My Superturtle

Hello fellow skeptics, free-thinkers and unbelievers,

Today I am going to be blogging about a topic that came up in a discussion with my grandfather a few weeks ago, when he asked me this “So Jack, what is your superturtle?” In a theological discussion, he wanted to know where I stopped in my logic. I am going to be elaborating on my answer in this post.

My answer to him first up was, “the laws of physics are my superturtle, what is yours?” To which he replied “god”. I explained to him how some quantum mechanics can create infinite amounts of universes, which I have blogged about half a dozen times. He then asked me this, “This may be the case, but who wrote the laws of physics, why do the laws of physics exist?”

This question is a non-sequiter, because I have explained to him that the laws of physics are my superturtle, and it is also hypocritical, because his god superturtle would also need to have a creator.

I explained that to him, and so it was decided upon that we both had our superturtles that we had chosen. The (by now) debate had turned to, “So if we both have our superturtles, which one is more logical?”

Obviously, from the outset, I had this one in the bag.

There is no way that god is a better superturtle than quantum mechanics. First of all, quantum mechanics is a naturally based, not the supernatural of a god. This makes it right there and then, scientifically and logically better. Supernatural things can be illogical, but they are also outside the realm of reality, so I won on that point.
Quantum Mechanics 1 – 0 God.

Quantum mechanics also has PROOF. There have been millions of  experiments conducted on quantum mechanics, all of them showing that quantum mechanics is a real thing. It is held with as high-regard as gravity (quantum mechanics and gravity are in a bit of a rut at the moment, but that’s another post) or electro-magnetism. All that god has for evidence is a few wishy-washy things like, “we love, so god must exist”. I don’t want to sound biassed, but I think that’s another point to quantum mechanics.
Quantum Mechanics 2 – 0 God.

This response (condensed, obviously), made my grandfather think for a while, and he then hit me with the same fallacious argument, “But something must have created these laws of quantum mechanics”. I then proceeded to tell him this:-

If my few simple equations, with proof, need the explanation and proof of creation, then your omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent (all logically contradictory) deity with no proof, needs the proof of creation thousands of time the size of my equations.

He was not very happy with that logical necessity, (Quantum Mechanics 3 – 0 God.) and he then proceeded to talk about the conscience and how that needs a miracle.

That’s all for today, I will leave you with a bible passage, which I think my friend over at secularjustice.wordpress.com has hit on the head.
” Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s.” John 3:18.

Lets start a free thinking revolution, share all the words of the bible, not just the nice sounding ones.

Secular Morality

It is very difficult to drive on American streets without noticing at least one of the famous John 3:16bumper stickers.

A picture of a bible reference on the bottom o...

One would not even be surprised to see a reference to the verse on the bottom of a restaurant cup (see picture)! So, just what does this verse contain? Many of those reading this may already know it by heart, but here it is:

“For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.” (John 3:16)

What benevolent words does Jesus speak next? Well actually he says…

 “Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but

whoever does not believe stands condemned already

because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son.” (John 3:18)

This post is a plea to all free-thinkers. Share the message of John 3:18 as vehemently as…

View original post 122 more words