I don't get it. How does a grown person believe that an invisible man created everything and have a hard time even entertaining any scientific theory? For the life of me, I can't figure that out. But maybe that's a good thing.
1. you lie like a ingnorant troll again. do you see the "or". .. see quote below... 2. you once again lie... you use a quote... and do not give a link... why? Well we already played this game. you quote shows I am correct. Your quote is written in the context of the mulitiverse... we went through this before. http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/hep-th/pdf/0602/0602091v2.pdf ... In fact if one does adopt a bottom-up approach to cosmology, one is immediately led to an essentially classical framework, in which one loses all ability to explain cosmologyâs central question - why our universe is the way it is. In particular a bottom-up approach to cosmology either requires one to postulate an initial state of the universe that is carefully fine-tuned [10] - as if prescribed by an outside agency or it requires one to invoke the notion of eternal inflation [11], which prevents one from predicting what a typical observer would see.
This is typical liberal strawman bullshit. We have been reviewing the fact that scientists are stating a universe appears designed. We have not been discussing specific beliefs.
Yes we've been through this before. You get refuted and debunked in this and other threads so you wind back to the start and repeat the same ignorant remarks. You have no argument. You look absurd making one ridiculous comment after the next trying to sound as if you do.
troll b.s. at its finest... everything you believe has been debunked as 1950s worship of random chance type atheism ... completely debunked by current scientific understanding. this paper debunks everything you have been saying for years... our universe appears designed, as if by an outside agency. You may choose to believe in a multiverse or eternal inflation if you wish. But, that takes faith. http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/hep-th/pdf/0602/0602091v2.pdf ... In fact if one does adopt a bottom-up approach to cosmology, one is immediately led to an essentially classical framework, in which one loses all ability to explain cosmologyâs central question - why our universe is the way it is. In particular a bottom-up approach to cosmology either requires one to postulate an initial state of the universe that is carefully fine-tuned [10] - as if prescribed by an outside agency or it requires one to invoke the notion of eternal inflation [11], which prevents one from predicting what a typical observer would see.
Religion 101: keep saying everything you don't understand or can't agree with is troll bs, repeat the same faulty claims a million times despite them being debunked, or just blurt out "random chance", in a generally random manner.
troll horsehit.. deny and distort Hawking and all the other top scientists. Even though it obvious. http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/hep-th/pdf/0602/0602091v2.pdf ... In fact if one does adopt a bottom-up approach to cosmology, one is immediately led to an essentially classical framework, in which one loses all ability to explain cosmologyâs central question - why our universe is the way it is. In particular a bottom-up approach to cosmology either requires one to postulate an initial state of the universe that is carefully fine-tuned [10] - as if prescribed by an outside agency or it requires one to invoke the notion of eternal inflation [11], which prevents one from predicting what a typical observer would see.