Kenny wrote: Storyteller wrote:
Ken? What do you
*That there was a time in history the Universe did not exist.So it has always existed?
(Ken) I would think so
*That the only way the Universe could exist is if it either were created, or popped into existence by itselfHow else could it have happened?
(Ken) It could have always existed
*That the Universe runs with precision, function, and consistency never random, or ever changing, in any of its systems.I`ll give you that one
Judging from your responses, those appear to be a few of the presuppositions you seem to make that I do not.
I admit I don’t have an answer, all I have are guesses. If we define the Universe as all that exist, I would assume the Universe has always existed. Thus far nothing else makes sense to me.
PaulSacramento wrote:Actually Ken, we do know that the universe, as we know it, had a beginning so it has NOT always existed.
I agree with the first half; that the Universe AS WE KNOW IT had a beginning (Big Bang). This implies it may have existed differently before then they just don’t know. Science does not claim a time in history when absolutely nothing existed. Now if the Universe is defined as “all that exists
” that means whatever it was that existed prior to the Universe existing AS WE KNOW IT was still the Universe. But of course if those silly scientists don’t know what they’re talking about when they refuse to consider God a factor in all of this, why should they be taken seriously with anything else they say?
PaulSacramento wrote:We also know that nothing in this universe that we know if, that comes into being does so WITHOUT an outside force causing it to be so.
These are things that science knows as well as it knows that Gravity, also called gravitation, is a force that exists among all material objects in the universe. For any two objects or particles having nonzero mass , the force of gravity tends to attract them toward each other. Gravity operates on objects of all sizes, from subatomic particles to clusters of galaxies. It also operates over all distances, no matter how small or great.
Does this also apply to Dark energy, and Dark matter which makes up 96% of the Universe? Or does this only apply to the 4% of the Universe that scientists know of.
https://westernparadigm.wordpress.com/2 ... -universe/
PaulSacramento wrote:Science of the gaps, really?
Naww Braughh; those “of the gaps
” accusations are reserved for those who claim to know the answers. I’ve made it clear from the start that I don’t know, and science is clear it doesn’t know either; all I am doing is guessing.
PaulSacramento wrote:It seems that my faith in science is greater than yours my friend.
Science doesn’t have the answers to the Universe, apparently you do. I think it’s safe to assume your faith goes a little beyond science; mine does not.
PaulSacramento wrote:Yes, we only understand a very small percentage of the universe, YET what we do understand is manifest consistently in almost every new discovery we have.
I disagree! Science does not claim Dark energy and matter manifest consistently with regular matter and energy. Unless of course this is another one of those things your faith allows you to know that goes beyond the reach of science...
PaulSacramento wrote:We do NOT know what dark energy is, nor dark matter, but we do know what they aren't and we know that based on the consistency that we find in the universe.
What we don’t know about something is not enough to go making claims about it.
PaulSacramento wrote:I tend to not focus on things that we have more hypothesis than anything else.
Science doesn’t have a hypothesis about what was before the singularity that expanded into the Big Bang; but you do….right?
PaulSacramento wrote:The point being is that, based on what we do know, we have enough evidence to conclude that the universe had a beginning
What do you mean by that? Are you saying Science claims a point in history when nothing existed?