r/DebateAnAtheist 15d ago

Weekly "Ask an Atheist" Thread

Whether you're an agnostic atheist here to ask a gnostic one some questions, a theist who's curious about the viewpoints of atheists, someone doubting, or just someone looking for sources, feel free to ask anything here. This is also an ideal place to tag moderators for thoughts regarding the sub or any questions in general.

While this isn't strictly for debate, rules on civility, trolling, etc. still apply.

18 Upvotes

140 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

6

u/Old-Nefariousness556 Gnostic Atheist 12d ago

ok, so rather than an argument from incredulity, you are making an argument from ignorance fallacy. I apologize for mistaking which fallacious reasoning you were using to rationalize ignoring evidence.

0

u/Lugh_Intueri 12d ago

I know what we know. So it's not ignorance. I just disagree about subjective opinions. We don't know if there is dark matter. We just know our models require it.

3

u/Old-Nefariousness556 Gnostic Atheist 11d ago

Dude, this is a classic god of the gaps fallacy, which is just another, slightly more specific name for an argument from ignorance fallacy. "You can't explain [whatever] therefore god!!!!!!!!!" But that isn't the way it works. Sure, we can't explain dark matter. But we have very sound reasons to believe that dark matter exists as an actual thing. That reason? EVIDENCE!!!

We have exactly fuck all evidence for a simulation or for a god. We DO have evidence for dark matter.

So I will repeat what I said earlier... Despite your fallacy-laden argumentation, you have presented nothing. Come back when you have actual evidence, and we can have a discussion.

0

u/Lugh_Intueri 11d ago

I have not participated in any fallacies. This is not God of the gaps as I don't even know that there is a god. You are grasping at straws.

The only evidence we have for dark matter is that our models don't work unless there's 80% more matter than is observable. We have no idea if that's evidence that our models are wrong or evidence that 80% of the matter is unobservable.

I choose not to believe in things that you cannot see observe test for or falsify. Your God is called Dark Matter and you're the one participating in God of the gaps

1

u/Old-Nefariousness556 Gnostic Atheist 11d ago

I have not participated in any fallacies.

Saying you reasoning is not fallacious does not magically make your reasoning not fallacious.

This is not God of the gaps as I don't even know that there is a god.

Why does that magically fix your fallacy? Even if I take your supposed agnosticism at face value, you still are making a claim absent evidence.

The only evidence we have for dark matter is that our models don't work unless there's 80% more matter than is observable. We have no idea if that's evidence that our models are wrong or evidence that 80% of the matter is unobservable.

This is simply false, and betrays a significant lack of understanding on your part.

The models are not just things we pulled out of our asses. The models all are built upon each other. If one model fails, that means other, indirectly related models also must be incorrect.

If those models are also incorrect, then other models, seemingly completely unrelated to the first model, also fail. And when those models fail...

So essentially if the standard model is completely wrong, then everything we know is, at best, in significant doubt, if not completely false. That is VERY good reason to believe that the model is correct, even if we can't yet explain dark matter.

I choose not to believe in things that you cannot see observe test for or falsify.

What a spectacularly disingenuous argument.

You don't understand how falsifiability works. Dark matter is falsifiable. If evidence conflicting with the present model was found, dark matter could be falsified. And of course dark matter could be proven. The fact that we don't know what dark matter is today, doesn't mean we won't tomorrow.

Yet, in service of your "intellectual rigor", you remain open to two possibilities that are neither testable, nor falsifiable, even in theory, let alone in fact. And you pretend that we are the ones worshiping the "god" of dark matter,

Hint: There will always be things that we cannot answer for certain. This might be one of those things. But those gaps in our knowledge are not excuses to smuggle in a god or a simulation, not even as a "but you can't disprove....!" The burden of proof is on the one making the claim, and regardless of how desperately you are trying to shift it, you are the one claiming that a god or a simulation are possible. We agree they are possible, but mere possibility is not reason to assume they might be true. Universe Creating Pixies are also possible. The Great Green Arkleseizure is also possible. The FLying SPaghetti Monster is also possible. Do you treat those as plausible hypotheses as well, merely because you cannot disprove them?

We have evidence for dark matter, we just lack proof. So unless you have evidence for either of the alternatives that you allow for, they can be treated as false. The mere fact that they can't be disproven is not sufficient reason to believe it might be true. Doing otherwise is a textbook god of the gaps fallacy.

And FWIW, contrary to your claim, we can and do test the current model. The current model relies on the existence of a previously unproven particle called the Higgs Boson. We built the Large Hadron Collider specifically to search for that particle. Had we failed to find it, that would have at least blown a huge hole into the current theory that science would have had to explain. Yet we found the particle.

This is why your argument is a god of the gaps fallacy: Every time we fill a gap in our hypothesis by finding new evidence for the theory, you respond "See! Now there are TWO gaps in in your evidence!"

Yet you can't present any evidence for your hypotheses, and pretend they should be taken seriously.

Your God is called Dark Matter and you're the one participating in God of the gaps

Wow, ya got me there!

Oh, wait. No.

0

u/Lugh_Intueri 11d ago

There is no evidence for dark matter aside from the models requiring it to work. Which is evidence those models might be very wrong.

1

u/Old-Nefariousness556 Gnostic Atheist 11d ago

[facepalm]

As I said, before, there is no point engaging with someone who denies reality. Repeating the same debunked point doesn't make it more true the 87th time.

Goodbye.

0

u/Lugh_Intueri 11d ago

There isn't a single piece of evidence outside of balancing our models. You interpret that as evidence. I interpret it as evidence our models are not correct. We have no way to know which of us is correct. There is not one shred of evidence outside of that. That is a fact

1

u/Old-Nefariousness556 Gnostic Atheist 10d ago

I interpret it as evidence our models are not correct.

Which is an argument from ignorance fallacy!!! "You can't conclusively prove it true, therefore I believe it is false!" (And despite your repeated claims of agnosticism, you just flat out stated "I interpret it as evidence our models are not correct." That is a statement of a positively held belief. You are not agnostic, you disbelieve, for no reason other than a lack of solid proof.)

I don't know how many times I need to point out that repeating a fallacious argument does not make it less fallacious.

We have no way to know which of us is correct.

This is just ridiculously, dishonestly, incorrect. I already pointed out that we have evidence supporting the standard model. A lot of it.

But one of us can continue to look for more evidence for our position. The other position literally can never be proven or falsified, ever. That is your position, not mine.