Afterlife….How About For You?

[ding]

False dichotomy
The fact of the matter is we really don't know how the universe came to be.

I don't think we will ever know because of the limitations of our brains and therefore our intellects.

You call your god some extra-dimiensional force and maybe such a force exists, maybe it doesn't but we will never know because we are incapable of perceiving such things.

But I don't fool myself into thinking that what you call your god is an actual benevolent, all knowing entity that snapped his fingers and created the universe.

How can it be a false dichotomy when the premise is it is either one thing or another thing. That is can only be one of two things and that the evaluation should evaluate both.

You are the one with the false dichotomy by arguing it can only be one thing.

You didn't even read it, did you?

You think the premise is one or the other.

I have never stated how the universe came to be because , If you actually read my posts, I have made it clear that we do not know the origins of the universe and furthermore we may never know because we are incapable of processing the data required to understand the universe.

Hence the origin of the universe quite possible and I'll say quite probably involves more that the 2 forces you are limiting the discussion to.

I am more than willing to entertain a third option that doesn’t reduce into the two mentioned.

So do you have a third opinion you want to share because these are the only two options I could come up with.

Because you saying you think there are more options without actually being able to offer one example seems disingenuous.

What about the fact that I said we may never know because we are incapable of knowing due to the limitations of our intellect.
'
If I were to guess and put forth with all surety what forces were responsible for the origin of the universe I would be doing exactly what you are doing when you say a god did it.

I don't make up answers to things I do not or cannot comprehend.

What makes you so certain you understand the 95% of the universe that is a mystery to every physicist, chemist, astronomer etc who has devoted years of study on the universe?

I will not make a definitive statement on something based on 5% understanding

What about it? How exactly are we limited from learning? You seem to be confusing knowledge with learning. What exactly is our limitation on learning? The answer is knowledge. But as we know more we learn more and as we know more we learn more. Your problem is that you can’t even seem to learn what we already know. Which is that the universe began ~14 billion years ago. It was literally created from nothing. It’s the implication from the SLoT. There’s no getting around it. Matter and energy cannot exist forever without reaching thermal equilibrium.

Wake up. Learn something lest your learning be limited.

 

[ding]

If I were to guess and put forth with all surety what forces were responsible for the origin of the universe I would be doing exactly what you are doing when you say a god did it.

No. I actually walked you through the logic. You couldn’t refute one single thing. You don’t have the knowledge to hold that conversation and you seem to be learning impaired.

 

[ding]

I don't make up answers to things I do not or cannot comprehend.

You reject the scientific explanation of the creation of the universe. So technically you did make up things for something you cannot comprehend.

 

[ding]

What makes you so certain you understand the 95% of the universe that is a mystery to every physicist, chemist, astronomer etc who has devoted years of study on the universe?

Again, tell me how you think that has anything to do with the creation of the universe? Can you show me one scientific reference concerning the role dark matter and dark energy performed in the creation of the universe?

The answer is no, you can’t.

Because dark matter and dark energy had nothing to do with the creation of the universe. Dark matter and dark matter probably don’t exist.

so why do you keep bringing it up like it means something here? It doesn’t. You can’t even prove it exists. No one can. Which is super odd that no one can find, observe, measure or capture the thing that is supposed to make up the vast majority of the matter and energy in the universe.

So give it a rest. Face the facts. You are a science denier.

 

[ding]

I will not make a definitive statement on something based on 5% understanding

Technically you just did by.

 

[Blues Man]

False dichotomy
The fact of the matter is we really don't know how the universe came to be.

I don't think we will ever know because of the limitations of our brains and therefore our intellects.

You call your god some extra-dimiensional force and maybe such a force exists, maybe it doesn't but we will never know because we are incapable of perceiving such things.

But I don't fool myself into thinking that what you call your god is an actual benevolent, all knowing entity that snapped his fingers and created the universe.

How can it be a false dichotomy when the premise is it is either one thing or another thing. That is can only be one of two things and that the evaluation should evaluate both.

You are the one with the false dichotomy by arguing it can only be one thing.

You didn't even read it, did you?

You think the premise is one or the other.

I have never stated how the universe came to be because , If you actually read my posts, I have made it clear that we do not know the origins of the universe and furthermore we may never know because we are incapable of processing the data required to understand the universe.

Hence the origin of the universe quite possible and I'll say quite probably involves more that the 2 forces you are limiting the discussion to.

I am more than willing to entertain a third option that doesn’t reduce into the two mentioned.

So do you have a third opinion you want to share because these are the only two options I could come up with.

Because you saying you think there are more options without actually being able to offer one example seems disingenuous.

What about the fact that I said we may never know because we are incapable of knowing due to the limitations of our intellect.
'
If I were to guess and put forth with all surety what forces were responsible for the origin of the universe I would be doing exactly what you are doing when you say a god did it.

I don't make up answers to things I do not or cannot comprehend.

What makes you so certain you understand the 95% of the universe that is a mystery to every physicist, chemist, astronomer etc who has devoted years of study on the universe?

I will not make a definitive statement on something based on 5% understanding

What about it? How exactly are we limited from learning? You seem to be confusing knowledge with learning. What exactly is our limitation on learning? The answer is knowledge. But as we know more we learn more and as we know more we learn more. Your problem is that you can’t even seem to learn what we already know. Which is that the universe began ~14 billion years ago. It was literally created from nothing. It’s the implication from the SLoT. There’s no getting around it. Matter and energy cannot exist forever without reaching thermal equilibrium.

Wake up. Learn something lest your learning be limited.

How many times do I have to give the example of a dog being incapable of learning basic algebra?

We may very well never understand the processes that enabled the creation of the universe because like a dog being incapable of processing the concepts of algebra we very well may not be able to process the concepts needed to understand the origins of the universe.

 

[Blues Man]

I will not make a definitive statement on something based on 5% understanding

Technically you just did by.

No, I did not.

 

[Blues Man]

What makes you so certain you understand the 95% of the universe that is a mystery to every physicist, chemist, astronomer etc who has devoted years of study on the universe?

Again, tell me how you think that has anything to do with the creation of the universe? Can you show me one scientific reference concerning the role dark matter and dark energy performed in the creation of the universe?

The answer is no, you can’t.

Because dark matter and dark energy had nothing to do with the creation of the universe. Dark matter and dark matter probably don’t exist.

so why do you keep bringing it up like it means something here? It doesn’t. You can’t even prove it exists. No one can. Which is super odd that no one can find, observe, measure or capture the thing that is supposed to make up the vast majority of the matter and energy in the universe.

So give it a rest. Face the facts. You are a science denier.

We have no idea what dark matter is so tell me how can we even begin to speculate on what its role in the creation of the universe was or wasn't?

And there is something out there we don't understand because according to our understanding of the universe and physics we can see there is something out there, some force, some type of energy, that is physically affecting the motion of galaxies.

And how can I be a science denier when I am using the same knowledge that scientists use?

The fact remains no one knows what dark matter or dark energy are, they might not even be matter or energy but the fat that we cannot explain why the galaxies are moving the way they do unless some other force is added to the equations we use.

Don't forget the Big Bang Theory is just that, a theory based on our observations but we still cannot explain why the universe is expanding at an increasing rate.

And FYI the scientists who postulated that the expansion of the universe is accelerating were awarded the Nobel Prize. I suppose you think they are "science deniers" too

 

[ding]

False dichotomy
The fact of the matter is we really don't know how the universe came to be.

I don't think we will ever know because of the limitations of our brains and therefore our intellects.

You call your god some extra-dimiensional force and maybe such a force exists, maybe it doesn't but we will never know because we are incapable of perceiving such things.

But I don't fool myself into thinking that what you call your god is an actual benevolent, all knowing entity that snapped his fingers and created the universe.

How can it be a false dichotomy when the premise is it is either one thing or another thing. That is can only be one of two things and that the evaluation should evaluate both.

You are the one with the false dichotomy by arguing it can only be one thing.

You didn't even read it, did you?

You think the premise is one or the other.

I have never stated how the universe came to be because , If you actually read my posts, I have made it clear that we do not know the origins of the universe and furthermore we may never know because we are incapable of processing the data required to understand the universe.

Hence the origin of the universe quite possible and I'll say quite probably involves more that the 2 forces you are limiting the discussion to.

I am more than willing to entertain a third option that doesn’t reduce into the two mentioned.

So do you have a third opinion you want to share because these are the only two options I could come up with.

Because you saying you think there are more options without actually being able to offer one example seems disingenuous.

What about the fact that I said we may never know because we are incapable of knowing due to the limitations of our intellect.
'
If I were to guess and put forth with all surety what forces were responsible for the origin of the universe I would be doing exactly what you are doing when you say a god did it.

I don't make up answers to things I do not or cannot comprehend.

What makes you so certain you understand the 95% of the universe that is a mystery to every physicist, chemist, astronomer etc who has devoted years of study on the universe?

I will not make a definitive statement on something based on 5% understanding

What about it? How exactly are we limited from learning? You seem to be confusing knowledge with learning. What exactly is our limitation on learning? The answer is knowledge. But as we know more we learn more and as we know more we learn more. Your problem is that you can’t even seem to learn what we already know. Which is that the universe began ~14 billion years ago. It was literally created from nothing. It’s the implication from the SLoT. There’s no getting around it. Matter and energy cannot exist forever without reaching thermal equilibrium.

Wake up. Learn something lest your learning be limited.

How many times do I have to give the example of a dog being incapable of learning basic algebra?

We may very well never understand the processes that enabled the creation of the universe because like a dog being incapable of processing the concepts of algebra we very well may not be able to process the concepts needed to understand the origins of the universe.

I think your analogy is actually quite good for describing your inability to recognize learning has no limitations.

 

[ding]

We may very well never understand the processes that enabled the creation of the universe because like a dog being incapable of processing the concepts of algebra we very well may not be able to process the concepts needed to understand the origins of the universe.

We already understand quite well red shift, CMB, FLoT, SLoT, quantum mechanics, Einstein’s field equations and Friedmann’s solutions to Einstein’s field Equations. All of which tell us that ~14 billion years ago the universe began. That it literally popped into existence from nothing and then began to expand and cool. And since that time everything that was created has merely changed form.

 

[ding]

What makes you so certain you understand the 95% of the universe that is a mystery to every physicist, chemist, astronomer etc who has devoted years of study on the universe?

Again, tell me how you think that has anything to do with the creation of the universe? Can you show me one scientific reference concerning the role dark matter and dark energy performed in the creation of the universe?

The answer is no, you can’t.

Because dark matter and dark energy had nothing to do with the creation of the universe. Dark matter and dark matter probably don’t exist.

so why do you keep bringing it up like it means something here? It doesn’t. You can’t even prove it exists. No one can. Which is super odd that no one can find, observe, measure or capture the thing that is supposed to make up the vast majority of the matter and energy in the universe.

So give it a rest. Face the facts. You are a science denier.

We have no idea what dark matter is so tell me how can we even begin to speculate on what its role in the creation of the universe was or wasn't?

And there is something out there we don't understand because according to our understanding of the universe and physics we can see there is something out there, some force, some type of energy, that is physically affecting the motion of galaxies.

And how can I be a science denier when I am using the same knowledge that scientists use?

The fact remains no one knows what dark matter or dark energy are, they might not even be matter or energy but the fat that we cannot explain why the galaxies are moving the way they do unless some other force is added to the equations we use.

Don't forget the Big Bang Theory is just that, a theory based on our observations but we still cannot explain why the universe is expanding at an increasing rate.

And FYI the scientists who postulated that the expansion of the universe is accelerating were awarded the Nobel Prize. I suppose you think they are "science deniers" too

Apparently you don’t find it strange or odd that something which is supposed to make up 95% of the universe has never been observed, measured or produced in experiments.

 

[ding]

What makes you so certain you understand the 95% of the universe that is a mystery to every physicist, chemist, astronomer etc who has devoted years of study on the universe?

Again, tell me how you think that has anything to do with the creation of the universe? Can you show me one scientific reference concerning the role dark matter and dark energy performed in the creation of the universe?

The answer is no, you can’t.

Because dark matter and dark energy had nothing to do with the creation of the universe. Dark matter and dark matter probably don’t exist.

so why do you keep bringing it up like it means something here? It doesn’t. You can’t even prove it exists. No one can. Which is super odd that no one can find, observe, measure or capture the thing that is supposed to make up the vast majority of the matter and energy in the universe.

So give it a rest. Face the facts. You are a science denier.

We have no idea what dark matter is so tell me how can we even begin to speculate on what its role in the creation of the universe was or wasn't?

And there is something out there we don't understand because according to our understanding of the universe and physics we can see there is something out there, some force, some type of energy, that is physically affecting the motion of galaxies.

And how can I be a science denier when I am using the same knowledge that scientists use?

The fact remains no one knows what dark matter or dark energy are, they might not even be matter or energy but the fat that we cannot explain why the galaxies are moving the way they do unless some other force is added to the equations we use.

Don't forget the Big Bang Theory is just that, a theory based on our observations but we still cannot explain why the universe is expanding at an increasing rate.

And FYI the scientists who postulated that the expansion of the universe is accelerating were awarded the Nobel Prize. I suppose you think they are "science deniers" too

So what role did dark matter play in the creation of space and time

 

[Blues Man]

False dichotomy
The fact of the matter is we really don't know how the universe came to be.

I don't think we will ever know because of the limitations of our brains and therefore our intellects.

You call your god some extra-dimiensional force and maybe such a force exists, maybe it doesn't but we will never know because we are incapable of perceiving such things.

But I don't fool myself into thinking that what you call your god is an actual benevolent, all knowing entity that snapped his fingers and created the universe.

How can it be a false dichotomy when the premise is it is either one thing or another thing. That is can only be one of two things and that the evaluation should evaluate both.

You are the one with the false dichotomy by arguing it can only be one thing.

You didn't even read it, did you?

You think the premise is one or the other.

I have never stated how the universe came to be because , If you actually read my posts, I have made it clear that we do not know the origins of the universe and furthermore we may never know because we are incapable of processing the data required to understand the universe.

Hence the origin of the universe quite possible and I'll say quite probably involves more that the 2 forces you are limiting the discussion to.

I am more than willing to entertain a third option that doesn’t reduce into the two mentioned.

So do you have a third opinion you want to share because these are the only two options I could come up with.

Because you saying you think there are more options without actually being able to offer one example seems disingenuous.

What about the fact that I said we may never know because we are incapable of knowing due to the limitations of our intellect.
'
If I were to guess and put forth with all surety what forces were responsible for the origin of the universe I would be doing exactly what you are doing when you say a god did it.

I don't make up answers to things I do not or cannot comprehend.

What makes you so certain you understand the 95% of the universe that is a mystery to every physicist, chemist, astronomer etc who has devoted years of study on the universe?

I will not make a definitive statement on something based on 5% understanding

What about it? How exactly are we limited from learning? You seem to be confusing knowledge with learning. What exactly is our limitation on learning? The answer is knowledge. But as we know more we learn more and as we know more we learn more. Your problem is that you can’t even seem to learn what we already know. Which is that the universe began ~14 billion years ago. It was literally created from nothing. It’s the implication from the SLoT. There’s no getting around it. Matter and energy cannot exist forever without reaching thermal equilibrium.

Wake up. Learn something lest your learning be limited.

How many times do I have to give the example of a dog being incapable of learning basic algebra?

We may very well never understand the processes that enabled the creation of the universe because like a dog being incapable of processing the concepts of algebra we very well may not be able to process the concepts needed to understand the origins of the universe.

I think your analogy is actually quite good for describing your inability to recognize learning has no limitations.

You have yet to prove we have no limitations on our intellect.

LEt's do this from a mathematical standpoint.

if a being lives in a 2 dimensional world he would be incapable seeing a 3 dimensional object except for a 2 dimensional cross section of that object. If that 3 dimensional object entered his 2 dimensional world on a third axis it would have appeared to the 2 dimensional being as if by magic.

So you see our resident of the 2 dimensional world has physical limitations on what it can perceive and understand.

 

[Blues Man]

What makes you so certain you understand the 95% of the universe that is a mystery to every physicist, chemist, astronomer etc who has devoted years of study on the universe?

Again, tell me how you think that has anything to do with the creation of the universe? Can you show me one scientific reference concerning the role dark matter and dark energy performed in the creation of the universe?

The answer is no, you can’t.

Because dark matter and dark energy had nothing to do with the creation of the universe. Dark matter and dark matter probably don’t exist.

so why do you keep bringing it up like it means something here? It doesn’t. You can’t even prove it exists. No one can. Which is super odd that no one can find, observe, measure or capture the thing that is supposed to make up the vast majority of the matter and energy in the universe.

So give it a rest. Face the facts. You are a science denier.

We have no idea what dark matter is so tell me how can we even begin to speculate on what its role in the creation of the universe was or wasn't?

And there is something out there we don't understand because according to our understanding of the universe and physics we can see there is something out there, some force, some type of energy, that is physically affecting the motion of galaxies.

And how can I be a science denier when I am using the same knowledge that scientists use?

The fact remains no one knows what dark matter or dark energy are, they might not even be matter or energy but the fat that we cannot explain why the galaxies are moving the way they do unless some other force is added to the equations we use.

Don't forget the Big Bang Theory is just that, a theory based on our observations but we still cannot explain why the universe is expanding at an increasing rate.

And FYI the scientists who postulated that the expansion of the universe is accelerating were awarded the Nobel Prize. I suppose you think they are "science deniers" too

So what role did dark matter play in the creation of space and time

How many times do i have to tell you that nobody knows?

If we do not know what Dark matter or dark energy actually are how can we know their origins?

 

[Blues Man]

False dichotomy
The fact of the matter is we really don't know how the universe came to be.

I don't think we will ever know because of the limitations of our brains and therefore our intellects.

You call your god some extra-dimiensional force and maybe such a force exists, maybe it doesn't but we will never know because we are incapable of perceiving such things.

But I don't fool myself into thinking that what you call your god is an actual benevolent, all knowing entity that snapped his fingers and created the universe.

How can it be a false dichotomy when the premise is it is either one thing or another thing. That is can only be one of two things and that the evaluation should evaluate both.

You are the one with the false dichotomy by arguing it can only be one thing.

You didn't even read it, did you?

You think the premise is one or the other.

I have never stated how the universe came to be because , If you actually read my posts, I have made it clear that we do not know the origins of the universe and furthermore we may never know because we are incapable of processing the data required to understand the universe.

Hence the origin of the universe quite possible and I'll say quite probably involves more that the 2 forces you are limiting the discussion to.

I am more than willing to entertain a third option that doesn’t reduce into the two mentioned.

So do you have a third opinion you want to share because these are the only two options I could come up with.

Because you saying you think there are more options without actually being able to offer one example seems disingenuous.

What about the fact that I said we may never know because we are incapable of knowing due to the limitations of our intellect.
'
If I were to guess and put forth with all surety what forces were responsible for the origin of the universe I would be doing exactly what you are doing when you say a god did it.

I don't make up answers to things I do not or cannot comprehend.

What makes you so certain you understand the 95% of the universe that is a mystery to every physicist, chemist, astronomer etc who has devoted years of study on the universe?

I will not make a definitive statement on something based on 5% understanding

What about it? How exactly are we limited from learning? You seem to be confusing knowledge with learning. What exactly is our limitation on learning? The answer is knowledge. But as we know more we learn more and as we know more we learn more. Your problem is that you can’t even seem to learn what we already know. Which is that the universe began ~14 billion years ago. It was literally created from nothing. It’s the implication from the SLoT. There’s no getting around it. Matter and energy cannot exist forever without reaching thermal equilibrium.

Wake up. Learn something lest your learning be limited.

One can never learn that which one is incapable of understanding.

You can't seem to learn this simple concept so I can only assume you are incapable of understanding it

 

[ding]

False dichotomy
The fact of the matter is we really don't know how the universe came to be.

I don't think we will ever know because of the limitations of our brains and therefore our intellects.

You call your god some extra-dimiensional force and maybe such a force exists, maybe it doesn't but we will never know because we are incapable of perceiving such things.

But I don't fool myself into thinking that what you call your god is an actual benevolent, all knowing entity that snapped his fingers and created the universe.

How can it be a false dichotomy when the premise is it is either one thing or another thing. That is can only be one of two things and that the evaluation should evaluate both.

You are the one with the false dichotomy by arguing it can only be one thing.

You didn't even read it, did you?

You think the premise is one or the other.

I have never stated how the universe came to be because , If you actually read my posts, I have made it clear that we do not know the origins of the universe and furthermore we may never know because we are incapable of processing the data required to understand the universe.

Hence the origin of the universe quite possible and I'll say quite probably involves more that the 2 forces you are limiting the discussion to.

I am more than willing to entertain a third option that doesn’t reduce into the two mentioned.

So do you have a third opinion you want to share because these are the only two options I could come up with.

Because you saying you think there are more options without actually being able to offer one example seems disingenuous.

What about the fact that I said we may never know because we are incapable of knowing due to the limitations of our intellect.
'
If I were to guess and put forth with all surety what forces were responsible for the origin of the universe I would be doing exactly what you are doing when you say a god did it.

I don't make up answers to things I do not or cannot comprehend.

What makes you so certain you understand the 95% of the universe that is a mystery to every physicist, chemist, astronomer etc who has devoted years of study on the universe?

I will not make a definitive statement on something based on 5% understanding

What about it? How exactly are we limited from learning? You seem to be confusing knowledge with learning. What exactly is our limitation on learning? The answer is knowledge. But as we know more we learn more and as we know more we learn more. Your problem is that you can’t even seem to learn what we already know. Which is that the universe began ~14 billion years ago. It was literally created from nothing. It’s the implication from the SLoT. There’s no getting around it. Matter and energy cannot exist forever without reaching thermal equilibrium.

Wake up. Learn something lest your learning be limited.

How many times do I have to give the example of a dog being incapable of learning basic algebra?

We may very well never understand the processes that enabled the creation of the universe because like a dog being incapable of processing the concepts of algebra we very well may not be able to process the concepts needed to understand the origins of the universe.

I think your analogy is actually quite good for describing your inability to recognize learning has no limitations.

You have yet to prove we have no limitations on our intellect.

LEt's do this from a mathematical standpoint.

if a being lives in a 2 dimensional world he would be incapable seeing a 3 dimensional object except for a 2 dimensional cross section of that object. If that 3 dimensional object entered his 2 dimensional world on a third axis it would have appeared to the 2 dimensional being as if by magic.

So you see our resident of the 2 dimensional world has physical limitations on what it can perceive and understand.

You keep changing my words. There is no limit or restriction on our ability to learn. Intellect is a combination of learning and knowledge. There is no limit to what we can learn.

Except for you. You haven’t learned that the universe literally popped into existence 14 billion years ago and then began to expand and cool.

 

[ding]

What makes you so certain you understand the 95% of the universe that is a mystery to every physicist, chemist, astronomer etc who has devoted years of study on the universe?

Again, tell me how you think that has anything to do with the creation of the universe? Can you show me one scientific reference concerning the role dark matter and dark energy performed in the creation of the universe?

The answer is no, you can’t.

Because dark matter and dark energy had nothing to do with the creation of the universe. Dark matter and dark matter probably don’t exist.

so why do you keep bringing it up like it means something here? It doesn’t. You can’t even prove it exists. No one can. Which is super odd that no one can find, observe, measure or capture the thing that is supposed to make up the vast majority of the matter and energy in the universe.

So give it a rest. Face the facts. You are a science denier.

We have no idea what dark matter is so tell me how can we even begin to speculate on what its role in the creation of the universe was or wasn't?

And there is something out there we don't understand because according to our understanding of the universe and physics we can see there is something out there, some force, some type of energy, that is physically affecting the motion of galaxies.

And how can I be a science denier when I am using the same knowledge that scientists use?

The fact remains no one knows what dark matter or dark energy are, they might not even be matter or energy but the fat that we cannot explain why the galaxies are moving the way they do unless some other force is added to the equations we use.

Don't forget the Big Bang Theory is just that, a theory based on our observations but we still cannot explain why the universe is expanding at an increasing rate.

And FYI the scientists who postulated that the expansion of the universe is accelerating were awarded the Nobel Prize. I suppose you think they are "science deniers" too

So what role did dark matter play in the creation of space and time

How many times do i have to tell you that nobody knows?

If we do not know what Dark matter or dark energy actually are how can we know their origins?

Because it doesn’t exist. It’s a fudge factor.

And has nothing to do with space and time popping into existence 14 billion years ago.

 

[ding]

False dichotomy
The fact of the matter is we really don't know how the universe came to be.

I don't think we will ever know because of the limitations of our brains and therefore our intellects.

You call your god some extra-dimiensional force and maybe such a force exists, maybe it doesn't but we will never know because we are incapable of perceiving such things.

But I don't fool myself into thinking that what you call your god is an actual benevolent, all knowing entity that snapped his fingers and created the universe.

How can it be a false dichotomy when the premise is it is either one thing or another thing. That is can only be one of two things and that the evaluation should evaluate both.

You are the one with the false dichotomy by arguing it can only be one thing.

You didn't even read it, did you?

You think the premise is one or the other.

I have never stated how the universe came to be because , If you actually read my posts, I have made it clear that we do not know the origins of the universe and furthermore we may never know because we are incapable of processing the data required to understand the universe.

Hence the origin of the universe quite possible and I'll say quite probably involves more that the 2 forces you are limiting the discussion to.

I am more than willing to entertain a third option that doesn’t reduce into the two mentioned.

So do you have a third opinion you want to share because these are the only two options I could come up with.

Because you saying you think there are more options without actually being able to offer one example seems disingenuous.

What about the fact that I said we may never know because we are incapable of knowing due to the limitations of our intellect.
'
If I were to guess and put forth with all surety what forces were responsible for the origin of the universe I would be doing exactly what you are doing when you say a god did it.

I don't make up answers to things I do not or cannot comprehend.

What makes you so certain you understand the 95% of the universe that is a mystery to every physicist, chemist, astronomer etc who has devoted years of study on the universe?

I will not make a definitive statement on something based on 5% understanding

What about it? How exactly are we limited from learning? You seem to be confusing knowledge with learning. What exactly is our limitation on learning? The answer is knowledge. But as we know more we learn more and as we know more we learn more. Your problem is that you can’t even seem to learn what we already know. Which is that the universe began ~14 billion years ago. It was literally created from nothing. It’s the implication from the SLoT. There’s no getting around it. Matter and energy cannot exist forever without reaching thermal equilibrium.

Wake up. Learn something lest your learning be limited.

One can never learn that which one is incapable of understanding.

You can't seem to learn this simple concept so I can only assume you are incapable of understanding it

Knowledge is gained one piece of information at a time. Learning occurs as knowledge is acquired.

There is no limitation on learning.

 

[Blues Man]

False dichotomy
The fact of the matter is we really don't know how the universe came to be.

I don't think we will ever know because of the limitations of our brains and therefore our intellects.

You call your god some extra-dimiensional force and maybe such a force exists, maybe it doesn't but we will never know because we are incapable of perceiving such things.

But I don't fool myself into thinking that what you call your god is an actual benevolent, all knowing entity that snapped his fingers and created the universe.

How can it be a false dichotomy when the premise is it is either one thing or another thing. That is can only be one of two things and that the evaluation should evaluate both.

You are the one with the false dichotomy by arguing it can only be one thing.

You didn't even read it, did you?

You think the premise is one or the other.

I have never stated how the universe came to be because , If you actually read my posts, I have made it clear that we do not know the origins of the universe and furthermore we may never know because we are incapable of processing the data required to understand the universe.

Hence the origin of the universe quite possible and I'll say quite probably involves more that the 2 forces you are limiting the discussion to.

I am more than willing to entertain a third option that doesn’t reduce into the two mentioned.

So do you have a third opinion you want to share because these are the only two options I could come up with.

Because you saying you think there are more options without actually being able to offer one example seems disingenuous.

What about the fact that I said we may never know because we are incapable of knowing due to the limitations of our intellect.
'
If I were to guess and put forth with all surety what forces were responsible for the origin of the universe I would be doing exactly what you are doing when you say a god did it.

I don't make up answers to things I do not or cannot comprehend.

What makes you so certain you understand the 95% of the universe that is a mystery to every physicist, chemist, astronomer etc who has devoted years of study on the universe?

I will not make a definitive statement on something based on 5% understanding

What about it? How exactly are we limited from learning? You seem to be confusing knowledge with learning. What exactly is our limitation on learning? The answer is knowledge. But as we know more we learn more and as we know more we learn more. Your problem is that you can’t even seem to learn what we already know. Which is that the universe began ~14 billion years ago. It was literally created from nothing. It’s the implication from the SLoT. There’s no getting around it. Matter and energy cannot exist forever without reaching thermal equilibrium.

Wake up. Learn something lest your learning be limited.

How many times do I have to give the example of a dog being incapable of learning basic algebra?

We may very well never understand the processes that enabled the creation of the universe because like a dog being incapable of processing the concepts of algebra we very well may not be able to process the concepts needed to understand the origins of the universe.

I think your analogy is actually quite good for describing your inability to recognize learning has no limitations.

You have yet to prove we have no limitations on our intellect.

LEt's do this from a mathematical standpoint.

if a being lives in a 2 dimensional world he would be incapable seeing a 3 dimensional object except for a 2 dimensional cross section of that object. If that 3 dimensional object entered his 2 dimensional world on a third axis it would have appeared to the 2 dimensional being as if by magic.

So you see our resident of the 2 dimensional world has physical limitations on what it can perceive and understand.

You keep changing my words. There is no limit or restriction on our ability to learn. Intellect is a combination of learning and knowledge. There is no limit to what we can learn.

Except for you. You haven’t learned that the universe literally popped into existence 14 billion years ago and then began to expand and cool.

And you don't seem to realize that that surety you have is based on an understanding of a mere 5% of the matter and energy in the universe.

The truth of the matter is we really don't know how the universe began all we have is a theory that best explains what we are able to observe.

What about the parts of the universe we cannot observe ?

What's 96 Percent of the Universe Made Of? Astronomers Don't Know

Almost all of the universe — 96 percent — is invisible stuff called dark matter and dark energy. The new book "The 4 Percent Universe" by Richard Panek describes how this bizarre picture came to be.

www.space.com

 

[Blues Man]

What makes you so certain you understand the 95% of the universe that is a mystery to every physicist, chemist, astronomer etc who has devoted years of study on the universe?

Again, tell me how you think that has anything to do with the creation of the universe? Can you show me one scientific reference concerning the role dark matter and dark energy performed in the creation of the universe?

The answer is no, you can’t.

Because dark matter and dark energy had nothing to do with the creation of the universe. Dark matter and dark matter probably don’t exist.

so why do you keep bringing it up like it means something here? It doesn’t. You can’t even prove it exists. No one can. Which is super odd that no one can find, observe, measure or capture the thing that is supposed to make up the vast majority of the matter and energy in the universe.

So give it a rest. Face the facts. You are a science denier.

We have no idea what dark matter is so tell me how can we even begin to speculate on what its role in the creation of the universe was or wasn't?

And there is something out there we don't understand because according to our understanding of the universe and physics we can see there is something out there, some force, some type of energy, that is physically affecting the motion of galaxies.

And how can I be a science denier when I am using the same knowledge that scientists use?

The fact remains no one knows what dark matter or dark energy are, they might not even be matter or energy but the fat that we cannot explain why the galaxies are moving the way they do unless some other force is added to the equations we use.

Don't forget the Big Bang Theory is just that, a theory based on our observations but we still cannot explain why the universe is expanding at an increasing rate.

And FYI the scientists who postulated that the expansion of the universe is accelerating were awarded the Nobel Prize. I suppose you think they are "science deniers" too

So what role did dark matter play in the creation of space and time

How many times do i have to tell you that nobody knows?

If we do not know what Dark matter or dark energy actually are how can we know their origins?

Because it doesn’t exist. It’s a fudge factor.

And has nothing to do with space and time popping into existence 14 billion years ago.

Prove it. If you're so sure it should be no problem.

FYI if we don't know what 95% of the universe is made of how can we say we know with absolute certainty how the universe originated?