They can also write stories about Leprechauns, fairies, and hobbits in Middle Earth. That doesn't make them real.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
You misunderstood me. I simply meant that humans write songs about God, they write books about God, they talk about meeting God during NDE's, etc.
If you think mainstream science is pure speculation, you are not doing science.Actually....
The laws of physics *insist* that some form of energy has existed eternally in some form or another. Even Alfven posited a 'bang' theory where clumps of matter and antimatter come together and blow apart again, but not all the matter of the universe comes together to a single point. In other words, even in an expansion scenario, the whole notion that anything began at a 'point' is pure speculation. The whole notion that all mass has some special creation data is a pure mythology based on 3 or maybe now 4 different supernatural claims, none of which can be demonstrated on Earth, nor will they *ever* be demonstrated on Earth in most cases.
You have what the article said backwards. The article states "A particular problem is that most Boltzmann brains will exist in the far future when the universe is no more than an inky void, with a past indistinguishable from the future. This would make our experience of time's arrow highly unusual.Yes, I did. It acknowledges that there is a *perfectly natural* way to a higher intelligence to "evolve" in this physical universe, *long, long, long* before humans ever evolved on Earth. The structures of spacetime may have taken this basic shape more than a hundred trillion years ago for all we know.
Compared to the puny supernatural invisible deities of BB theory, you have absolutely *nothing* to complain about.
Time doesn't give you a carte blanche. The probability of a macroscopic intelligence forming can be so small that it's occurrence in the past 13.7 billion years would be extremely unlikely.The universe doesn't even have to be "eternal" actually. Even based on *mainstream* claims, the universe has had *more time* to "evolve", since the universe is 13.7 billion years old (according to the mainstream) and the Earth has only existed for about 4.6 billion years. You can't hide from the fact that that the universe has had more time to evolve than humans.
Humans also write books about encountering talking snakes, leprachauns and fairies. Doesn't mean any of those are real.You misunderstood me. I simply meant that humans write songs about God, they write books about God, they talk about meeting God during NDE's, etc. I can verify the *effect* just as I can verify the *effect* of redshift.
If you think mainstream science is pure speculation, you are not doing science.
You have what the article said backwards. The article states "A particular problem is that most Boltzmann brains will exist in the far future when the universe is no more than an inky void, with a past indistinguishable from the future. This would make our experience of time's arrow highly unusual.
However, if we can demonstrate that the universe has a finite lifespan, that would deny Boltzmann brains the infinite time they need to outnumber us. "
You didn't read it, did you?
It is pure speculation that inflation exists or ever existed.
I've also been the mainstreams biggest critic for the better part of decade now.
Humans also write books about encountering talking snakes, leprachauns and fairies. Doesn't mean any of those are real.
You are not able to verify those effects on the same level as you can verify redshift,
because you have to rely entirely on the perception of the people describing the events.
And we know from psychological research that those perceptions are easily influenced. That is why being able to verify every step of a process empirically is so important, something you cannot do with NDE's or "meeting God".
Has the mainstream noticed you?
You're now trying to distinguish between "cause/effect" which can *only* be verified by controlled experimentation.
So what? I have to rely upon their testimony and perceptions about 'dark energy' too.
Noticed? The active ones on the internet have surely "noticed" me.
You think posting on a Christian forum is making waves in mainstream science?
I've been making waves all over the internet for about 8 years.
I have also published a few papers as well.
I've been making waves all over the internet for about 8 years.
I have also published a few papers as well.
The entirety of science disagrees with you.
False. You can do the same experiments they did.
And this is where your understanding of science goes haywire once more.You're now trying to distinguish between "cause/effect" which can *only* be verified by controlled experimentation. Likewise I can't verify that dark energy is a 'cause' of photons redshift without *active experimentation*.
Of course I can. Humans have been repeating that behavior since the dawn of recorded human civilization.
So what? I have to rely upon their testimony and perceptions about 'dark energy' too.
All the observations can be checked, whether they have been made inside or outside the lab. All the measurement devices used to make those observations can be checked, whether they were used inside or outside of the lab. The chain of reasoning from measurement to observations can be checked. You can check each of the intermittent observations.Perceptions related to the cause of redshift also easily influenced, however, some things work in the lab (like inelastic scattering) and others don't (magical space expansion).
Observations that can be (and have been) repeated, using measurement devices that can be checked and investigated. In contrast with NDE's and the like, where this cannot be done.Nope. Those aren't 'experiments', those are "pure observations". You can't even tell the difference between an uncontrolled observation and a real experiment with real control mechanisms!
The entirety of science cannot even tell me where dark energy might come from, they cannot tell me how to control it, and not one of them can demonstrate their claim in a controlled experiment. Who cares what a handful of old guys that are convinced they see invisible stuff in the sky think? For crying out loud, the whole lot of them thinks "reconnection' happens *without* plasma, and most of them have never read a plasma physics textbook, including you!
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?