3 ms·

Sorry, but you just don't understand physics and cosmology. It's not about the "type of things that make up the universe we can see and observe" it's about ANYT

by jbssm 11y ago

Sorry, but you just don't understand physics and cosmology. It's not about the "type of things that make up the universe we can see and observe" it's about ANYTHING that makes up for the universe, including dimensions for instance. This is exactly the issue that I was pointing. People discussing these themes don't have enough knowledge to discuss them and they enter in easy - but totally incorrect - getaways like the one you just did. And when trying to explain them the science behind it, they realize it jeopardizes their faith and refuse to learn it.

TrevorJ 11y ago
Your argument assumes a level of understanding in cosmology and physics that does not currently exist. The standard model, as it stands is incomplete and does not predict all observable phenomena, it is intellectually dishonest to imply that we have fundamentally answered these questions empirically.
- jbssm 11y ago
  I'm sorry, but it's your level of understanding in cosmology and physics that is the problem here. 1 - I'm not claiming that the standard model is the ultimate mode. I'm just claiming that following the assumption of the Big Bang which is part of the standard model, then the existence of a God before the creation of the universe is a de facto impossibility. 2 - Something that may or may not exist outside our universe, can't have any influence or even be able to observe our universe. This, is not a theory, it's the definition of Universe. Thereby, the most your could say from the Plato's cave allegory, was that a God created the cave, but that the rest of the world where that God was must have existed before he himself came to exit.
  - TrevorJ 11y ago
    The key difference in our viewpoint here is that you take the standard model as dogma, and I do not. It is incomplete, subject to amendment as new facts are discovered as any good scientific model should be The logical progressions of our arguments diverge from there, understandable so.
    - jbssm 11y ago
      "I'm not claiming that the standard model is the ultimate mode."

by jbssm 11y ago

TrevorJ 11y ago

Your argument assumes a level of understanding in cosmology and physics that does not currently exist. The standard model, as it stands is incomplete and does not predict all observable phenomena, it is intellectually dishonest to imply that we have fundamentally answered these questions empirically.

jbssm 11y ago
I'm sorry, but it's your level of understanding in cosmology and physics that is the problem here. 1 - I'm not claiming that the standard model is the ultimate mode. I'm just claiming that following the assumption of the Big Bang which is part of the standard model, then the existence of a God before the creation of the universe is a de facto impossibility. 2 - Something that may or may not exist outside our universe, can't have any influence or even be able to observe our universe. This, is not a theory, it's the definition of Universe. Thereby, the most your could say from the Plato's cave allegory, was that a God created the cave, but that the rest of the world where that God was must have existed before he himself came to exit.
- TrevorJ 11y ago
  The key difference in our viewpoint here is that you take the standard model as dogma, and I do not. It is incomplete, subject to amendment as new facts are discovered as any good scientific model should be The logical progressions of our arguments diverge from there, understandable so.
  - jbssm 11y ago
    "I'm not claiming that the standard model is the ultimate mode."