if not God then who/what?

This is untrue. We know that the universe is finite. It was created, but by natually occuring forces.

Now, this is not to say that our universe was the first, or will be the last. There could have been billions of universes created before and billions more after.

 

What "naturally occurring forces"? That would imply that 'nature' and all of the man-made laws pertaining to nature was in place before the existence of the universe.

 

They are not manmade. They were simply observed by man. Calling laws like gravity manmade points to the idea that we man never existed gravity would not either.

 

Really? Show me one that I can go out in the yard and dig up and read it for myself.

Who wrote the words that describe this law? Was it a man? Then it is man-made. If man never existed, who would be the observer to observe and write something about it, if it did exist without the presence of man?

 

SORRY FOR THE BELATED RESPONSE, I AM ALREADY OVERDONE AT THE CHURCH AND MISSION;

Yes, I read the link by skimming the article even though I was already aware of the articles presuppositions (about metaverse creation and inflation). Also are you aware of the recent discoveries that lend credence to the existence of meta-verses? Google gravitons, gravity waves, metaverse). If they exist HOT DAMN! God it would be sure proof for the existance of God! Anyway I knew about the processes of metaverse creation because (again) I have been a serious amateur astronomer for over ten years. If not for the clergy I would probably been a professional astronomer or work in the field. So seeing that you are putting all your eggs in the inflation basket we are back at the starting line, square one so to speak, where you first put foot in mouth! Will you permit me to demystify my cryptic talk?

In a nut shell I said earlier that ‘theory’ without empirical evidence is weak, at least when compared to theory that is backed up with empirical evidence. Inflation is pure theory and it’s theory that disputes a well entrenched axiom of science i.e. the speed of light. I have problems with inflation allowing faster than light ‘travel’ and velocities. See where I am going? You have a shaky theory (meta-verses) backed up by another shaky theory i.e. inflation which was fabricated to make certain formulas and theories valid. In any case you presented a fairly good rebuttal, but a weak rebuttal.


I will address the rest of your reply later.


reva

 

Metaverse

With all due respect Rev, but are you on drugs?

 

I wondered that too. But anyone who can say this:

must have some pharmaceutical assistance.

Facts are these. Man entertains himself and gives employment to many philosophers by pretending he as some sort of afterlife populated in some religions by virgins who managed to please the Lord.

Of course, it is crass nonsense. But if people need to believe this sort of fantasy in order to get themselves through the daily chores of screwing, reproducing, rearing children even less savoury than they are themselves, doing the laundry and the milkman, and ordering in pizzas, then they have found something to hang onto on justification of their generally useless lives.

In fact, that's the point. Their generally useless lives will, by magic, be given a meaning they never had and don't deserve.

Hail Mary.

 

With all due respect RStones you are reported and you know why. (I may change my mind or maybe not, your future responses will have a lot to do with that).

Ok, if you can bring yourself to admit that fact perhaps this debate is salvageable. In other words when you lose like a man or please… stifle. I am assuming you will do the right thing, so lets proceed, shall we? Understanding the rank basic astrophysics is not that difficult. The fact remains that the Big Bang one universe (hot model/standard theory) REMAINS* the most widely accepted theory of origins in the scientific community. Sad to say that the link you provided (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaverse) has little to do with your original pleading and ‘straw grasping‘. Confused? Revisit post # 684. You said; “What this comes down to is, are there other Universes out there or not.” You were insinuating if more universes exist, the KCA etc is not a convincing or maybe credible theory/idea, the KCA being the theory that uses the big bang theory as a evidence for the existence of God. I employ the one universe theory while Craig PhD/ThD , a Christian apologists defends the KCA with or without the metaverse as an component.

So you are lacking Mr RS. It’s time to man up admit you are wrong. The BB with one universe is the most likely theory to be true, therefore the undefeated KCA a modern cosmological version is the best logical argument and evidence for the existence of God bar none IMO.


Please learn the basics before I have to write a page of font to correct you AGAIN.



God bless this forum~



reva

 

the link I provided has NOTHING to do with my argument, rather it is to show what a metaverse (something YOU brought into this conversation) is. And from what I read, it is creating virtual worlds for human entertainment.

A metaverse has NOTHING to do with any kind of 'god' or super natural force that probably does not exist. Hence, why I asked you if you were on drugs for bring this garbage into this. Get it? When you are no longer confused as to metaverse link, then we shall proceed.

 

Did it ever occur to you that he meant "multiverse"?

 

No, because I brought up multiverse, then HE brought up metaverse to counter my multiverse argument.

If you feel the need to go back and see the conversation, here is where rev a brought metaverse up

 

I did and if you look at the context, he's clearly referring to the multiverse because gravitons and gravity waves have nothing to do with a metaverse.

 

Then why is he countering multiverse argument with a multiverse argument?

 

That's a much better question than asking if he's on drugs. Maybe he'll answer it.

 

Thanks IC and Contrails, I have almost quit this debate in exasperation. The real point of this entire meta multi verse inflation big bang discussion was way back in #264 (I think) RS and friends had attempted to shoot down the KCA by claiming inflation created more than one universe after the big bang created the superforces etc. not long after T-0. I was saying inflation was a theory that had no empirical evidence to support it, even though its generally accepted because it makes certain theory work. However I also say I question it because it's not good theory having no empirical evidence to support it. That’s where' the bait and switch as well as other deceptive tactics begin appearing from RS and other members.

Where the misunderstanding occurred was mixing metaphysics with traditional i.e. classical and quantum physics, unless the deception was malicious. In any case I say the KCA REMAINS good evidence for the existence for God, and I will go so far to say inflation or no inflation still the KCA is a valid cosmological argument that contains a complete logical syllogism, and should be considered evidence for Gods existence.


reva

 

Lets cut to the chase. Do you believe there is more evidence for multiple universes than just one? If so what is the best evidence in your opinion? The ONLY good evidence I see concerns gravity wave detection. Still I think its more like religious faith than good science to believe in many universes or infinite universes which are legitimate (if somewhat silly) theories of science.
reva

 

In bold: Hog wash, You just refuse to acknowledge the new evidence that was found:

Our Universe May Exist in a Multiverse, Cosmic Inflation Discovery Suggests

Now, please come back and say there is not empirical evidence for inflation theory.

 

This is getting old...from your own post ; "If the results are confirmed."

duh huh?

reva

 

What 'bait and switch' tactics?

What other 'deceptive tactics'?

Care to explain these?

 

First Direct Evidence of Cosmic Inflation

Is this article better for you?

anything to deny legitimate science that goes against your KCA and imaginary friend 'god' eh?

- - - Updated - - -

Or how about this one:

BICEP2 finds first direct evidence of cosmic inflation

duh huh?

rstones199

 

"All this, of course, was just theory."
"They also considered whether dust in our galaxy could produce the observed pattern, but the data suggest this is highly unlikely."
"The primordial B-mode polarization is related to primordial gravitational waves that are thought to have abounded in the early universe."

With statements such as you have quoted and which I have highlighted above, I see no PROOF having been made available that would cause the "findings" to be elevated beyond the label of "theory". In other words, this "evidence" does not compel my mind to accept it as 'true'.... especially when their own reporting indicates such hypothetical scenarios as described.

 

And I thought I was on your ignore list?

 

You are.. don't believe me... make inquiry with a moderator who can examine my settings.

 

Neither do I see anything that makes those preliminary findings special. Exciting yes special meaning a new discovery ...NO!. Also this has as per usual turned into a peeing contest the haters trying unsuccessfully to discredit anything the spiritual people say, especially if we are saying something that lends credence for the existence of God. Lastly; Thanks for your input and good observations IC.

 

With the reversals untruths deceptions and other plain old malicious BS he spins I am inclined at least very tempted to do the same, And I despise the iggy list.

reva