EvC Forum: Hawking Comes Clean

Email This Thread

Newer Topic | Older Topic

Author

Topic: Hawking Comes Clean

onifre

Member (Idle past 2971 days)

Posts: 4854

From: Dark Side of the Moon

Joined: 02-20-2008

Normal Thread Display

Message 29 of 148 (579134)
09-03-2010 5:46 PM

Reply to: Message 28 by cavediver
09-03-2010 4:14 PM

But that says nothing about the Universe as a whole.

I think this is where the deeper misunderstanding lies; at least it was for me before I got to this site and read yours and Son Goku's posts.

To equate existence, the observable universe, and the whole universe, seems like a conceptual inevitability to those, like many of us, who are not as knowledgable as you. I know it was a struggle for me to grasp, and still is when I try to explain it to someone.

And to be fair, I should start writing "existence" as I'm almost just as weak on definitions there as I am with "god"s.

It gets more and more confusing every time I think about it.

- Oni

Edited by onifre, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 28 by cavediver, posted 09-03-2010 4:14 PM		cavediver has not replied

onifre

Member (Idle past 2971 days)

Posts: 4854

From: Dark Side of the Moon

Joined: 02-20-2008

Normal Thread Display

Message 37 of 148 (579502)
09-04-2010 10:45 PM

Reply to: Message 35 by Bolder-dash
09-04-2010 10:32 PM

Re: Hhhm, no he did what so many do.

You would never ever mind an evolutionists bias.

If the subject is cosmology, as is discussed in this thread, then I would question what an evolutionary biologist had to say.

Or are you just lumping in anyone who favors science over fairy tales into the "evolutionist" camp?

- Oni

Edited by onifre, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 35 by Bolder-dash, posted 09-04-2010 10:32 PM		Bolder-dash has replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 38 by Bolder-dash, posted 09-04-2010 10:56 PM		onifre has seen this message but not replied

onifre

Member (Idle past 2971 days)

Posts: 4854

From: Dark Side of the Moon

Joined: 02-20-2008

Normal Thread Display

Message 118 of 148 (580363)
09-08-2010 9:04 PM

Reply to: Message 117 by slevesque
09-08-2010 8:47 PM

Re: We just don't know... And that's okay.

So does this mean you consider the 'no first cause' position as the default position ?

I think the default position is, intelligent entities that exist in supposed realms that are not subject to the laws of physics, and can create universes with laws, don't exist until evidence for them is provided.

If the leading theory in theoretical physics is that of 'no first cause,' as it seems to be, then that is where the evidence lead the experts.

In fact, the default position for most of history has been God. It is because of the evidence that it has lead science away from that.

- Oni

Edited by onifre, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 117 by slevesque, posted 09-08-2010 8:47 PM		slevesque has replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 121 by slevesque, posted 09-08-2010 9:19 PM		onifre has replied

onifre

Member (Idle past 2971 days)

Posts: 4854

From: Dark Side of the Moon

Joined: 02-20-2008

Normal Thread Display

Message 123 of 148 (580372)
09-08-2010 9:33 PM

Reply to: Message 121 by slevesque
09-08-2010 9:19 PM

Re: We just don't know... And that's okay.

We were talking about colliding branes. or first cause vs no cause

Yeah I got that, but I don't think this negates my post. What is the "red herring" in reference to?

- Oni

This message is a reply to:
	Message 121 by slevesque, posted 09-08-2010 9:19 PM		slevesque has not replied

Date format: mm-dd-yyyy

Timezone: ET (US)

Newer Topic | Older Topic

Do Nothing Button

3 online now:	LamarkNewAge, PaulK, Taq
Newest Member:	popoi
Post Volume:	Total: 916,397 Year: 3,654/9,624 Month: 525/974 Week: 138/276 Day: 12/23 Hour: 1/1