Science can prove a god must exist

[Zaki Aminu]

Ultimate Reality has the unique distinction that It cannot derive from anything else! And all else derives from It. I don't want It confused with other things.

Makes about as much sense as asserting Hyper Reality has the superior distinction of being the most utmost of realities, the driving force behind them and Ultimate Reality is merely part of its all-encompassing framework.

I see no point in moving the goalposts like this. Reality is what is real, what demonstrably exists. The definition stands. Tacking on "ultimate" to it simply creates baggage. You'd best prove your alternate dimension "ultimate reality" exists.

Here you go amigo

Thanks! :>

And why does it annoy you anyway?

Because you feeling the need to emphasis every occasional word comes off as condescending and obnoxious? We can read.

Why do you find it "condescending" and "obnoxioius" though? I thought you'd welcome clarity and precision in expressions to avoid misunderstandings. And aren't emoticons devices for emphasis also. Are you equally against their use - or is this just about me?

---

Ultimate Reality has the unique distinction that It cannot derive from anything else! And all else derives from It. I don't want It confused with other things.

Makes about as much sense as asserting Hyper Reality has the superior distinction of being the most utmost of realities, the driving force behind them and Ultimate Reality is merely part of its all-encompassing framework.

I see no point in moving the goalposts like this. Reality is what is real, what demonstrably exists. The definition stands. Tacking on "ultimate" to it simply creates baggage. You'd best prove your alternate dimension "ultimate reality" exists.

Here you go amigo

Thanks! :>

And why does it annoy you anyway?

Because you feeling the need to emphasis every occasional word comes off as condescending and obnoxious? We can read.

There is a clear distinction between "reality" and "Ultimate Reality" - which is why the dictionary found it necessary to use the latter rather than just the former. The only possible reason for objecting to greater clarity is if one actually desires confusion. No research scientist doing cutting-edge work would settle for anything less than the most precise tools affordable. I'm shocked to see people objecting to greater precision. Preferring instead approximations. Astounding!