bulletproof alternate universe

quote:

---

Trying to prove that he exists via science or pseudo-science I think cannot be done.

---

Missing the point here? OK here it is in black and white. Trying to prove that he does not exist via science or pseudo-science I think cannot be done. Capice?

quote:

---

1. This individual was confused ...
2. Science does not say there is no god.
3. There is no need to bring in cosmology to show that the universe ( Earth )is ancient.
4. Simply rejecting the bits of science you do not like does not, by default, mean that
YOUR god, or any god, is the alternative answer.

---

1)Sad to hear about the confused individual. Do you share his confusion or something?
2)Science, as practiced by so very many, is taken beyond scientific knowledge, to favor godless theory, such as a God omitting big bang
3)No need indeed. Thank you. That is why it becomes clear when looking at the invisible universe that has been long known to exist, eliminates all cosmological need for old age.
4)Which bits of science do you imagine I am rejecting, what proof of science should I embrace that suggests most people are nuts to believe in the other side? What of this other universe do you know, so that I can understand 'science' prohibits it? As far as default creators, we still have our unscientific free choice to choose whatever we like. All we do is explain how time is relative to this known other side. As is space. It has been said here that all the very laws of physics "break down" near the point of the big bang speck, as to getting it smaller. In other words it is not only not common sense, and against the bible, and against a law. It is against them all!! To break all the scientific laws I propose is not scientific at all. If we can break a law here, why not break one somewhere else? If we can simply toss them all out for the speck soup, then someone can toss the silly things out as they wish. I have not tossed, I think any of them out! And you have the nerve to rail against the other universe as 'unscientific?'-just because it won't fit in your soup!
What is so all fired scientific about extrapolating far beyond law and reason anyhow?

Arkathon, you said Can I point out that science DOES NOT try to prove that God doesn't exist - it has nothing to say on whether he does or does not. Capice?

You were given two "ferinstances" to rule out -- last tuesday and 13.7 billion years ago. You claim it shows the universe is only 6200 years old. How does it explain 6200 years old if exactly the same explanation can be used for any other age (which is currently the case). Therefore light that we are seeing that comes from over 6200 light-years away proves that the universe is older than 6200 years. Thank you for admitting that your concept is invalid.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist

If I understood him right, his explanation goes like this.At an undetermined time, a spiritual universe was created somehow. The spiritual universe was somehow filled with spiritual stars, spiritual light, spiritual background microwave radiation and so on.When things are in their spiritual states, they can do a lot of nice stuff. The speed of light is a lot faster, since everything is spiritual and not bound by pesky natural limits.In some way, at more or less the same time, an empty 'blanket' universe started coming closer and closer to the spiritual universe. This universe was different from the spiritual one, and contained things such as constant speed of light, relativity and other things.At a point about 6000 years in the past, this universe got close enough to the spiritual one that it started affecting it. It sort of captured it, and put a lot of limitations on the spiritual world. It hasn't as of yet collided fully, but it will do so in about 8 years.When that happens, a cosmos-wide merge will happen, and the two universes will combine into a new one, which combines the best of two worlds.It is currently possible to travel between the two universes, but only through limited means. For example, when you die you cross over fully into the spiritual universe because you are no longer bonded by your material mass. Other examples are UFOs which is when things go the other way; things from the spiritual world shines through.Did I get that more or less right? I'm not going to argue about it right now, but it helps if you provide your ideas in a coherent and simple way.

quote:

---

Can I point out that science DOES NOT try to prove that God doesn't exist

---

You can try. But in effect, by extrapolating right past creation backwards, many feel it is. Not in studying something for example, like medicine, but in the deep space theory of the big bang, I'm afraid it is clearly that way.

But what we can observe corresponds exactly to as if that is the way things are.The only alternative is that God wants to decieve us by creating false evidence.Doesn't seem to be much of a basis for exploring the universe to me.

quote:

---

How does it explain 6200 years old if exactly the same explanation can be used for any other age

---

I think I see your point. It is not that it rules out dates, really, as much as it allows for the young creation date.

quote:

---

Therefore light that we are seeing that comes from over 6200 light-years away proves that the universe is older than 6200 years.

---

When the universe was seperated, the physical universe had things already in place. Before the seperation, the far away stars, were likely still there. If we looked at them a day before the seperation, we would have seen them, or perhaps been able to travel to them in a flash. Therefore, no time was a limiting factor then. After seperation, say the next week, the same star you could have traveled to, would take now maybe a billion years! (light was not the same as it is in a physical only universe) So any light we saw then, would NOW be limited to laws and forces, and time, that is needed here in the physical universe. In other words, it would seem, light probably doesn't change speed (much at least?) in our physical universe. The change only comes as the universes merge. This was before, as well as soon again, as the predicted merge, and new heaven and earth come about. Does this explain it?

quote:

---

But what we can observe corresponds exactly to as if that is the way things are. The only alternative is that God wants to decieve us by creating false evidence.

---

Cheer up. No need to be deceived any more.

You really don't have to come up with all these new ways of convincing us that your ideas are imbecilic, useless, and totally unrelated to reality ... we know already.

arkathonI have not be keeping up too well to this debate.Is there somewhere in all your posts where you offer some evidence that back up your assertion of a 6200 year old universe?

quote:

---

The spiritual universe was somehow filled with spiritual stars, spiritual light, spiritual background microwave radiation and so on.

---

I wonder if the background radiation could be some kind of leftover from the split? Anyhow, no. It was the physical, and invisible, combined, merged universe that was there. Yes, it was very different from the physical one alone, after the split. How much there was that is there in addition to what we see is hard to say. Some wonder why we need to raise from the dead, as christians, instead of just get a new ghost body. Apparently it is a real combination of the two, not just the ghost part, we can look forward to. Otherwise, why would Jesus bother to raise up His body 3 days later, then, after a month or something, have it carried to the other side? We are talking about a real universe, just because we can't see the invisible part now, doesn't mean we see it all. [quote]When things are in their spiritual states, they can do a lot of nice stuff. The speed of light is a lot faster, since everything is spiritual and not bound by pesky natural limits. [quote] Also in the merged spiritual/physical complete state it is very different than this here.

quote:

---

In some way, at more or less the same time, an empty 'blanket' universe started coming closer and closer to the spiritual universe.

---

A fairly sudden split, actually.

quote:

---

At a point about 6000 years in the past, this universe got close enough to the spiritual one that it started affecting it. It sort of captured it,

---

No, our universe was split off, seperated from the other one, no drifting aimlessly here. The reason we use the 6200 yrs, is because it corresponds with a recorded creation time. A little like the story of Lazurus, and the rich man. After the rich guy died, the Laz tried to visit him, but encountered an 'inseperable gulf fixed', so in that instance, he couldn't.

quote:

---

collided fully, but it will do so in about 8 years.

---

Not collide, be merged again on purpose. Besides, actually, it isn't the new earth that comes in the near future, I don't know why I gave you my guess at that. The real soon stuff, is not universal. In other words, only those who want to go up to meet Jesus, will get their immortal, spiritual bodies. It's a thousand years after that when the new heaven and earth come together, Sorry if I didn't slow down a bit on the fine tuning of the predictions there. I guess that's still relatively soon.

quote:

---

When that happens, a cosmos-wide merge will happen, and the two universes will combine into a new one, which combines the best of two worlds.

---

Bingo

quote:

---

It is currently possible to travel between the two universes, but only through limited means. For example, when you die you cross over fully into the spiritual universe because you are no longer bonded by your material mass. Other examples are UFOs which is when things go the other way;

---

It may be possible for the spirit world to visit here somehow, for certain reasons, but we can't see or visit there, really. (unless you get into visions, dreams, etc.) Yes, when our body dies, our spirit is released from the physical universe. UFOs, if tey are not the military ones, but angels, or spirits going between worlds, could have a number of possibilities. I won't get into that here. Suffice it to say, they could be good, or evil. And they likely carry a bunch of beings.
OK I did my corrections, thanks.

quote:

---

imbecilic, useless, and totally unrelated to reality

---

If you think your speck is reality, then it has no relation. Namecalling is good, it shows I'm hitting home a little.

So, how did the creation of the previous universe go about? Or are you just going to leave that out of the model, and push the problem back further?And what caused the split?Also, if everything we can observe comes from after the split, how can you expect to make a model of what happened before it, if there is no evidence?Plus wouldn't we still be able to observe such amazing things as millions of people suddenly changing?

quote:

---

So, how did the creation of the previous universe go about? Or are you just going to leave that out of the model, and push the problem back further?

---

Well, no one seems to mind the speck just existing for no reason. Why do you need a reason for our split universes? I could actually tell you, but I'll answer it this way. Tell me where your big bang speck came from, and I'll tell you where the complete universe came from.

quote:

---

And what caused the split?

---

I could go there if you like. But I'd prefer to deal with everything since then, as we do with the speck.

quote:

---

Also, if everything we can observe comes from after the split, how can you expect to make a model of what happened before it, if there is no evidence?

---

There is a mountain of indirect evidence of a spirit universe. For us concerned with science, and space, we have to stick to what is observable, and repeatable. In the case of the speck, neither. In the case of our complete universe, until we keen up our powers of observing the currently invisible, we may have to also look at some of the indirect evidence.
[I guess it is a definite sideline here, but backgrounf radiatin, they like to associate with the bang-could we possibly use this for the split?]

quote:

---

Plus wouldn't we still be able to observe such amazing things as millions of people suddenly changing?

---

You got me there. Which millions of people are these you think should be changing? Not dead ones? In that case, the bodies don't change, just the invisible part leaves the old shell, like getting rid of an old car. Now if we were talking about people raising from the graves, and flying up in several years, that is different. Until then, I think our spirit is invisible.

arkhathon Ok just let us know about this mountain of evidence that we might ascertain for ourselves the validity of it.

---

'Everyone is entitled to his own opinion but not his own facts.'
(Daniel Patrick Moynihan)