(December 23, 2015 at 5:09 pm)AAA Wrote:(December 23, 2015 at 1:44 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: Begging the question isn't my cup of tea.Saying an undefined sky-being is an oversimplification. I think it is likely that there are other spacial dimensions (Physicists think there could be up to 11) like a 4 dimensional being. Imagine our 3D interaction with a 2D creature, then you can see the parallels of how a 4D creature would interact with our 3D world. Yes it is more plausible that the universe was created in a top down fashion than a bottom up fashion. Think about entropy. The amount of usable energy is decreasing as time goes on. This means that at the beginning, the universe had much more usable energy. There is no natural way that the total amount of usable energy in a system can increase, yet it clearly happened.
Wait, you think it's more plausible that some undefined sky-being poofed this into existence than it is for 13 billion years of physical processes to have sculpted it? Why is that?
I disagree. The numerous "design flaws" demonstrated throughout nature tell us that biology was a ground-up enterprise building on what came before it without the guiding hand of some invisible sky-being that you cannot even define in meaningful terms.
You choose to look at the "flaws" when there are so many examples that represent tremendous design. Every protein and enzyme works with chemical specificity and well. Historically, evolutionists jump to the conclusion that there is a flaw in the creature due to their presuppositions about us gradually changing. Typically, they will then find later that the structure in question does have a purpose and is well suited for its function.
This discussion of a four-D entity, from the guy who dismisses multiverse as unevidenced?
By the way, scientists may have found evidence for a multiverse hypothesis. Is there any for your four-D critter?
I'm not obliged to pay any respect to any hypothetical entity simply because you choose to worship one.
You can bring evidence if you wish to change my mind; suppositions aren't evidence.