, and point to the historical use of religious differences to persecute or fight wars.

      "Although it is simply a distortion of history to pin all conflict on religion," Jack said. "Non-religious political movements, such as fascism and communism, and quasi-scientific movements, such as eugenics, have also done great harm." "


      https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/03/160323151838.htm

      Delete