Revolutionary wrote:
Let me explain simple logic too you.....
Now who's being rude and condescending? I was (and still is) hoping for an intelligent conversation.
Revolutionary wrote:Simple logic would bring intellect along an undeniable path in thought....
We shall see ...
Revolutionary wrote:Lets wipe it all clean down to a void/nothingness....
That's your first error of equivocation. A void is not nothingness, a void is a void, which is bound by space-time. That's the first 'simple' thing we need to agree on, i.e. what is nothing. Otherwise there really is no point in going further. Nothing is nothing. It's not a void, it's not the law of gravity, it's not a quantum fluctuation or a brane segment or the point at which a bubble bursts and a new cycle begins. Nothing is really and truly nothing. It is a privation, i.e. the complete and total absence of anything. If you agree let's move on. If you don't then please forgive me but I can't waste my time any more than I already have.
Revolutionary wrote: More so, it is an infinite void in an infinite arena of time....
More so, you would have to prove, not merely assert, that time is infinite. Unfortunately for you science is, once again, not on your side considering the space-time continuum absolutely breaks down at the moment of singularity. It is its product, not the other way around. Unless and until you can back up your assertion vis-a-vis a timeless time (lol, that's quite a conundrum you got there) then I will have no choice but dismiss your baseless assertion.
Revolutionary wrote:If a universe could spring from said void, probability offers us this very simple aspect to logic; in an infinite arena of time and void there are infinite events to which this probability can occur giving us infinite examples of such a point of origin. This (our observable universe) is just small scale view to something (infinitely more expansive) that logically, there is no point of origin.
As I said, nothing but fallacies and baseless assertions.
Revolutionary wrote:Never once has science declared anything pertaining to origin beyond our physical/observable 'universe', only because it can't observe it and so there is no real point!
You are dead wrong. Science has plenty to say beyond our observable universe and all the contemporary evidence points to a single, ultimate creation, irrespective of the number or type of universes postulated, irrespective of any periodic table and the laws of chemistry and biology, irrespective of even the laws of physics. I am ready to discuss it if you are.
Revolutionary wrote:And here is the real conundrum that you alone must overcome, something that always is and always was doesn't need a creator
The only conundrum exists in your (il)logic.