Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Should God be replaced? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: one_less who wrote (24306)	7/3/2006 12:56:33 AM
From: TigerPaw	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 28931

it doesn't prove what you claimed it proves (an absolute beginning of time). I suppose you are arguing that time exists outside the universe?

To: one_less who wrote (24306)	7/8/2006 5:40:37 PM
From: Solon	Respond to of 28931

"I am arguing that in its current state, it doesn't prove what you claimed it proves (an absolute beginning of time). Nobody can prove that. However, it IS strongly evidential of a beginning of time in the reality fragment we are able to make valid conjectures upon... It is pointless for us to speculate before the big bang (or after the big after) other than as an exercise in imagination. I don't place to much stock in any of that stuff. I am prepared to admit that we are as stupid as the scientists whom supported the Church centuries ago. Socrates knew nothing. I am in good company. Religionists torture themselves trying to protect the POSSIBILITY of some nonsense or another. I know why it is important to deter people from hitching rides on comets, or dishing out kool-aid to vulnerable people in psychic pain, or slaughtering people like they were sheep. I just don't know why it is important to deter people from deterring people from deterring people from that.