tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6805190.post8704725879407281183..comments2024-03-01T07:35:49.740-08:00Comments on Come Reason's Apologetics Notes: Beginning to Argue EffectivelyLenny Espositohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04064209669748618955noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6805190.post-705899180987071562014-03-12T07:50:45.197-07:002014-03-12T07:50:45.197-07:00Lenny, the beginning of the universe does have evi...Lenny, the beginning of the universe does have evidence, wherein the multiverse theory has none. So you are right on. I think Bernie is making an error when he assumes that any theory holds the same weight as the rest. Stating that there might be a multiverse is certainly not on the same level of credibility of Big Bang cosmology. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04288239060737132244noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6805190.post-84676552687575252082014-01-16T07:50:31.968-08:002014-01-16T07:50:31.968-08:00The possibility of other universes is irrelevant t...The possibility of other universes is irrelevant to whether or not ours "began to exist." Evidence points to a beginning. Now you can argue that we don't know this 100% for sure, but that's not unique in life. But does that mean we can't assert then the universe "began to exist?"<br /><br />Of course not. All known evidence supports this claim. It's not being made without merit. Certainly not from "ignorance."<br /><br />If we had no evidence at all, then yes it would be. Just being less than complete certainty is not AFI.Chrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10284597561755652662noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6805190.post-50713267682505206722014-01-15T16:56:22.321-08:002014-01-15T16:56:22.321-08:00If out universe is one of many (multiverse theory)...If out universe is one of many (multiverse theory), then the "began to exist" doesn't mean anything for your argument. It is like the example of: you began to exist, but before 'you' were 'you' the parts of 'you' were sperm and egg, each coming from somewhere else.Bernie Dehlerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03919318328504104290noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6805190.post-20899183467126700502014-01-15T16:53:50.975-08:002014-01-15T16:53:50.975-08:00My statement was "The universe began to exist...My statement was "The universe began to exist." That is clearly the consensus, and those discoveries are used as evidence for the same. Again, HOW it began is a different claim from IF it began. Remember, time can only work if there is space and matter. All three must come about together.Lenny Espositohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04064209669748618955noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6805190.post-77184455401124863372014-01-15T16:51:53.333-08:002014-01-15T16:51:53.333-08:00None of that has to do with the origination of the...None of that has to do with the origination of the big bang. Has to do with after it started.Bernie Dehlerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03919318328504104290noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6805190.post-47747671281009876112014-01-15T16:51:01.615-08:002014-01-15T16:51:01.615-08:00Ah, but what is the current consensus? What do mos...Ah, but what is the current consensus? What do most scientists believe? Why did Penzias and Wilson receive the Nobel Prize in 1978 for their work on background radiation? What does the Hubble red-shift demonstrate? Why is the span of 13.8 (or so) billion years significant?<br />Lenny Espositohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04064209669748618955noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6805190.post-25987175167401839532014-01-15T16:45:38.997-08:002014-01-15T16:45:38.997-08:00RE: " big bang cosmology holds that the unive...RE: " big bang cosmology holds that the universe DID begin to exist at some finite point in the past. "<br /><br />No ones knows about the origination of the universe. It is a gap in human understanding.Bernie Dehlerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03919318328504104290noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6805190.post-22455583241176377662014-01-15T16:40:00.932-08:002014-01-15T16:40:00.932-08:00Bernie,
Thanks. Are you saying that the statemen...Bernie,<br /><br />Thanks. Are you saying that the statement "The universe began to exist" is not currently widely accepted within the scientific community? I'm highly confident that while science doesn't claim to know exactly HOW the universe began to exist, big bang cosmology holds that the universe DID begin to exist at some finite point in the past. That's the consensus currently.Lenny Espositohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04064209669748618955noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6805190.post-17035142089923427272014-01-15T14:32:06.792-08:002014-01-15T14:32:06.792-08:00Lenny, pretty good article, and very happy to see ...Lenny, pretty good article, and very happy to see you promoting critical thinking and teaching logical fallacies.<br /><br />RE: "2. The universe began to exist."<br /><br />This is where your argument gets into a logical fallacy called "appeal to ignorance." No one knows yet about the origin of the univese, so it is all speculation, yet the premise is stated as a fact. And even if it were a fact, the creator could still be nature, as in multiverse theory. Where did multiverses come from? No one knows. See how your argument goes into the realm of "appeal to ignorance?" Try arguing from a basis and premise of actual facts, rather than human ignorance. I know you are copying William Lane Craig, but it is still a poor argument for the existence of God(s), no matter who says it.Bernie Dehlerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03919318328504104290noreply@blogger.com