Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar
So, what.? That's two people's OPINION.
|
I'm confident that it's a lot more than two. If you are going to play the OPINION card what would make your OPINION more valid that theirs?
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar
And that's all it is because many scientists, I'm sure, disagree with them.
|
I'm also confident that it's not very many. But we're getting into
argumentum ad populum.. I'll simply say that the scientists's "opinions" are based on
evidence whereas yours is based on
wishful thinking. You have yet to prove that "atheistic materialism" is "self refuting." (Those were your words. Right?)
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar
Besides, how could they prove anything about the state of universe "prior 1.0E (-43 seconds)?
|
They couldn't and neither could you.
That's the point. You are committing both the fallacy of
False Dilemma (assuming that there are only two possibilities when there could be three or more) and the fallacy of
Argument from Ignorance (assuming that if one outcome cannot be proven then the other must be true.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar
So, are you also saying that this ignorance about the state of universe applies equally to the theory of an eternal universe?
|
No, because quantum theory is the theory of the very small, and the universe would have been very small at 1.0E(-43) seconds, but it would have been very large at 1.0 second.
