Universe Race

Just to make sure that we understand this, there was no before. Asking about what happened before is like asking what is north of the North Pole, in the oft repeated, but still very good, analogy.Edited by Chiroptera, : minor typos

---

If I had a million dollars, I'd buy you a monkey.
Haven't you always wanted a monkey?
-- The Barenaked Ladies

How so???If I don't know and I say I don't know, I'm making a truthfull statement.If I don't know and I say Goddidit, I'm just making things up.

What dogmatic views exactly? I believe there was an event in our distant past that you could call T=0. I support the evidence that leads to such a conclusion. You have not shown any evidence that can lead to any conclusions beyond that point because there is none. Yes, it is like saying "Godidit". There is no answer, if you understood what the event implies you would realize that an answer is highly unlikely. You are attempting to describe the cause of an event that resulted in time. Its not only impossible, its nonsensical. Incorrect. You are trying to invent a conclusion about the cause of the Big Bang. The laws of science break down at T=0 so yes, without a doubt, your causation is a creation of your imagination. You will be required to produce evidence of God making Big Bang happen before you can jump to the "Its the truth, you just can't handle it" accusations. You asked:

quote:

---

and i ask you, without intelligence, how could it self evolve? hmm?

---

You are apparently ignorant of natures ability to evolve without the guiding hand of intelligence. Due to this apparent lack of knowledge I believe I am completely justified to say that you are basing your idea on an Agument from Personal Incredulity. Your "reasonable intelligence" is unreasonable, you have a lack of knowledge and think this gives you insight. Before you accuse me of having Schizophrenia you may want to read up on the mental illness, I work with people every day at my job who do have it and I am safe to say I do not fit the criterea for a diagnosis. Exactly my point! If you are willing to make conclusions based upon a decided lack of evidence, then is it not reasonable for me to rebut with a denial of evidence? Its the same thing really - you are attempting to convince people of a worldview that is not supported by evidence. I merely suggested another worldview that is also not supported by evidence. Again, exactly my point. If and when there becomes evidence regarding the cause of Big Bang then I will accept it. You are just weaving a story unsupported by observations. You are missing my point and thinking I am unable to understand your position. I presented an alternative that is equaly invalid as yours. You cannot say that yours is the only conclusion that can be made when I have already suggested an alternative. I can suggest several more if it would help you understand. Don't be trapped into thinking that I actually believe any of my alternatives to your story, I just have the ability to use my imagination and not confuse it with science. Thats actually not funny. If you had experience with the illness you would realize how insulting you are being to another human being. Its quite disgusting.

quote:

---

Freudian Slip! He meant to say "poof," but he said "proof." It kind of changes the entire meaning of what he was trying to say, doesn't it?

---

The F slip may better apply to the poof being more plausable than the proof. The poof applies to an ex nehilo premise, while proof applies to its subsequent stage only. Before we can rationalise and explain something, it has to be existant, while that same mode of proof cannot explain or ratify the existant's origins: it will always end in a brick wall.Analogy: a car can be proved to be made via proof, by following all the imprints from car to car maker, car factory, to metal, to forces and equations. However, this same proof cannot apply to where the forces, equations, metals, man - come from. There is no alternative to the poof factor in the foremost first factor instant. IOW, we cannot use the components of the universe to explain the universe - because this would violate the finite premise of the universe: all the components are also finite, and never existed pre-universe. This does not contradict any science or maths factors, for the same reason: the science and maths only apply post-universe, and these cannot measure what does not exist.Edited by IamJoseph, : No reason given.

Ha ha ha ha. I just noticed this subtitle.I just taught my math classes about Aleph-naught. Their test is Monday.

---

If I had a million dollars, I'd buy you a monkey.
Haven't you always wanted a monkey?
-- The Barenaked Ladies

T=0 is a location. WHAT is there?ALL energy of the universe with NO outside interactions. NOWHERE will you find ANYTHING that can evolve with NO outside interactions.now, what can you say of that?energy? HAS TO BE.order chaos? : dunno.how did it evolve from a timeless state? directed? not directed?remember: NO OUTSIDE INTERACTIONS. and it DID EVOLVE.if ordered: its intelligent by all math. why? it evolved. we are proof.if chaos, and it became ordered structure: it MUST be intelligent to have maintained order.FACT: at T=0 , was energy, that had intelligence of some form to direct an evolution within itself which all the universe came from.act, with no outside interactions, but based by belief that it WAS : FAITH. no.. you are IGNORING the fact that nature was ESTABLISHED by a energy source that JUST WAS and had no outside interactions.forgive me, im tiring of all the ignorance of so very intelligent people with so simple and easy to understand truth that has sat before their eyes for so long, but because people dont LIKE the truth, they cannot even stop and EXAMINE it, and SOME claim to be scientists. I've had a rough day at work, probably shouldn't be posting because i weary of DOGMATIC IGNORANCE that scientist choose by choice by refusing to examine evidence.i will not post any more tonight, for i am starting on wine, and i got to roll some cigarettes. i will pray God forgive me for any anger i might invoke, and to open at least ONE persons eyes to actually READ and be able to understand the simple text and EXAMINE it for the truth.Gods will be done, so be it.

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

because we know what is, we can indirectly examine the before.T=0 is inevitable. eventually, all time, all evolution, was in its genesis always was state.now examine what CAN be said of this.energy? yes.now view all math, universe is expanding, universe shrinks, where did the energy go? back to T=0, the genesis state.so what can be said of the genesis state?energy? ABSOLUTE. if no energy you have nothing nothing could be, nothing would be, and you do not exist.ok energy yes, chaotic? (complete disorder)if chaotic, there is intelligence within the energy to direct it. why? because by all observation : order cannot exist on top of chaos in the natural order unless directed. only by direction is order established on top of chaos, and chaos can exist only inside order.what about order?there is NO outside interactions. PERIOD. at T=0 there is only ONE energy source. and after T=0 is the first evolution. if the energy was timeless and ordered, it MUST be intelligent to maintain order with no outside interactions.to answer your question : HOW DOES THIS MEAN BY NOT EXAMINING T=0 THAT ITS LIKE SAYING GODDIDIT?because, your refusing to examine the evidence of what CAN be said of T=0 because it shows God. and you dont like it.

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

look yall. i sometimes drink. i smoke cigarettes. but i KNOW God IS.it isn't what goes into a man that defiles them, its what comes from your hearts. if God was willing to forgive and help and love ME. he will you.look back to my analogy and understand the big bang. existence only is because of the faith of the first energy.take a peice of paper, write on it : existencedraw your circle in the center to represent the "known" universe.(by the way, do you even KNOW the SICE of the known universe? you should Google a planatery and stellar scale)now shrink that to nothing, all that is left is "existence".its a fold. like a black hole, the production of matter form the genesis energy created the vacuum and "apparent" space between matter. because matter is conserved energy. the very same energy that "was" at T=0. but it only exists within the body of the T=0 energy.blow up a baloon. stick it in water it shrinks the deeper it gets. bring it to the surface and it expands. matter production is whats causing the expansion. and the production is within the body of the T=0 energy.it explains black holes, it explains the possible other universes and heavens within the main body, and although we cant say how many times God chose to evolve, and how many universes: T=0 is inevitable eventually. and at true T=0 you can understand the name of God which is "existence" which could not "exist" unless something just WAS. and an evolution from that point is an act of intelligence no matter order or chaos, by ALL math of science.this IS the truth. you only need examine it.

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

So lets get on with it, quit repeating previous claims and advance your idea. Present the evidence of what the outside interaction was that caused the Big Bang. Don't just say "God", I mean evidence that proves it was the Christian God as represented in the Bible. Remember that I am just going to reply that it was the easter bunny, universe printers, Thor, or a noodly appendage. Show me He caused it, then show me who He is so I know it was Him. Its funny that something so tiny as a snowflake can disprove your claims about the entire universe. You just said there was an outside interaction. Now that your attempting to confuse me I will just sit back and demand you present the evidence. Are you saying this is my belief? Lets be clear - I have no belief about what caused the Big Bang. If there was an "outside interaction" it is an unknown, if you wish to claim the cause as known then I want the evidence. You seem to be stuck in this idea that Big Bang had a cause, and by your imagination the one and only possibility is God. Because you feel there is only one possibility you believe it is justified to say you are in possession of some kind of Truth™. How can you actually believe that I (or others) have not examined your line of thinking? How can you call me (or others) ignorant when it has been shown that your line of thinking is illogical? There are alternatives to your conclusions, all of them are imaginary because there is no evidence to support any conclusions about the cause of Big Bang. You have not shown it. How excatly do you plan to show evidence of something outside the purveiw of science? Logic? I have shown alternatives, so logic will not get you anywhere.You are left with faith. Admit it.

stick to science, then when you understand that without direction the universe including you and your snowflake, are impossible; study the religions. you'll see only one makes sense with what the reality of T=0 is. with no outside interactions, there would be no snowflake. the snowflake is possible because of outside interactions. and water is an ordered structure, if not order, it would not maintain form. it is a beautiful representation of the natural "order" however. no, it was internal direction that created an order that would interact within the body by set laws of the natural "order". without the first action, no other interactions are possible. the first action was a self evolution of a singular energy with no "outside" interactions. thats how you know it must have been intelligent. it impossible without direction. you seem to be stuck on the fact something can come from nothing and thats the same as saying you might not exist. WRONG you have not examined what i said, or have poor reading comprehension.

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

Hi Chiroptera, ICANT can be wrong but if he is he's got a lot of company.There are a lot of problems with the Big Bang Theory.Expansion is in trouble without inflation.Here is part of a statement signed by 218 Scientist and Engineers.
Plus 187 Independent ResearchersAn Open Letter to the Scientific Community
Open Letter on Cosmology http://csep10.phys.utk.edu/...lect/cosmology/bbproblems.html The three problems. The Theory of Inflation Faith that it will be correct.Without inflation Expansion did not take place as predicted. With inflation it is far from being anything other than faith that it will be correct.More problems,Here
The Top 30 Problems With The Big BangGod Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

So you adimit that you are unable to conclue that science simply has not found the answers to your questions. Funny how you ignored the fact that there was no intelligence to guide the creation of the snowflake. Order from chaos without intelligence. I agree its beautiful, I think the same thing about gravity and its ability to create planets and stars. Incorrect. Refer to the snowflake. You have not shown that the universe reguired an intelligent guide. Snowflakes and stars do not require direction. I dare you to read every post I have made since I joined this site and find where I said "Something came from nothing". You will find a few I am sure, but its generally making fun of creationist ideas about Big Bang. Try and understand this: Big Bang came from something - its up to you to provide evidence of what that something is. Assertions are not evidence. In order to prove something you have to go beyond insisting your view really has to be true because you really want it to be. My view is I don't know, and I need evidence to change that.Edited by Vacate, : No reason given.

what is wrong with you? are you stupid by choice or just too ignorant to understand what i wrote? science proves God IS 100%.read the bible and you'll find out he cares. because the Hebrew God is/was the true God. Jesus literally was the consciousness of the T=0 energy in a man. and it fits the science of what God is. but if you do not believe in God; why read it? funny how you ignored the fact the natural balances were set to behave that way by the intelligent energy that existed at T=0. geez.wake up. im gonna prescribe that medicine for you yet. then get your head out of your ASS AND examine t=0 FOR THE TRUTH.

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

If you have an issue with my reading comprehension I would suggest bringing it up to a moderator. Read that again and ask yourself if that is evidence of the cause of Big Bang. You accuse me of having no reading comprehension and then you say things like that! Seriously. I did no such thing. I asked you for evidence that it was true. Still waiting. You appear to simply be resorting to insults. I have point by point made my objections known, if at some point you can answer them without the childish behaiviour perhaps this discussion can move forward.Edited by Vacate, : format

blah blah blah.like most you take what i say and read only what you want to hear. i was banned unjustly before, so why not ban me justly?i have brought you a truth. and your an arrogant stone. but i love you. and dont want to see you cut off from existence. but as it is YOUR will to deny the body you live in. SO BE IT.Gods will be done forever. AMEN.

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides