Do you believe in evolution?

Status
Not open for further replies.
rossum said:
The Buddha decreased suffering by showing the path to reduce and eliminate suffering.
Click to expand...
Then why is there more suffering even in his home town?
rossum said:
So, you either cannot or will not tell me how old you think the planet Neptune is. If you cannot, then that is another indication of your ignorance of science and of your inability to google a simple fact. If you will not, then that is an indication that you are a young earther and are aware that admitting that fact will completely lose you any scientific credibility in this discussion.

Which one is it?
Click to expand...
I can but i won’t. We’ve had this discussion before. Time and age means nothing to a person who believes in consciousness as the only reality that exists, everything else is a construct of the mind.
 
Last edited:
Dan123 said:
13 billion years is the age of the universe you’re living in right now, well the one you think is a construct of the mind anyways.
Click to expand...
Then it should be a contradiction with an eternal multiverse. Either an eternal multiverse exists which means no time or ‘The universe’ exists which is 13.8 B years.
 
Last edited:
Noose001 said:
Then it should be a contradiction with an eternal multiverse. Either an eternal multiverse exists which mean no time or The universe exists which is 13.8 B years.
Click to expand...
That’s a contradiction you’re imagining exists.
 
Noose001 said:
Eternal and 13 B years are contradictory.
Click to expand...
Not if 13B yrs is the age of THIS universe…we don’t know the conditions that lead to THIS universe and a multi universe theory is as possible an explanation as God…since we don’t know!
 
Pattylt said:
Not if 13B yrs is the age of THIS universe…we don’t know the conditions that lead to THIS universe and a multi universe theory is as possible an explanation as God…since we don’t know!
Click to expand...
  1. An eternal multiverse means there’s ‘no age’ at all.
  2. Multiverse theory is not convincing and even if it were, you can’t say ‘the age of this universe’ because changes are a comparison and comparisons have reference points.
    But you can say, ‘this universe is 13B years younger than the other universe’
We can say 13.8 B years if 0 is our reference point and 0 being our reference point means no other universe.
 
Last edited:
Lost_Sheep said:
What is this “eternal multiverse” you speak of? That’s a new one on me.
Click to expand...
See Multiverse. It is an infinite assembly of many universes. It is eternal because it is outside the time dimension of the four dimensional manifold that constitutes the Einsteinian space-time of our present universe.
 
Noose001 said:
Eternal multiverse/ 13 B years is an obvious contradiction.
Click to expand...
Out universe is just one universe. A multiverse has multiple universes of different ages.

Your lack of knowledge is showing again I’m afraid.
 
Rau said:
40.png
rossum:
Why not an eternal multiverse?
Click to expand...
Why does that exist?
Click to expand...
That’s the wrong question, Rau.
 
Noose001 said:
40.png
Dan123:
13 billion years is the age of the universe you’re living in right now, well the one you think is a construct of the mind anyways.
Click to expand...
Then it should be a contradiction with an eternal multiverse. Either an eternal multiverse exists which means no time or ‘The universe’ exists which is 13.8 B years.
Click to expand...
I’m far from being a fan of blood sports but does watching fish getting shot in a barrel count?

That was a rhetorical question but this one isn’t: From wherever you plucked that age of 13.8 billion years from and however it is perceived, can you roll the film onwards and stop it at the point this planet was formed? What does the readout say?
 
Rau said:
Why does that exist?
Click to expand...
You are looking for purpose where there is none. First, you have to establish that purpose existed before the multiverse. A post-hoc purpose is not an acceptable answer. That leaves you with the problem of establishing a prior purpose for an eternal multiverse.

Good luck with that.
 
Science might lead to robots replacing human beings. Many scientists are excited about this possibility.

So, why should I support science?
 
rossum said:
Which says a great deal about you. You ask questions, but refuse to answer them, even when you know the answer.
Click to expand...
Well, that’s me. If you talk about East when you should be talking about West, i don’t see the need to introduce the West when i can easily show you that ‘your East’ is misplaced.
rossum said:
See Multiverse.
Click to expand...
It is not a credible scientific theory.
rossum said:
Out uni verse is just one universe. A multi verse has multiple universes of different ages.

Your lack of knowledge is showing again I’m afraid.
Click to expand...
Good thing about time, there’s no such thing as our time vs their time.

T=0 simply means nothing is happening anywhere.
Freddy said:
From wherever you plucked that age of 13.8 billion years from and however it is perceived, can you roll the film onwards and stop it at the point this planet was formed? What does the readout say?
Click to expand...
Again, t=0 means nothing is happening and nothing can possibly happen anywhere. You have massive problems with the origins of this universe don’t even bother multiverse.

Multiverse is an idea that was to address the massive problems with the beginning of this universe but it certainly doesn’t. How it is meant to solve the problem is that time doesn’t hit zero from universe to universe.

T=0 is same as eternity also same as no changes.
 
Last edited:
There is no evidence for a multiverse, isn’t it easier to believe that God created the reality we live in, than to believe in many unseen realities?
 
BlueKumul said:
There is no evidence for a multiverse, isn’t it easier to believe that God created the reality we live in, than to believe in many unseen realities?
Click to expand...
Let us replay that in a different key:
There is no evidence for a God, isn’t it easier to believe that the multiverse caused the reality we live in, than to believe in an unseen deity?
Click to expand...
A multiverse is not omniscient. A multiverse is not intelligent. Your God has very improbable additional properties, which make your proposed deity far less probable than a simpler multiverse. Using Occam’s Razor we can see that a non-intelligent multiverse is less improbably than an intelligent omniscient deity.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top