for atheists/agnostics

yes. time is the measure we used to describe the rate at which things happen. without things to happen, time ceases to exist. without time, there is no "before" -- so the question of what comes before the universe doesn't really make sense.

creationists simply add a different question to picture. in solving one question, they generate another. okay, so there's a creator. who created the creator?


i find it to be very disingenuous for people to argue for the existence of god based on the creation of the universe as opposed to other more human concerns. i mean, there's a reason people are christians or muslims or jews and it's not because of one event billions of years ago.

 

Yes, you do. Every event, no matter how random, has a cause or causes. Each of these can be peeled back like the layers of an onion.

But I do like your, "we don't know what caused it, but it couldn't have been God defense." That's always fun.

 

The fallacy of your assumption lies in the fact that you are assuming there is one thing in that chain with no previous cause. I will begin to consider the premise once you provide evidence to me that it is physically possible for that condition to exist.

 

"supporting factor" is not proof. when testing a hypothesis, the whole point is to find where it fails. the longer it holds up, the more trusted it becomes. but you can never say you've proven something to be true, scientifically. scientific method is all about ruling out competing theories until you've only got one that remains.

 

Physics offers theories. Mathematics offers proofs.

A rigorous mathematical model can make a theory be considered colloquially to be a "law", maybe that is the idea you are referring to like the Laws of Thermodynamics, but technically speaking they are also theories.

 

inserting god is simply adding another layer. what does it answer?

 

i'm trynig to avoid colloquialisms and words from other disciplines. when speaking scientifically, "proof" of a theory/hypothesis is unattainable. moving from gut feeling thru hypothesis and theory and eventually to law is simply a matter of time. as theories hold up, they become more widely accepted as being accurate. it's not like they get qualified as being true by a single experiment.

edit:

anyway, applying scientific theory to a supernatural being is kind of pointless.

 

Everything has to have a cause. Everything.

 

I never said that it answered anything. I have always said that is simply one potential explaination.

 

Agreed. Even your "god." That would make him a natural phenomenon. And finite.