fishinbub
Senior Member
Nope. My question still stands.
Then this is a poor attempt to change the subject...
Nope. My question still stands.
Same with logic. Nothing is 100% accurate.
There are things that are 100% accurate. Takes time and effort to prove them as such.
Tim L, matter has always been, in various forms. So has energy. What we have to do as humans is realize the concept of time is something WE have created.
It is not universal and does not apply to the cosmos.
I recommend some deeper study and reading of the cosmological argument.
There are things that are 100% accurate. Takes time and effort to prove them as such.
Tim L, matter has always been, in various forms. So has energy. What we have to do as humans is realize the concept of time is something WE have created.
It is not universal and does not apply to the cosmos.
I recommend some deeper study and reading of the cosmological argument.
What's ridiculous is the God of the gaps argumentation. Doesn't matter if you call it supernatural, intelligence, God, whatever.
Tim you still haven't answered the question that I have asked twice now.
Then this is a poor attempt to change the subject...
No, it's entirely on subject. If you're going to ask how something came from nothing you first need to establish that something did come from nothing.
It's a tough question because we don't know the premise to even be true. Why have you yet to answer it instead of knit picking me for asking it?
You can't be that ignorant. My reference thermodynamics and the theory of relativity (and how the pertain to this discussion) are as plain as the nose on your face. Don't play dumb...
Nothing can be proven. Study that.
What makes you think those demonstrate that energy/matter came from nothing?
The greatest thing of all about this discussion is that whatever theory these atheist choose to believe they must have "faith" in that theory. It is truly ironic.
What makes you think those demonstrate that energy/matter came from nothing?
That's a fallacy of equivocation.
Some Atheists and Agnostics may hold a belief using meager or inadequate evidence, but it is not based on "faith" in the sense of not having any evidence whatsoever.
"This is not to claim that the Big Bang is the last word; the first cause. That would be to misunderstand the logical force of the Razor - that if you believe in one entity more than other people, you are less likely to be right, so need a good reason for doing so. Putting God forward as the first cause, and then claiming he was always there, is just to treat Him as a "brute fact." This just shifts the problem to why He - rather than the universe - has no cause. It's never very satisfactory to call something a brute fact. But since we have no alternative for now, we had best make it the universe, which we at least know exists."
Thomas Ash
Don't play dumb. We've had this discussion before. You know as well as I do that energy is not infinite (second law of thermodynamics), that matter and energy are interdependent, and that the universe is expanding. Anyone with a middle school education knows that the universe must have a definite beginning. The debate is to how the "beginning" happened...
If all of the energy was present at that "beginning" then the original question is pointless.
Because no energy was created.