Please understand that I'm not claiming my hypothesis to be empirical.
really? then why did you say:
My claim is that my eternal universe hypothesis is empirically 1LoT compatable as stated if true.
why do you need testing outside of 1LoT to determine whether it is compatible with that science law?
when you say:
My claim is that my eternal universe hypothesis is empirically 1LoT compatable as stated if true.
you're saying that you have experimental data that shows that your hypothesis is compatible with the first law of thermo.
You people are bankrupt as to any explanation of where all the energy originated from.
And you are as equally bankrupt when it comes to where your "god" comes from. You sweep it all under the rug with the answer "he's always existed".
to addess your edit:
What I am claiming to be empirical is that my ID/energy hypothesis passes the 1LoT test.
what experiments ahve you done to show that your hypothesis passes the test? To dumb it down for you empirical=experimental, if you're claiming that your hypothesis is somehow empirically sound it means that you have experimental data to back it up.
Edited by DrJones*, : No reason given.
Edited by DrJones*, : No reason given.
Edited by DrJones*, : No reason given.
Just a monkey in a long line of kings.
If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist!
*not an actual doctor