Not without first even suggesting a way it could possibly work. You can’t have a ‘speed’ of something without defining what is travelling through what medium.
Information in the form of a thought, (as abstract as that is) through ummmm… spacetime. lol
Anyway the speed at which gravity radiates has in some cases shown to be faster than the speed of light.
I am sorry, I don’t think you have any idea about what the hell you just said.
And unless you know relativity you don’t have the right to say information can travel faster then the speed of light.
The universe couldn’t be created by an infinite being, because we know time and space are not infinite, it started rougly 13.6 billion years ago.
Before that, no time nor space were present which means absolutely nothing could possible be there, a certain being would have either been made from energy or matter and both require space and time to be present.
Even if a religious person ignores all this, and still says this infinite being created the universe, hes still wrong because there is no time so the universe would had to exist forever, with no beginning - which ofcourse is false because we can see universe grow (so in the past it was smaller and eventually crushed into a singularity).
I’m sorry, is this your “belief” or has it been empirically proven that thoughts are “nothing but electrical pulses going through our brain?” [Citation needed.]
I don’t think you have any idea what the hell I just said. Google quantum entanglement.
Big bang theory doesn’t deal with what happened “before the big bang.” What you’ve posted is your personal belief, not a scientific hypothesis. Your belief involves the universe being created out of nothing 13.6 bln years ago, you are totally ignoring the question of what process started the creation. Which is totally appropriate, but doesn’t disprove the existence of a god.
Are you even reading my posts? 
I’d say it’s fairly likely that thoughts are electrical impulses in the brain. What else would you say they are? If thoughts are some other medium, then what exactly are the electrical impulses?
Individual neurons in the brain “communicate” with other cells through electrical pulses… if you somehow know how this relates to “thoughts,” you’ve figured out something that neuroscientists still don’t understand.
So… You still haven’t answered my question.
My philosophical explanation of the nature of the mind* would be a guess, exactly like your “electrical activity” theory, and its would have just as little do with my original point.
The point being that the statement “a god can’t hear you pray because thoughts can’t travel faster than light” is based on ridiculously vague assumptions, such as the assumption that you know what a “thought” is.
My larger point being that any attempt to discuss theology using scientific tests will inevitably be useless because of assumptions exactly like this one.
*I don’t mind explaining my view, but I think it would distract from the discussion
I fail to see how thoughts are related to theology.
Really? Here’s some copypasta:
If the mind exists independently of the brain, we’re getting into metaphysics and therefore theology. If the brain is the mind, we’re denying the possibility of a “soul” and therefore disproving most religions.
So you consider the beginning of the universe to be a theological question too?
It’s only theological if you believe in souls. If you’re a pure rationalist, then it isn’t theological.
I’d say it you take into account the complexity of the life in general, thoughts being made up of electrical impulses isn’t that hard to believe.
Its not “hard to believe” but it is in fact a belief . Therefore any arguments which rely on that assumption are worthless, because they ignore the ongoing debate, even outside the religious community.
This thread is quickly becoming epic, BMS Forum needs an IRC chatroom or something.
Thoughts being electrical impulses aren’t assumptions or theories, they are facts. Real proved facts. Next thing I’ll know is you don’t believe the earth’s a sphere.
Semantics. What I should have said is that it’s the most sensible hypothesis, and the most simple. There are electrical impulses in the brain. They carry information. Thought processes are information. Some of those impulses are processed information from the various nerves in the body, but I’d say it’s perfectly logical that some of the electrical impulses could be thoughts.
It’s either that, quantum stuff (although since things on the quantum scale are generally detectable, I find that hard to believe) or some kind of spiritual thing. Which do you reckon it is?
You find it to be the most sensible hypothesis, but the fact is there is an ongoing debate, even amongst the scientific community, over whether this is in fact the case. If you ignore that fact, like Imonfire is trying to, then you are not making a good-faith argument.
If thoughts aren’t electrical, why is it possible then to invent stuff which works with your thoughts?(mind controlled ping pong )
With faith, hope and good will.
Aww shit now I need to the company that made my science book to say they’re wrong.
So you’re basically saying it’s a religion vs. Science argument? And nearly all self-respecting scientists would disagree that the mind is separate from the body in the same way they’d disagree that god exists.