science doesnt disprove religion, therefore religion is irrelevant to any science article, including this one.An article about the origin of the universe and out of the 31 comments only one post mentioned a bible verse? Oh come on, religious people! You can do better than that! We need our Saturday morning coffee entertainment!
What's a Technological Singularity?Any species capable of creating consciousness in computer simulations would have achieved a Technological Singularity and would therefore have no more need for computer simulations, as it would be a computer, and instead of simulations it would just use its imagination. The difference between simulation and imagination is that when we imagine someone, we don't give it a consciousness of its own. And even if it would have any use to do so, it would be inhumane.
you continue to say this yet you lack any evidence or examples.5/10
Science has, and continues to, debunk the claims of religion. Thereby proving all religions are false. I don't know if there is a god, I reserve judgment until there is legitimate evidence, but I do know all religions are superstitious nonsense devoted to gods which debunk their own existence with the incorrect claims they make.
@Twixtea
Well, if it was proven that there was "Intellegent Design" in the creation of the Universe, it would definatly point to a "Creator". Maybe not the "God" versions, but definatly intellegent. Which would not dicount "God", but would show that, A. W e are not alone in the universe. B: There is a Creator. C: Life would be everywhere in the universe as no intellegent creature (I hesitate to say being) would waste that much space.
it makes no sense from something to come from nothing, as that breaks the laws of (at least, what we believe) of physics. but if intelligent design was correct (and im not stating any more about my views on that) then it would make sense for a being that always existed (in line with the bible) to have the power to do things beyond human comprehension. Hypothetically, we could fool ourselves into saying we could comprehend it, but we would not be able to. im not saying you are incorrect, im simply offering another argument that it would be interesting to get a response.First of all it's generally absurd to think the human race is as an intelligent species alone in the universe.
Secondly the problem with the concept of a simulation or an intelligent creator is simple - How are we supposed to explain the "host universe"? With another intelligent creator?
It actually makes much more sense to assume that everything emerged out of nothingness, sort of like a very complicated fractal, originating from the simplest formula and then spiralling into more and more complexity and diversification.
it makes no sense from something to come from nothing, as that breaks the laws of (at least, what we believe) of physics. but if intelligent design was correct (and im not stating any more about my views on that) then it would make sense for a being that always existed (in line with the bible) to have the power to do things beyond human comprehension. Hypothetically, we could fool ourselves into saying we could comprehend it, but we would not be able to. im not saying you are incorrect, im simply offering another argument that it would be interesting to get a response.
I can see what we lead to this conclusion, however, there is no evidence suggesting that a creator does not have humanlike traits. I can also say that the bible states that god created man "in his image"..I think the law that'd be broken would rather be a law of logic, rather than physics. I admit my point wasn't entirely accurate the way I formulated it, if we were to follow the analogy of the fractal, there certainly had to be some sort of trivial entity which the universe originated from.
Anyways, the biggest problem I see with the idea of an intelligent creator is the fact how extremely biased it seems on the human being, if you try to look at it rather objectively. I mean, the idea implies the existence of a person-like entity with arbitrary properties such as "will" and "intelligence" (Religions even go as far as attributing emotions like love or anger, almost completely "humanizing" this creator).
Now, I don't think terms like these can be assigned to anything else other than some sort of biological being, I dare you to present me a concept or example that suggests otherwise. I don't know what your take on this would be, but to me it seems kind of logical, that something that occurs inside a universe cannot happen outside of it, let alone lead some kind of a timeless existence. Things like us are formed by the universe and our existence relies on all of it's rules, mechanics and time. In conclusion that leads me to think that if an "intelligent creator" was in fact responsible, it must be resident in a(nother) universe.
I don't think all of this necessarily involves things beyond human comprehension... What concerns their existence however I'm pretty interested if there's a way to either be able to prove it or realize that doing so would be a paradox.