Search results

ok, well these are his words, clear enough... "It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be...

Lol. Steven Weinberg pre discovery pre cosmological constant. :D:D omg! That's too absurd even for you. Making up nonsense like that just because your absurd religious beliefs drive you to it, is what's extreme.

pfft, well you'd better start calling one of those people you describe as "a great minds of science" and "a smartest guy in the world", liar too then. "There is a constant called the "cosmological constant", which if I didn't know anything I would make an estimate of what its magnitude...

There always is more, that's all you do. Paste and troll to draw faulty conclusions which you never address. This is where you paste and troll, troll and paste.

Then without all parameters probability can't be calculated. Like an idiot you make the point for me but don't even realize you have. could be God is not science based could be a multiverse is science based could be explained in the future, is like the first, no explanation at all. You are...

When the smartest guys on the planet won't be telling me something which can't be true, then I question the idiot who pretends they are.

Why do you keep posting stuff to prove my point if you disagree with it so much? Birth: all parameters are known. Probability against 10 ^265,000 (beats Universe!) Universe: they aren't all known. If you know the parameters you can make a probability calculation. "Given what we have...

According to ALL of science, it is the laws of physics by which a Universe becomes inevitable. No physicist anywhere gives any other kind of scientific explanation. Infinite odds against doesn't explain anything .It's just an argument from incredulity. Massive odds against occurrences happen...

No big deal in universe terms. The chances of any single person being born can be calculated to 10 ^265,000 which far outstrips some Universe probability guesses. It's not possible to properly calculate probability when all required parameters are not known, and as far as the universe goes...

That pleasure was all mine. ...that can and will create itself from nothing. The one comes with the other.

...as far as I'm aware, there's no law which disallows faith from shutting his own eye to reason.

Problem is, that's not the beginning of the universe. Big difference, rather infinitely big difference. Only by rather perversely supplanting the word gravity with the word Creator do you get evidence of a Creator. "Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create...

Glad you agree. The birth of one thing is not the same as the beginning of something else. The Universe began to expand at big bang. That is described as the start of "our" Universe, not the start of the Universe. No science is stating otherwise. Everything you've grabbed at agrees with...

The birth of a child is not the beginning of all children. The birth of "our" Universe is not the beginning of the Universe. Nothing in big bang cosmology says it is. oh no, Susskind AGAIN. :D scientific completely non scientific He also 'truthfully states' accident is one option.:p

..me too, his actually exists.

Or more appropriately, a "strawman" button.

False dichotomy. Also, neither are known to exist in the Universe. A-causal quantum events with inevitable outcome do, therefore look most likely. in a nutshell !

.. don't leave out yourself dude, and first in :p

That's fine, except neither is true. The only one to mention steady state or suggest the idea, is you. Science as you put it, that is to say big bang cosmological model, is about the beginning of the expansion of the Universe, not the beginning of the Universe. Also an eternal Universe does...