Why Something Rather Than Nothing?

[Heywood]

Not quite. There are many possible coherent models but since no-one knows anything of the nature of existence before the current form of our immediate universe, a wide variety of alternatives are admissable and since we know that events in our universe are the result of unintelligent and naturalistic processes, many of which are non-random, it's not such a stretch of the imagination to suggest that other such processes may have been in place to 'cause' the current state of our immediate universe to come in to existence; some 'selection' process which describes which of the possible models can exist.

But that's not the point, I was simply illustrating the false dichotomy that datc was offering and your point reinforces mine.

The third option you presented is easily dismissed for good reason....the necessary process that allows the third option is an imagined one that contradicts our current physics. That leaves just two options remaining. There is no false dichotomy.

---

The burden of proof is on both of us.

Atheists have a burden of proof? That's blasphemy in these circles. Chas is going to ape shit when he see this.