An infinite progress

[FortyTwo]

I tend to like a scientific view of the cosmos. Because science strives toward accuracy. And if science ever finds itself to be inaccurate, it modifies its theories. It improves over time, corrects its own mistakes.

Granted, however, "science" has no way to gather ANY information before the Planck time. However, "science" has, almost by definition, an infinite amount of data that can be discovered after the Plank time. Answers, then, must depend on the future, not the past. Quantam theory has no problem postulating that effect can proceed cause, Therefore, would not an infinitely powerful and complex "being" in the future trump (pardon the expression) and almost infinitely simple, first-order cause in the past?

---

  Can't just cherry pick the good stuff. You've got to take everything that's in the mix.  

Cheers.

Not at work.

Forgive me . . . wait . . . that's my job!!!   Still, I did not postulate, in any way whatsoever, a cosmos without suffering or a cosmos that complied with your high ideals and standards. Why attack a position I did not espouse?