Search results

The science which is theoretical physics is not just speculation and not just a theory; any different than the science that explains gravity is not just a theory. Science explains how a universe can begin from nothing and the laws of physics allow for that. Knock yourselves out.

I didn't say your links were locked Before you try to "school" someone on what dark energy isn't, try joining a reading comprehension class

You wish I were , it's what your argument has been stumbling for.

I changed nothing. You're just being dishonest, that's all. Neither the laws of physics or the theoretical physics to do with a universe beginning from nothing are going to be ever reasonably dismissed as "just a theory"...which is what you're dancing around with. So what’s the real...

They obviously don't, nor do they, so why do you keep asking false questions? You were talking about the laws of physics. No problem with them you said...but everything else is supposed to be...."just a theory".... which of course is dishonest and childish.

Creator God, not even a theory. Yeah you could say that

No way intended, it's how things are... The laws of physics allow when the laws of physics are not being violated. They are not violated in the theoretical physics which explains how a universe can begin from nothing.

It's not my fault you insist in asking the wrong question which leads to you getting this ass backwards. Presumably you know of the laws of physics as you said you have no problem with them. Those same laws of physics are not violated in the theoretical physics which explains how a...

I already said the irrational ramblings that you've made earlier in links you keep referring to are locked, so they are going to remain as dumb as when you first made them.

Ask this guy....he'll tell you..... ....he'll explain what scientists "say" and will change what they actually do say for you, if it's not going to fit with some intelligent design notion or other. You said you had no problems with the laws of physics. But do seem to have a problem...

I think you are not only misinterpreting my tone.... as it's not intended to be overly agressive and doesn't seem to me generally to be any more so than your own....but also misinterpreting what is being written. Just to throw a little light on this. How do you interpret the pro-Creator...

The math proves your postulate incorrect. It makes 'everyone wrong' who says x+y=4 must mean x=2 and y=2. What are you trying to say?

You alter specifically and in context what a physicist says in his own video I hardly think you would be writing the things you do if you wanted to understand, let alone learn something.

What you have defined there as religion - is not science. The real use of philosophical statements like "true" in the end, is only in as far as they can be tested by science.

Absolute certainty is not required. Uncertainty is in itself a constituent part of confirming a universe from nothing . Which by the way did I mention, the laws of physics allow for.

Your argument right there is ..... "any response is the wrong response ...I'm right" Then you accuse me of always wanting to be right. That's the same kind of dishonesty I was talking about earlier . Not true. This is certainly not all religious - even in the wildest sense. Understanding...

You’re happy the other guy should be deluded? Why? Other realization based on empirical observation could hurt some precious religious sensibilities or something?

What is there to explain that you would ever want or be prepared to hear? The laws of physics allow a universe to begin from nothing. The diametric opposite of absurd intelligent design arguments. The laws of math allow 1+1 to = 2. I notice you are not cross dressing into your...

So when for example you say or infer Einstein doesn't make (common) sense.... it's wrong to question that because science is right....? what are you talking about? Believing "it all" was set in motion by 'an agent'... is not open to question is it not? There are no grounds to query that...