The Big Bang and the visible past.

Too much information, slow down

Somewhat as your science alleges "models of the Universe where there is no concept of 'before' the Big Bang" ........no outside of for expansion and no time in which to have originated.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

Apart from a 'just so' story for why there is anything at all, what models could derive from 'goddidit'? Yah sure, Larni, like IDist eternal universe science proponents would like to know and understand the appearance that the BB poofed from nothing. Whether or not we all acknowledge the other's interpretation of observed phenomena, there is supportive evidence for both arguments. Lol. Nothing eternal, by definition, ever created itself. That is at least equally scientific and possible as the universe having no before, no time or space in which to have happened, no outside of in which to expand and no time in which it could have happened. LoL. The concept of higher intelligent entities in the universe is from all cultures for all of human history relative to all levels of human cultural intelligence, including todays ID scientists.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

Posting something of some significance in response would be the best way for you to help anyone, Hunter. This is nothing but ranted yada.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

The difference Buz is that there are ongoing scientific experiments and predictions that are testing the various Scientific theories.What experiments and predictions are being attempted to support the alleged IDists eternal whatever? And you have been asked many times on many subjects to present the supportive evidence for your argument.Here is yet another opportunity for you to try to actually support your argument.

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

Buz, there is nothing funny about you not comprehending this - all of that makes perfect sense in world of mathematical physics. That it makes no sense to you is irrelevant and of no consequence to anyone.If you want to introduce some factor into the explanatory framework, you need to define your terms. Do so, or shut up.

No, there is only supporting evidence for one 'side'. I'm good with that: no god! And is still a perfect example of primitive superstition sticking it's face and arse into a perfectly good scientific discussion.

you missed the point, didn't you? Your woowoo "model" is just as good as any woowoo "model", I just proposed another one, that is just as scientific as yours.Go on, prove me wrong, show the math, and I'll show you mine.

You tell me to shut up, due to incomprehensiveness after this? Message 26 You expect me to comprehend your model of no before, no outside of, no space and time, when I, science peon Buz must define for you, the EvC renouned Cavediver, terms like ethernal (I assume eternal), intelligent?I maintain my Message 24

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

The terms "eternal", "intelligent" and "designer" are human concepts that are based on our experience in time-space. So, based on the standard BB model, "eternal" could only mean "since the big bang" and "intelligent designer" could only refer to some entity in the physical universe.Presumably that is not what you intended. Thus cavediver was asking for an explanation of what you really did intend.

Blindly asserted allegement, void of evidence. Say what? Nothing eternal need be created. Can you comprehend that? And just what of any substance in this one-er message has been intelligently contributed scientifically by Larni?

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

I beg to differ. The BB does not define terms like eternal, designer and intelligent just because the BB is presumed to be temporal. Cavediver has the intelligence to determine the meaning of eternity, intelligence and designer relative to the context of the message to which he was responding.Cavediver knew knew full well my intentions. The renouned scientist sports in making a fool out of the ole man. He should not fool with a fool until he's certain (abe: he's fooling with a) fool. Edited by Buzsaw, : as noted, clarifying wording

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

The standard model is that BB creates time. So "time" does not apply to anything other than what follows BB. I'm not sure what you intended by "the BB is presumed to be temporal" but that is not anything that I would presume.

I understand that, but the terms which Cavediver called for the meaning of were eternal, intelligent and designer. Scientifically or otherwise, the BB does not define any of these, whether or not they are used in conjunction with the topic of BB or whether they are used in conjunction with another scientific topic.My application of the term was relative to an eternal intelligent designer which allegedly exists in a non-temperal eternal universe. The context of my message left no question as to my intentions. Cavediver full well knew that. His condescending attitude towards lay folk sometimes un-necessarily muddies up constructive dialog.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

The BB defines time. And the usual meaning of "eternal" depends on time. So, again, what does "eternal" mean such that it does not involve time?