(September 20, 2012 at 3:39 am)Puddleglum Wrote: I do not 'believe this' its just a theory, a possibility.It is perfectly fine for science to look at possible solutions to current unknowns. However "god" is a completly broken concept rooted in myth and superstition and has no place acting as a place card for the unknown.
1) Multiple universe theory is an extreme likeleyhood according to Quantum Physicists.
2) A strong current theory is that this universe 'budded off' from another universe in a different dimension
3) We are going through a logarithmic increase in knowledge to such an extent that the Technological singularity (aka the nerd rapture' ) here is a distinct possibility and in an indeterminate number of years men we will able to transform matter at its most fundamental level.
4) if Multiple universe theory is true that means there are an almost limitless number of other universes many of which will have developed intelligent life that has achieved this power.
5) This universe might, therefore, be the product of an intelligence from another dimension that existed, before our time even existed.
6) That being would be to all purposes a creator god from our P.O.V.
7) That being might still be monitoring this universe and might , for amusement or as experiment, interfere with the normal evolutionary cycle.
Just scrap the damn antiquated word. "God is not required"Stephen Hawkins.
Once something is thoroughly debunked it should be scrapped as a claim just like when you grow up, you don't believe in Santa. Trying to re define a word such as "god" instead of simply discarding it, to me,is inviting trouble from those who are still stuck in a utopian past.
We once did not know why hurricanes formed, but have documented them throught written history. But science never filled in that gap with myth. It's method only went with current data and only "guessed" not with gaps, but with proven data.
Competing theories in science are how things improve. But the standard even in competing claims in science is to always avoid superflous add ons that do nothing to validate a theory.
Was there something before? Don't know. Are there multiple universes? Don't know. But what we do know is that energy and motion and material do not require a cognition to occur or move.
My best guess to "whatever" is that when we do find some new knowledge we wont find a god, we will simply find more data and improve on our current knowledge.
If it makes no sense to incert Posiden in as the cause of a hurricane, then why would life or the universe need a cognition to occure either?
