Hello Thunderf00t re (part 37)

Hello thunderfoot
From your description box


"William Lane Craig is a master of crowing over the essentially irrelevant robust nature of certain methodologies while simultaneously misapplying such methods to draw his desired and erroneous conclusions.

In academic circles, anyone who spends a disproportionate amount of their time exhausting the praises of the reliability of logical methods (as Craig does), reeks of being a bullshit merchant as its well known the whole methodology is subject to GIGO... Garbage in, Garbage out.

Craig has 'five pillars' by which he 'proves' Christianity. Here, in Why Do People Laugh at Creationists Part 37, William Lane Craig, I address merely the first of these 'pillars'. He claims that everything that begins to exist has a cause. Well if we didn't have a few hundred years of scientific discovery under our belt showing the universe does not mold itself around human intuitions, he might have a point: however that's just not the case! The smaller and higher in energy you get, the less intuition serves you satisfactorily. And whats the problem Craig wants to apply his 'intuition' and 'inductive reasoning' to? Oh yeah, the beginning of the universe, where all of the energy/ matter of the universe was in pretty much the smallest volume we can conceive. He seems to expect that even though we have no way of currently defining such a state (it's an unknown, a gap in knowledge), that his intuitive reasoning will serve him well. You don't need to know much about science to realize that's almost a pointless exercise. Apply intuition to quantum mechanics, and you will fail. Similarly with relativity.

These are of course the scientific objections to Craigs arguments. Craig is of course merely a layman when it comes to science. A point I only bring up as Craig persistently brings up such appeals to authority when suggesting his critics are not serious because they do not possess a degree in Philosophy.
"

"These are of course the scientific objections to Craigs arguments" indeed science and education for the win, could you tell me when exactly causality was removed from the foundations of scientific methodology and when it was replaced with a more magical Ex nihilo foundation ?
Or is this not a scientific objection ? perhaps it should be considered more as a poorly constructed argument
I could continue, there are more mistakes
I became aware of this video via a critiquing video of your use of logic and reason, several days ago, and I have watched more since
I am intently curious as to why these criticisms have not been addressed and why you have not corrected your mistakes via annotations or the description box?
Thank you

[RevDevilin]

@pappafrito I haven't watched many of his vid so I couldn't really say, but hay we all make mistakes and we all have periods of ineptitude, and that's ok we all do it, my concern here is that this is done in the name of reason and science, and he has thus far not attempted to correct his mistakes

[waspbloke]

PawnBACM is hilarious!

You may have a noticed by now a certain 'religious' fervor amongst some of thunderf00t's disciples. Whenever somebody levels a criticism at their god they just jump in with assumptions about them being apologists.

[Mattthehat]

Why is the voice over made up of separate samples?

[Stairc]

Google Stephen Hawkings' "The Grand Design". Or check out Lawrence Kraus' "A Universe from Nothing."

If you want to keep up to date with science, that's a good start.

[RevDevilin]

@PawnBACM This is a cut & paste response
Thank you for your input criticism is always welcome and appreciated, but your shameless disingenuous verbose verbiage has led me to believe any further discores should be conducted at the below link
watch?v=jAMfqkLaxWE  ( please conduct any future dialogue there thank you )

[RevDevilin]

@PawnBACM That's because you didn't ask a question
Did you ?
See above example for reference
If you have nothing more than ad hom's and strawman arguments as you have already demonstrated, then please conduct any further dialogue at the link below thank you

[Stairc]

@RevDevilin Perhaps you'd be better served doing rudimentary research yourself into these topics before arrogantly slapping others claiming that they need to keep up to date.

It makes you look like a fool.

[RevDevilin]

@Stairc "Lawrence? Kraus' "A Universe from Nothing"
Quantum fluctuations ex nihilo, ie by magic, it's a joke vid, but it's a bad joke because people like you believe it



learn about scientific methodology logic and mathematics If you want to keep up to date with science, and be a bit more sceptical :D

I'll look up Hawkings The Grand Design when I have time