(June 19, 2015 at 2:20 am)Stimbo Wrote: Even granting that we haven't yet solved the question of the origins of the Universe and maybe never will, the two options you cited (the laws of physics were different enough to allow causation vs it could have been a supernatural entity) are not equally valid. Everything we can observe in nature is caused by other things in nature. Leaping to the least plausible explanation before investigating far more plausible ones is not keeping an open mind to the possibilities; it's actually a definition of delusion (or if it's not, it ought to be). Especially when that explanation is rooted in fuzzy feelings flavoured by mythology written by superstitious people who thought rainbows were magic.
I respect your views, but I think what you say is a matter of opinion. I find it much less plausible that the laws of nature/physics would ever allow for anything to come from nothing, than for there to be something above nature involved. With neither having any proof, it would honestly take more faith for me to believe the former.
"Of course, everyone will claim they respect someone who tries to speak the truth, but in reality, this is a rare quality. Most respect those who speak truths they agree with, and their respect for the speaking only extends as far as their realm of personal agreement. It is less common, almost to the point of becoming a saintly virtue, that someone truly respects and loves the truth seeker, even when their conclusions differ wildly."
-walsh
-walsh