13 May 13
Originally posted by menace71The creation of something 'mature' means the creation of a fake history. Lets say Adam had memories of his childhood, they would all be fake. Similarly, if the universe was created with starlight 'in transit' as some creationists say, then any stars you see in that starlight never existed. They are a fake history.
True for those who believe that.....I'm really leaning that way these days. I know that there are many mysteries but the truth is there in front of our faces it is just how man interprets the data
Manny
13 May 13
Originally posted by twhiteheadYour argument is a strawman.
The creation of something 'mature' means the creation of a fake history. Lets say Adam had memories of his childhood, they would all be fake. Similarly, if the universe was created with starlight 'in transit' as some creationists say, then any stars you see in that starlight never existed. They are a fake history.
The Instructor
14 May 13
Originally posted by twhiteheadPerhaps you draw conclusions too quickly and too firmly. I have studied the topic for years and I can see plenty of evidence. The scientists are alarmed over the problems of any big bang model and are seeking funding to create a new concept.
The difference is it fits the evidence. Any young earth creationist theory just doesn't add up. It doesn't matter what theory you come up with, either astronomers are completely wrong about how big stars and galaxies are, or the universe is billions of years old. There is no way to reconcile a large observable universe with a short timescale.
🙂
14 May 13
Originally posted by twhiteheadThere does not need to be any fake history. There has to be a first cause no matter what model you use.
The creation of something 'mature' means the creation of a fake history. Lets say Adam had memories of his childhood, they would all be fake. Similarly, if the universe was created with starlight 'in transit' as some creationists say, then any stars you see in that starlight never existed. They are a fake history.
14 May 13
Originally posted by RJHindsA universe/multiverse without beginning or end was discussed at length in
I think it is or else you would have been quick to share it with your evil-lutionists buddies here on RHP.
The Instructor
Spirituality.
The lack of cause (ie randomness) of quantum effects has been discussed
at length on this forum.
I cannot be held responsible for your senility and inability to remember
what has previously been posted.
14 May 13
Originally posted by wolfgang59Just as I thought. You have nothing of importance to add.
A universe/multiverse without beginning or end was discussed at length in
Spirituality.
The lack of cause (ie randomness) of quantum effects has been discussed
at length on this forum.
I cannot be held responsible for your senility and inability to remember
what has previously been posted.
The Instructor
15 May 13
Originally posted by wolfgang59There is no real super calculus for a multi-verse. It is an excuse, sheep clothing covering a wolf. We are held accountable for what we teach.
no
If you are really concerned for yourself, you might want to read; Romans 1, 19-22. I hope you have an Amplified bible, it says it best in our language today.
15 May 13
Originally posted by blunderblusherReally? That one must have passed me by. I'll have to trot over to the funding eedjits and ask if I can have some cash for a new concept. I think I'll have a blue one.
Perhaps you draw conclusions too quickly and too firmly. I have studied the topic for years and I can see plenty of evidence. The scientists are alarmed over the problems of any big bang model and are seeking funding to create a new concept.
🙂
There are plenty of "new" models for universes and multiverses. I like the ekpyrotic model but it is about as useful as most religions in this regard. Untestable and zero evidence either way. And no, there doesn't have to be any kind of cause for all this. It is, get over it.