As I pointed out, that applies to a rock. Allah = a rock, apparently. Inanimate objects are your god. You really will believe any old ****e.
Natural selection has seen to it that the weak will fall by the wayside ever since the beginning of life on this planet, I have every faith that this will continue to be the case.
The argument, as in Dawkins' Blind Watchmaker, is that given enough time and conditions complicated arrangements of molecules are inevitable. You don't have to climb Mount Improbable as a cliff-face - there's a long, gentle slop on the other side.
So you know all about my "book" to be dismissive....I see that as very arrogant. Massive generalisation and assumption to make that people believe and live the way they do because of fear and expectations of next life...people believe and live that way because they believe it to be the right way. Not fear as you put it, maybe you need to work on those misconceptions you have of believers and why they believe. Pascal Wager...living the way i do what have i missed out on really? do you have a better life than a believer in anyway i dont think so...and as you put when the curtains closes and there is nothing then i lose nothing, if there is something its you that will be loser...
Interesting debate around whether natural selection applies to modern humans Personally don't buy into natural selection but that's for another day
At least there's a shred of evidence for that (though I'm more of a steady state/quantum flux/dark energy expansionist view of the cosmos). Really does have more going for it than a white-bearded dude on a cloud thing.
Anyone that's ever studied Pascal's Wager in any depth knows that it's a really, really weak argument. It fails on so many levels. Religious people say not to use it, because it's so clearly flawed.
They make far less sense WITH a creator. Your fallacy is that you have an assumption that God exists therefore everything proves he exists without even looking at it with fresh eyes. Multiverse makes no sense from a creation standpoint. Why would a creator use another brane to start the big bang if he could just create it himself. Surely if the multiverse theory is true this makes God either nonexistent or at very least, we were an accident.
So you dont have a clue and are trusting another mans views, which could be wrong? not that you have shown any even from your man Hawking yet...
