+ Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 49 to 64 of 75

Thread: God is Duality.

  1. #49
    LogicallyYours's Avatar
    LogicallyYours is offline Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings.
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,352

    Re: God is Duality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cnance View Post
    Wow, that was a really intelligent statement. Just like the rest, it ended in insults. I think you're Satan's best on planet earth for attacking believers.
    Satan....Yawn...another make believe sky fairy. Are you really that STUPID???

    Why don't you take a cold bath a let it go. Did you know some of the most successful people in the world believe in God. Why don't you attack them? I'm growing tired of your insults. However, don't take that as a sign of weakness. I'll outlast you, I have God on my side.
    Then you're god is a DUMBFVCK....a BITCH....a PUSSY. Actually, he's make believe so, he's none of these.

    Wow, that should give you inspiration!

    Go ahead, give me your best insults. I think I should start cataloging them, they must be the best on this forum.
    Pray harder.

    What happened to my challenge. What's wrong, can't you find a perfect theory to make me look like an IDIOT, your favorite expression
    Your challenge holds no threat, no water...no credibility. When it comes to having an actual explanation, you're not allowed at the table. You have nothing to offer...NOTHING.

    Again, your belief is all fairy tales.

    Why do you hang out on the religious forum? Do you have a cause?
    To expose the simple morons like you for what they really are, simple morons.

    You must be one of Satan's best. Does that make you proud?
    LOL...SATAN!!!...SATAN!!!...SATAN!!!...HOW OLD ARE YOU, 3?


    If you want to break this log jam present a rational argument, perhaps a scientific study to discuss. Oh, I forgot you don't understand science.
    Prove your pedophile god had something to do with Evolution, Creation....anything.
    "Religion is a heavy suitcase: all you have to do is put it down."
    -----------------------------------------------------------
    "I have read the bible...more than once. I was not impressed nor was I so moved to give up my ability to think for myself and surrender my knowledge of facts for the unfounded belief in a mythical sky-fairy." - Me.

  2. #50
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,872

    Re: God is Duality.

    Quote Originally Posted by LogicallyYours View Post
    Satan....Yawn...another make believe sky fairy. Are you really that STUPID???



    Then you're god is a DUMBFVCK....a BITCH....a beep. Actually, he's make believe so, he's none of these.



    Pray harder.



    Your challenge holds no threat, no water...no credibility. When it comes to having an actual explanation, you're not allowed at the table. You have nothing to offer...NOTHING.

    Again, your belief is all fairy tales.



    To expose the simple morons like you for what they really are, simple morons.



    LOL...SATAN!!!...SATAN!!!...SATAN!!!...HOW OLD ARE YOU, 3?




    Prove your pedophile god had something to do with Evolution, Creation....anything.
    You lost it. You have no argument.

    Declaring war on the Bible is a waste of time.

    Insults are no substitute for truth.

    You know nothing about science. If you do, prove it!

    You're a foul mouth phony.

    Present a natural science theory for the universe!

    I forgot that's beyond your ability. All you know is insulting.

    What a pathetic display.:2gunsfiring_v1::judges:
    Last edited by Cnance; 10-07-2012 at 10:43 PM.

  3. #51
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Glendale Az
    Posts
    1,249

    Re: God is Duality.

    I never said science doesn't work for intended purposes. Stop changing the subject. The question for this debate is a natural science explanation for origins. For that, science has no theory, or for theories proposed, no evidence.
    This is an excerpt from Stephen Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow's book...."The Grand Design."

    Why God Did Not Create the Universe

    There is a sound scientific explanation for the making of our world—no gods requiredmore in Books »By STEPHEN HAWKING And LEONARD MLODINOW

    According to Viking mythology, eclipses occur when two wolves, Skoll and Hati, catch the sun or moon. At the onset of an eclipse people would make lots of noise, hoping to scare the wolves away. After some time, people must have noticed that the eclipses ended regardless of whether they ran around banging on pots.
    Ignorance of nature's ways led people in ancient times to postulate many myths in an effort to make sense of their world. But eventually, people turned to philosophy, that is, to the use of reason—with a good dose of intuition—to decipher their universe. Today we use reason, mathematics and experimental test—in other words, modern science.
    Albert Einstein said, "The most incomprehensible thing about the universe is that it is comprehensible." He meant that, unlike our homes on a bad day, the universe is not just a conglomeration of objects each going its own way. Everything in the universe follows laws, without exception.
    Enlarge Image





    Emma Hardy for The Wall Street Journal Stephen Hawking at his office at Cambridge University on Sept. 2.



    Newton believed that our strangely habitable solar system did not "arise out of chaos by the mere laws of nature." Instead, he maintained that the order in the universe was "created by God at first and conserved by him to this Day in the same state and condition." The discovery recently of the extreme fine-tuning of so many laws of nature could lead some back to the idea that this grand design is the work of some grand Designer. Yet the latest advances in cosmology explain why the laws of the universe seem tailor-made for humans, without the need for a benevolent creator.
    Many improbable occurrences conspired to create Earth's human-friendly design, and they would indeed be puzzling if ours were the only solar system in the universe. But today we know of hundreds of other solar systems, and few doubt that there exist countless more among the billions of stars in our galaxy. Planets of all sorts exist, and obviously, when the beings on a planet that supports life examine the world around them, they are bound to find that their environment satisfies the conditions they require to exist.


    News Hub: Hubble Takes Baby Pictures of Universe

    6:51 The Hubble Space Telescope snaps new images of the oldest galaxies ever seen. A senior scientist at the University of California, Santa Cruz, explains to WSJ's Robert Lee Hotz and Simon Constable how he did it-and what it means.





    It is possible to turn that last statement into a scientific principle: The fact of our being restricts the characteristics of the kind of environment in which we find ourselves. For example, if we did not know the distance from the Earth to the sun, the fact that beings like us exist would allow us to put bounds on how small or great the Earth-sun separation could be. We need liquid water to exist, and if the Earth were too close, it would all boil off; if it were too far, it would freeze. That principle is called the "weak" anthropic principle.
    The weak anthropic principle is not very controversial. But there is a stronger form that is regarded with disdain among some physicists. The strong anthropic principle suggests that the fact that we exist imposes constraints, not just on our environment, but on the possible form and content of the laws of nature themselves.
    The idea arose because it is not only the peculiar characteristics of our solar system that seem oddly conducive to the development of human life, but also the characteristics of our entire universe—and its laws. They appear to have a design that is both tailor-made to support us and, if we are to exist, leaves little room for alteration. That is much more difficult to explain.
    Stephen Youll



    The tale of how the primordial universe of hydrogen, helium and a bit of lithium evolved to a universe harboring at least one world with intelligent life like us is a tale of many chapters. The forces of nature had to be such that heavier elements—especially carbon—could be produced from the primordial elements, and remain stable for at least billions of years. Those heavy elements were formed in the furnaces we call stars, so the forces first had to allow stars and galaxies to form. Those in turn grew from the seeds of tiny inhomogeneities in the early universe.
    Even all that is not enough: The dynamics of the stars had to be such that some would eventually explode, precisely in a way that could disperse the heavier elements through space. In addition, the laws of nature had to dictate that those remnants could recondense into a new generation of stars, these surrounded by planets incorporating the newly formed heavy elements.
    By examining the model universes we generate when the theories of physics are altered in certain ways, one can study the effect of changes to physical law in a methodical manner. Such calculations show that a change of as little as 0.5% in the strength of the strong nuclear force, or 4% in the electric force, would destroy either nearly all carbon or all oxygen in every star, and hence the possibility of life as we know it. Also, most of the fundamental constants appearing in our theories appear fine-tuned in the sense that if they were altered by only modest amounts, the universe would be qualitatively different, and in many cases unsuitable for the development of life. For example, if protons were 0.2% heavier, they would decay into neutrons, destabilizing atoms.
    If one assumes that a few hundred million years in stable orbit is necessary for planetary life to evolve, the number of space dimensions is also fixed by our existence. That is because, according to the laws of gravity, it is only in three dimensions that stable elliptical orbits are possible. In any but three dimensions even a small disturbance, such as that produced by the pull of the other planets, would send a planet off its circular orbit, and cause it to spiral either into or away from the sun.
    The emergence of the complex structures capable of supporting intelligent observers seems to be very fragile. The laws of nature form a system that is extremely fine-tuned. What can we make of these coincidences? Luck in the precise form and nature of fundamental physical law is a different kind of luck from the luck we find in environmental factors. It raises the natural question of why it is that way.
    And these next paragraphs from the book, Cnance, sum up science's "Natural Cause Explanation" pretty concise....that is, an explanation of why there is no need for a god of the bible....your premise...
    Many people would like us to use these coincidences as evidence of the work of God. The idea that the universe was designed to accommodate mankind appears in theologies and mythologies dating from thousands of years ago. In Western culture the Old Testament contains the idea of providential design, but the traditional Christian viewpoint was also greatly influenced by Aristotle, who believed "in an intelligent natural world that functions according to some deliberate design."
    That is not the answer of modern science. As recent advances in cosmology suggest, the laws of gravity and quantum theory allow universes to appear spontaneously from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist. It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the universe going.
    Our universe seems to be one of many, each with different laws. That multiverse idea is not a notion invented to account for the miracle of fine tuning. It is a consequence predicted by many theories in modern cosmology. If it is true it reduces the strong anthropic principle to the weak one, putting the fine tunings of physical law on the same footing as the environmental factors, for it means that our cosmic habitat—now the entire observable universe—is just one of many.
    Each universe has many possible histories and many possible states. Only a very few would allow creatures like us to exist. Although we are puny and insignificant on the scale of the cosmos, this makes us in a sense the lords of creation.
    —Stephen Hawking is a professor at the University of Cambridge. Leonard Mlodinow is a physicist who teaches at Caltech. Adapted from "The Grand Design" by Stephen Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow, to be published by Bantam Books on Sept. 7. Copyright © by Stephen Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow. Printed by arrangement with the Random House Publishi

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405274870420680457546792
    1609024244.html

    I'm willing to bet that you will either not respond to this post, overlook the Stephen Hawking excerpt from his book, or state that this is not a natural science explanation of universal origin, even when prominent theoretical scientists like Hawking and Mlodinow say that it is.....
    Most people can't think, most of the remainder won't think, the small fraction who do think mostly can't do it very well. The extremely tiny fraction who think regularly, accurately, creatively, and without self-delusion- in the long run these are the only people who count... Robert Heinlein

  4. #52
    LogicallyYours's Avatar
    LogicallyYours is offline Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings.
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,352

    Re: God is Duality.

    CDANCE response: "You're only showing how gawd created the universe."
    "Religion is a heavy suitcase: all you have to do is put it down."
    -----------------------------------------------------------
    "I have read the bible...more than once. I was not impressed nor was I so moved to give up my ability to think for myself and surrender my knowledge of facts for the unfounded belief in a mythical sky-fairy." - Me.

  5. #53
    LogicallyYours's Avatar
    LogicallyYours is offline Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings.
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,352

    Re: God is Duality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cnance View Post
    You lost it. You have no argument.

    Declaring war on the Bible is a waste of time.

    Insults are no substitute for truth.

    You know nothing about science. If you do, prove it!

    You're a foul mouth phony.

    Present a natural science theory for the universe!

    I forgot that's beyond your ability. All you know is insulting.

    What a pathetic display.:2gunsfiring_v1::judges:
    Tell us about how the angels fly around the universe with satan any the other mythical beings. You know, the science of your life.

    Shallow thinker.
    "Religion is a heavy suitcase: all you have to do is put it down."
    -----------------------------------------------------------
    "I have read the bible...more than once. I was not impressed nor was I so moved to give up my ability to think for myself and surrender my knowledge of facts for the unfounded belief in a mythical sky-fairy." - Me.

  6. #54
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Glendale Az
    Posts
    1,249

    Re: God is Duality.

    Quote Originally Posted by LogicallyYours View Post
    CDANCE response: "You're only showing how gawd created the universe."
    Yeah.....I know....that will be his "excuse" for keeping to his old ways. I cannot blame him for that...I was the same exact way with these questions, until I decided to consciously leave my old beliefs at home, and by taking the second, bigger risk of leaving behind my original bias against other theories whose proofs were better thought out than the biblical stories I was locked into for so very long, LY.

    I can only state to others what worked for me.

    I just wanted to have a more genuine experience to draw on from for my life, than living a false scenario as a basis for my existence.
    Thus the challenges came to me on the inside, and I lived them.

    But at least Cnance cannot state that we never gave him an authentic scientific view.....that falls within the realm of possibilities.....logical, mathematically-proven, reality-based possibilities, unlike the unbelievable stuff he brings to the table.
    And absolutely nothing points to a "hand of a god" in the mix.

    After all....when someone the likes of Hawking (along with the postulations of most other highly recognized theoretical scientists) tells you that effectively there has never been evidence pointing to any "supernatural capers," most thinking folks would take that as a sign that something, (the universe) coming from nothing ( quantum level vacuum) is a quite "natural" event.

    I feel that these "unbelievable" science ideas are more respectable, logically speaking, than the other "unbelievable" process given to us in the bible.
    Last edited by GHOST DOG; 10-08-2012 at 08:48 AM.
    Most people can't think, most of the remainder won't think, the small fraction who do think mostly can't do it very well. The extremely tiny fraction who think regularly, accurately, creatively, and without self-delusion- in the long run these are the only people who count... Robert Heinlein

  7. #55
    LogicallyYours's Avatar
    LogicallyYours is offline Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings.
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,352

    Re: God is Duality.

    I think he suffers from the idea that Life has to have a meaning or purpose. What he sadly misses is, we...ourselves are responsible for giving our lives meaning and purpose. Not god, not a mythical sky fairy...not a make believe deity gives life meaning or purpose.

    After you cut through their BULSH, misinformation, lies and intellectual dishonesty...you find their entire position is based soley on personal incredulity.

    The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honorable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this. These subtilised interpretations are highly manifold according to their nature and have almost nothing to do with the original text.
    A. Einstein
    Last edited by LogicallyYours; 10-08-2012 at 11:12 AM.
    "Religion is a heavy suitcase: all you have to do is put it down."
    -----------------------------------------------------------
    "I have read the bible...more than once. I was not impressed nor was I so moved to give up my ability to think for myself and surrender my knowledge of facts for the unfounded belief in a mythical sky-fairy." - Me.

  8. #56
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Glendale Az
    Posts
    1,249

    Re: God is Duality.

    I think he suffers from the idea that Life has to have a meaning or purpose.
    In his mind he isn't suffering over his beliefs, though.
    He is content with his present beliefs, not wanting to change, simply because he feels that he has the "Truth" and its a comfort zone for him.

    Most folks don't want to defer their comfort. In the case of his god belief, it serves two purposes, I feel.

    Its comfortable to believe in that which has been in place for so long, and he probably feels that his dreams convey a true sense of "Someone" who is infinitely powerful, and invested in looking after him and his interests.

    Arguing for those beliefs on this website is for his own pleasure, even against all common-sense proofs to the contrary, since Cnance isn't looking to test, or change his beliefs.

    He also gets a certain amount of joy from simply "rattling the cages" of those he supposes are atheists, or the other christian believers that could possibly defeat his scenarios of his dream "truths" with their interpretations of the bible.

    IMHO, its his game, and its ok.


    The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honorable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this. These subtilized interpretations are highly manifold according to their nature and have almost nothing to do with the original text.
    A. Einstein
    By the way...thanks for this quote from one of the greatest minds the planet will ever see.

    I also like this quote of his:

    On the question of an afterlife Einstein stated to a Baptist pastor, "I do not believe in immortality of the individual, and I consider ethics to be an exclusively human concern with no superhuman authority behind it." Albert Einstein
    Most people can't think, most of the remainder won't think, the small fraction who do think mostly can't do it very well. The extremely tiny fraction who think regularly, accurately, creatively, and without self-delusion- in the long run these are the only people who count... Robert Heinlein

  9. #57
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,872

    Re: God is Duality.

    Quote Originally Posted by GHOST DOG View Post
    This is an excerpt from Stephen Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow's book...."The Grand Design."

    And these next paragraphs from the book, Cnance, sum up science's "Natural Cause Explanation" pretty concise....that is, an explanation of why there is no need for a god of the bible....your premise...
    —Stephen Hawking is a professor at the University of Cambridge. Leonard Mlodinow is a physicist who teaches at Caltech. Adapted from "The Grand Design" by Stephen Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow, to be published by Bantam Books on Sept. 7. Copyright © by Stephen Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow. Printed by arrangement with the Random House Publishi

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405274870420680457546792
    1609024244.html

    I'm willing to bet that you will either not respond to this post, overlook the Stephen Hawking excerpt from his book, or state that this is not a natural science explanation of universal origin, even when prominent theoretical scientists like Hawking and Mlodinow say that it is.....
    I will address their main thesis for the article.

    Many people would like us to use these coincidences as evidence of the work of God. The idea that the universe was designed to accommodate mankind appears in theologies and mythologies dating from thousands of years ago. In Western culture the Old Testament contains the idea of providential design, but the traditional Christian viewpoint was also greatly influenced by Aristotle, who believed "in an intelligent natural world that functions according to some deliberate design."
    That is not the answer of modern science. As recent advances in cosmology suggest, the laws of gravity and quantum theory allow universes to appear spontaneously from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist. It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the universe going.
    Our universe seems to be one of many, each with different laws. That multiverse idea is not a notion invented to account for the miracle of fine tuning. It is a consequence predicted by many theories in modern cosmology. If it is true it reduces the strong anthropic principle to the weak one, putting the fine tunings of physical law on the same footing as the environmental factors, for it means that our cosmic habitat—now the entire observable universe—is just one of many.
    Each universe has many possible histories and many possible states. Only a very few would allow creatures like us to exist. Although we are puny and insignificant on the scale of the cosmos, this makes us in a sense the lords of creation.
    First of all there is no direct statement of or even a hint of evidence. As the quote states, "as recent advances in cosmology suggest." You notice it doesn't say PROVE. In science, there is a big difference between suggest and prove.

    Here we have a real fairy tale idea, "Our universe seems to be one of many, each with different laws. That multiverse idea is not a notion invented to account for the miracle of fine tuning."

    There is absolutely no evidence for multiple universes.

    Contrary the statement, it is "a notion invented to account for the miracle of fine tuning."

    This statement of course is pure nonsense. "Each universe has many possible histories and many possible states. Only a very few would allow creatures like us to exist. Although we are puny and insignificant on the scale of the cosmos, this makes us in a sense the lords of creation."

    It's exactly as I've stated several times on this forum. It's the way an atheist scientist can make up a theory based on laws of probability whereas many universes are required to produce this one, the one that's finely tuned for life.

    That was fun. Roll out another one. I really enjoy debunking these theories, especially when there is absolutely no evidence.

    When there is evidence to support a natural science theory for the universe, then you can start celebrating.

    Sorry, you're wasting your time. It all goes back to what science does know. Most scientist agree that it all began with the big bang. Some, like Hawking, make up theories to fit atheism. Like you and the other atheist on this forum, they're incapable of considering any other possibility.

    Science will never explain it, God willed the universe into existence.
    Last edited by Cnance; 10-08-2012 at 05:21 PM.

  10. #58
    LogicallyYours's Avatar
    LogicallyYours is offline Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings.
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,352

    Re: God is Duality.

    Sorry, you're wasting your time. It all goes back to what science does know. Most scientist agree that it all began with the big bang. Some, like Hawking, make up theories to fit atheism. Like you and the other atheist on this forum, they're incapable of considering any other possibility.
    "make up theories"??? Do you even know what the definition of a "theory" is in the Scientific community???

    Theory is a hypothesis supported by facts and evidence. It's not just some "made up" idea. Furthermore, Hawking is perhaps one of the most open minded minds of our time. His mind is able to conceptualize ideas that you, in 100 years, wouldn't even consider.

    You just don't like the fact that he doesn't deal in Woo. YOU are the one who is incapable of considering any other possiblity...because you know that truth. You've stated just that, many times.

    You're an intellectually dishonest, hypocrite.

    Science will never explain it, God willed the universe into existence.
    "...they're incapable of considering any other possibility."

    Ha!...insulted with your own words. Priceless.
    "Religion is a heavy suitcase: all you have to do is put it down."
    -----------------------------------------------------------
    "I have read the bible...more than once. I was not impressed nor was I so moved to give up my ability to think for myself and surrender my knowledge of facts for the unfounded belief in a mythical sky-fairy." - Me.

  11. #59
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,872

    Re: God is Duality.

    Quote Originally Posted by LogicallyYours View Post
    "make up theories"??? Do you even know what the definition of a "theory" is in the Scientific community???

    Theory is a hypothesis supported by facts and evidence. It's not just some "made up" idea. Furthermore, Hawking is perhaps one of the most open minded minds of our time. His mind is able to conceptualize ideas that you, in 100 years, wouldn't even consider.

    You just don't like the fact that he doesn't deal in Woo. YOU are the one who is incapable of considering any other possiblity...because you know that truth. You've stated just that, many times.

    You're an intellectually dishonest, hypocrite.



    "...they're incapable of considering any other possibility."

    Ha!...insulted with your own words. Priceless.
    So, Mr. Logic, who is full of hot air, where is the evidence for Hawking's multiple universes?

    Oh, I get it, you don't really understand how theory works. Do you know about the scientific method? Well, here is a lesson for you. For a hypothesis to be confirmed, evidence is required. It is never too late, maybe you should go back to school.

    Oh, I see, your working on a really good insult.

  12. #60
    LogicallyYours's Avatar
    LogicallyYours is offline Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings.
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,352

    Re: God is Duality.

    Here is just one piece on multiverse theory...this is a bubble multiverse theory. There are many other evidences that support a multiverse theory as the cause.

    The signatures of a bubble collision: A collision (top left) induces a temperature modulation in the CMB temperature map (top right). The “blob” associated with the collision is identified by a large needlet response (bottom left), and the presence of an edge is determined by a large response from the edge detection algorithm (bottom right).

    (PhysOrg.com) -- By looking far out into space and observing what’s going on there, scientists have been led to theorize that it all started with a Big Bang, immediately followed by a brief period of super-accelerated expansion called inflation.
    Perhaps this was the beginning of everything, but lately a few scientists have been wondering if something could have come before that, setting up the initial conditions for the birth of our universe.

    In the most recent study on pre-Big Bang science posted at arXiv.org, a team of researchers from the UK, Canada, and the US, Stephen M. Feeney, et al, have revealed that they have discovered four statistically unlikely circular patterns in the cosmic microwave background (CMB). The researchers think that these marks could be “bruises” that our universe has incurred from being bumped four times by other universes. If they turn out to be correct, it would be the first evidence that universes other than ours do exist.

    The idea that there are many other universes out there is not new, as scientists have previously suggested that we live in a “multiverse” consisting of an infinite number of universes. The multiverse concept stems from the idea of eternal inflation, in which the inflationary period that our universe went through right after the Big Bang was just one of many inflationary periods that different parts of space were and are still undergoing. When one part of space undergoes one of these dramatic growth spurts, it balloons into its own universe with its own physical properties. As its name suggests, eternal inflation occurs an infinite number of times, creating an infinite number of universes, resulting in the multiverse.

    These infinite universes are sometimes called bubble universes even though they are irregular-shaped, not round. The bubble universes can move around and occasionally collide with other bubble universes. As Feeney, et al., explain in their paper, these collisions produce inhomogeneities in the inner-bubble cosmology, which could appear in the CMB. The scientists developed an algorithm to search for bubble collisions in the CMB with specific properties, which led them to find the four circular patterns.

    Still, the scientists acknowledge that it is rather easy to find a variety of statistically unlikely properties in a large dataset like the CMB. The researchers emphasize that more work is needed to confirm this claim, which could come in short time from the Planck satellite, which has a resolution three times better than that of WMAP (where the current data comes from), as well as an order of magnitude greater sensitivity. Nevertheless, they hope that the search for bubble collisions could provide some insight into the history of our universe, whether or not the collisions turn out to be real.

    “The conclusive non-detection of a bubble collision can be used to place stringent limits on theories giving rise to eternal inflation; however, if a bubble collision is verified by future data, then we will gain an insight not only into our own universe but a multiverse beyond,” the researchers write in their study.

    This is the second study in the past month that has used CMB data to search for what could have occurred before the Big Bang. In the first study, Roger Penrose and Vahe Gurzadyan found concentric circles with lower-than-average temperature variation in the CMB, which could be evidence for a cyclic cosmology in which Big Bangs occur over and over.

    Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2010-12-scienti...erses.html#jCp


    So, Mr. Logic, who is full of hot air, where is the evidence for Hawking's multiple universes?
    Oh, I get it, you don't really understand how theory works. Do you know about the scientific method? Well, here is a lesson for you. For a hypothesis to be confirmed, evidence is required. It is never too late, maybe you should go back to school.[/QUOTE]

    No, actually I do. I find it funny that any theory that doesn't point to your make believe sky fairy, you dismiss out of hand.

    I'd tell you to go back to school but, I'd hate to see you waste your money a second time.
    "Religion is a heavy suitcase: all you have to do is put it down."
    -----------------------------------------------------------
    "I have read the bible...more than once. I was not impressed nor was I so moved to give up my ability to think for myself and surrender my knowledge of facts for the unfounded belief in a mythical sky-fairy." - Me.

  13. #61
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,872

    Re: God is Duality.

    Quote Originally Posted by LogicallyYours View Post
    Here is just one piece on multiverse theory...this is a bubble multiverse theory. There are many other evidences that support a multiverse theory as the cause.







    Oh, I get it, you don't really understand how theory works. Do you know about the scientific method? Well, here is a lesson for you. For a hypothesis to be confirmed, evidence is required. It is never too late, maybe you should go back to school.
    No, actually I do. I find it funny that any theory that doesn't point to your make believe sky fairy, you dismiss out of hand.
    You do! Where is the evidence? Hot air doesn't suffice.
    I'd tell you to go back to school but, I'd hate to see you waste your money a second time.
    Why don't you read articles before you post them. There is nothing here about evidence, just speculation. That goes on all time in science.

    You've made a mistake underestimating my critiquing ability. There is no theory that I can't critique, even those with evidence have flaws. What you two keep presenting are theories without evidence.

    You stated, "There are many other evidences that support a multiverse theory as the cause." What evidence? Post them.

    Bubble universes that bounce around hitting each other, kind of like bumper cars at the amusement park, that's truly imaginative. I got it, why don't they watch Lawrence Welk where champagne bubbles float onto the stage. If we could only find that bubble machine. That's it, in another multiple universe a gigantic blob was born, that's where bubble universes came from.

    That is not just humor, science must account for a beginning. even for multiple universes, unless scientist can deny the First and Second Laws of Thermodynamics, or implications of the big bang for time, matter and energy, there must be a beginning.
    Last edited by Cnance; 10-08-2012 at 06:52 PM.

  14. #62
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Glendale Az
    Posts
    1,249

    Re: God is Duality.

    First of all there is no direct statement of or even a hint of evidence.
    (Ahem)......Here is your direct statement:
    That is not the answer of modern science.
    That sounds fairly direct to me....

    The evidence is in the logical application of the math Hawking and the others have performed...he just doesn't spell the mathematical formulas out in his oversimplified book.

    I know, I know...you want to hold the evidence in your hand and cannot.

    In this way you don't have to go along with his theory, leaving yours in the dust.

    Your typical escape route.

    Here we have a real fairy tale idea, "Our universe seems to be one of many, each with different laws. That multiverse idea is not a notion invented to account for the miracle of fine tuning."
    You, above most others would certainly know "fairy tales," with the exception that this one can be confirmed as viable through the math, the logic, and the observations made along the lines of particle physics.

    Too bad about your theory.....

    This statement of course is pure nonsense.
    Every statement that doesn't agree with your premise, Cnance, seems to be "pure nonsense" to you....

    I'd like to call Hawking up and tell him that there is this guy, Cnance, on this website that seems to think that his theories about origins is pure nonsense, but he cannot give any evidence pointing to the refutation of it.

    He might just laugh himself right out of his wheelchair....

    I really enjoy debunking these theories, especially when there is absolutely no evidence.
    If you knew the math and understood it, and you had an open mind, you'd see it....

    Interesting!
    Something of substance and applications, (Hawking's well-respected theories) against something without any substance, and only an emotional source and application. (Cnance's theories)
    Let the "battle" begin......
    Sorry, you're wasting your time. It all goes back to what science does know. Most scientist agree that it all began with the big bang. Some, like Hawking, make up theories to fit atheism. Like you and the other atheist on this forum, they're incapable of considering any other possibility.
    If you really knew what you were talking about, you'd know that Hawking, in his books, gives life to the Big Bang Theory, through quantum mechanics....
    Guess what?

    The source is..........nothing!
    Most people can't think, most of the remainder won't think, the small fraction who do think mostly can't do it very well. The extremely tiny fraction who think regularly, accurately, creatively, and without self-delusion- in the long run these are the only people who count... Robert Heinlein

  15. #63
    LogicallyYours's Avatar
    LogicallyYours is offline Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings.
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,352

    Re: God is Duality.

    You do! Where is the evidence? Hot air doesn't suffice.

    Why don't you read articles before you post them. There is nothing here about evidence, just speculation. That goes on all time in science.


    You've made a mistake underestimating my critiquing ability. There is no theory that I can't critique, even those with evidence have flaws. What you two keep presenting are theories without evidence.

    You stated, "There are many other evidences that support a multiverse theory as the cause." What evidence? Post them.
    Really???

    ...have revealed that they have discovered four statistically unlikely circular patterns in the cosmic microwave background (CMB). The researchers think that these marks could be “bruises” that our universe has incurred from being bumped four times by other universes.
    I know it's not angels, satan and "Poof!"...so, I'm not holding my breath you would actually acknowledge any type of evidence.

    You've made a mistake underestimating my critiquing ability. There is no theory that I can't critique, even those with evidence have flaws. What you two keep presenting are theories without evidence.

    Actually, I haven't. You don't have two brain cells to rub together for heat. Anyone can critique what they don't want to understand.

    I used to think you wouldn't accept any theory unless it was proved A-Z. Now I know you won't accept even that. That is, unless it has something to do with angels and fairies.

    ...AND we have all witnessed your dishonesty with the theory of Evolution....how you claim to have no problem with it and then claim later, that it's statistically impossible.
    Last edited by LogicallyYours; 10-08-2012 at 07:05 PM.
    "Religion is a heavy suitcase: all you have to do is put it down."
    -----------------------------------------------------------
    "I have read the bible...more than once. I was not impressed nor was I so moved to give up my ability to think for myself and surrender my knowledge of facts for the unfounded belief in a mythical sky-fairy." - Me.

  16. #64
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,872

    Re: God is Duality.

    This is a my last posting.

    I just discovered that scam.com has eliminated one of my religious threads about Satan. I was not warned or advised about its deletion. I assume, based on atheist who have objected to my threads, that scam.com decided to eliminate my influence.

    Rather than waiting for other threads to be deleted, I am withdrawing from scam.com.

    Do not misinterpret. My withdrawal has nothing to do with ego, or any feeling of importance. It is because of a clear indication of discrimination against me and other believers. After all, this is scam.com where atheist have the upper hand.

    I've enjoyed debates and knowledge gained from discussions.
    Last edited by Cnance; 10-09-2012 at 01:01 AM.

Similar Threads

  1. Dieting & Ideology: Delusional Duality?
    By coberst in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 04-16-2009, 04:05 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may edit your posts
  •