(November 3, 2014 at 7:14 pm)Parkers Tan Wrote:(November 3, 2014 at 6:03 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: You keep bring up the beginning of the universe and I have already pointed out that it is irrelevant.
You're trying to eat your cake and have it, too. If the beginning of the Universe is irrelevant, what is the point of positing a prime mover? And if the prime mover is crucial, then the beginning of the Universe is relevant.
Chad's prime mover- which I just don't understand because I don't agree with it!- doesn't just start the universe in cases where the universe is finite, but sustains it, seemingly by magic, in cases where it is eternal. It's still having his cake and eating it too, since he doesn't seem particularly interested in demonstrating either of those things and, tellingly, has accepted this claim despite at least half of it being completely, unavoidably fictional depending on the eventual status of the universe and its origins, but at least its as consistent as a random, baseless magic claim can be.
Quote:... and you haven't explained why a Universe requires a prime mover, but a prime mover doesn't.
Because magic, that's why. It's not meant to be considered that deeply, at heart it's just a cheap rhetorical trick; it's the thing that does the thing that confirms Chad's beliefs via solving a problem we have no indication exists beyond the fact that he really wants it to.
"YOU take the hard look in the mirror. You are everything that is wrong with this world. The only thing important to you, is you." - ronedee
Want to see more of my writing? Check out my (safe for work!) site, Unprotected Sects!
Want to see more of my writing? Check out my (safe for work!) site, Unprotected Sects!