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.
And you brought up an incorrect version of the Kalam. You did not specify WLC's failed version of the argument.
Is it, well I'm glad to hear it. Though one might ask why more evidence is required for one thing than another.
Good question. For events that happen every day little evidence is needed. "I bought a puppy" is unlikely to be challenged. I have a dragon in my garage is apt to be challenged.
Why not. There is a cause, God is a far better candidate than the Flying Spaghetti Monster, a turtle or the multiverse.
I'm pretty certain that the universe popping into existence is not an everyday occurrence. So why is more evidence required for turtles than a God?
That really made me laugh. Assuming a god as a reason complicates the issue, but universes popping into existence every day does not?
Why would you think that? The FSM at least is morally consistent. And as we all know, the Discworld is on top of four elephants (there used to be five) that stand on the back of a giant turtle. If you have nothing better than a special pleading fallacy then your beliefs are in second place at best.
Your reasoning appears to be off again. I never brought up turtles myself. I did not propose a mechanism. We know that the universe exists, as @HitchSlap pointed out. No one can seem to find any reliable evidence for a God. And claiming that a God exists is quite the tall claim.
As I recall there were multiple turtles also (doesn't the second book have the turtle go to the breeding grounds?). Also Carrott proved that there was a Turtle by standing on it an gazing at the elephants!
Which I never claimed. Nor mentioned. Physicists may have some weak evidence for the concept, but I would say that the concept does not even qualify as hypothetical yet. Why bring up this red herring?
I'm not sure the point you are making here. After all there are going to be lots of things we disagree on (humour is clearly one of them). Disagreement is not making one view true and the other untrue, it is just disagreement.
No, the turtle was (is?) the Great A'Tuin, though I remember at least one character using the phrase "Turtles all the way down".
It's not a red herring, I seem to recall that I started by responding to the 'if God made the universe, who made God comment' and this resulted in a 'turtles' response. So I pointed out that the 'turtles' response is no different from the multiverse response in that they both posit an infinite egress.
