Is there any reason why you won't simply provide the evidence?
QWC document comments and criticisms
- Thread starter quantum_wave
- Start date
Is there any reason why you won't simply provide the evidence?
In my view there are a number of ways to account for the existence of the universe.
Go for it!
I did. You wouldn't answer.
We're saying we don't know. You are doing a great deal of 'speculation' (aka random unsupported guessing) about things before the BB without a single iota of method or justification behind your claims. People like Turok who come up with brane cosmology models use a quantitative model to show you can construct systems which lead to our universe via a BB-like event. You simply make stuff up. The two approaches are entirely difference and yet you try to claim that because people like Turok address such questions its okay for you to do it your way and claim you aren't wasting everyone's time.
I see you failed to provide any links to any posts where I said what you claim I said. So much for honesty from you. More lies from the forum hack. Let me know when someone in the science community cites your work.
I agree with AN. We know with reasonable certainty that there was a time about 13.7 billion years in the past when the universe was very small, dense and hot. What happened before that is not accessible to current methods, although a theory of quantum gravity would make it accessible.
I feel compelled to include this quote again: "They say 'well science doesn’t know everything.' Well science knows it doesn’t know everything otherwise it would stop, but as well as that, just because science doesn't know everything doesn't mean you can fill in the gaps with whatever fairytale appeals to you." - Dara O'Briain
Now, what evidence are you basing your speculations on, and lets try and avoid bullshit and evasion this time.
Not true, Fish Bait.
The first liar always looses. You lied first, you lose.
Then there is no reason for your interest or your waste of time.
Run along sonny.
So you have no evidence then? Or else, why would you refuse to provide it?
If you want to discuss it then practice the art of discussion.
How can I discuss evidence if you refuse to provide any? I've answered all the questions you've asked me. Don't be a hypocrite.
Run along sonny.
What's the problem? You said you had evidence. You weren't lying were you?
Wouldn't you call this a lie? I would.
The first liar always loses. You lose. Run along.
You did say you wanted to discuss the evidence you claim you have that the universe has always existed:
P: What it the evidence with which you speculate that the universe has always existed?
QW: I will be glad to go there with you but first...
If you can quote specifically the place where I have lied then I will withdraw it and apologise. The fact is that I haven't lied and this is nothing more than a diversionary tactic to avoid a proper discussion, because despite saying you wanted to discuss the evidence, you have none which makes you the liar.
That is the lie. You lose. Get lost.
You haven't been able to find a lie that I've told? Do you have any evidence or not? Not, I'll warrant...
Last edited:
You have joined Fish Bait in that little stagnant puddle of your lives, destined to end in the stagnant stench of dishonesty, faulty logic, lies and dishonor. Bye now, Fish Bait.
What happened to that discussion we were going to have? Seriously, let's have a discussion, starting with the evidence.
If you were honorable you would be willing to admit that we were never going to have an artful discussion. You are two minnows in a stagnate puddle, two peas in a pod, and you both like it that way. Bye bye Fish Bait.