[hinckley buzzard]

something besides data must motivate the science of multiverses, because by definition multiverses are not observable. Stenger makes the connection explicit, whereas Hawking or Susskind is a little more coy with their metaphysics. Multiverse-theory is designed for one purpose, and one purpose only, and that is to defend atheism.

So when you spew this crap about "the science" of multiverses you admit you are lying. There is no science without data. Just bullcrap. IOW another waste of space by an anti-religious bigot masquerading as an objective observer. Thanks, but no thanks.

[sonrise57]

bump for later reading

[newheart]

I’m inclined to think that while theories of multiple universes may be an attempt to stave off the need for a creator, the creator becomes just as essential for them as for ours based again on the only reasonable answer to the first question, Why is something rather than nothing?

So multiverses may only be hypothetical, but even if they are real, their existence in no way negates the need for a personal creator.

[jongaltsr]

The universe and its entirety IS GOD.
Until we understand the universe (which I doubt we ever will)
We will never really understand God.

[paudio]

ping