Posted on 11/18/2009 5:58:48 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
New Scientist magazine is generally regarded by the secular community as one of the top-ranked science magazines in the world. However, a published opinion by a regular columnist demonstrated how “unscientific” and anti-God some of their articles have become—something we have documented before (see Refutation of New Scientist’s Evolution: 24 myths and misconceptions).
Amanda Gefter wrote an article discussing multiverse theory, or the idea that our universe may be only one of many that currently exist. Such speculations attempt to explain away the appearance of design in the universe, because of, as we shall see, the spiritual implications. In an article called What’s God got to do with it she wrote: ...
(Excerpt) Read more at creation.com ...
ininformed=uninformed
See. You are very defensive of your position and comments.
Not angry, as another poster claims, just strongly defensive.
Stay strong.
Is not science an imposition of the limitations and constraints of human comprehension on the creation of God?
Wow, where do I start. It is one of the basic ramifications of the Big Bang theory, (plus others.) From which we get Space-Time is finite.
Basing the concept of the Universe being finite (a theory) on the concept of the The Big Bang (another theory) is fairly presumptuous.
Even were the Universe to be finite, what makes you think we have actually found the outer bounds, and that we are even capable of knowing it’s mass?
Actually, I see science as a lens through which to better observe the beauty and majesty of His works. There is a reason Ansel Adams never took pictures of sunsets.
Even were the Universe to be finite, what makes you think we have actually found the outer bounds, and that we are even capable of knowing it’s mass?
Seriously? If the Univervse was considered ifinite, then why would anyone screw around with the multiverse concept? The concept of infinity is a purely mathematical construct, of which there is no evidence that it is anything but an effective mathematical tool.
So the let take a try at your rhetoric, "the concept of the Infinity (another theory) is fairly presumptuous.
If we continue down that path then who is to say that we can really know anything, since everything we know or understand is based on unknowable or unprovable theories?
Likewise, I’m sure.
Is it still not limited by the constraints of human comprehension?
Not everything is based on unknowable or unprovable theories.
There are many things we accept in theory, that we may never 'know' because we will never be able to prove them scientifically. It is not necessary that we 'know' in order for things to be, or to work.
Take magnetism or gravity, for example.
Especially if one wants to.
Like all the lawsuits trying to keep anything but evolution out of the public schools?
Perfect example.
Science is being used and misused by those with an agenda against Christianity and all we hear from the evos on this forum is support for the efforts of the ACLU and big government control of public schools.
(someone already answered this) Because the theory the Universe is finite does not fit with the scientific evidence and mathematical calculations. (i.e. why they had to make up Dark Matter). Therefore, they came up with the multiverse theory to explain the inconsistencies.
The concept of infinity is a purely mathematical construct, of which there is no evidence that it is anything but an effective mathematical tool.
As are the roots of negative numbers, yet they are used in science.
Point of view is everything.
That is very possible. And, likewise, our physical plane may only be a teeny tiny part of the entire Universe(s), like the TV band is a teeny tiny part of the electromagnetic spectrum.
P.S. Rereading my comment, I realize I said nothing different or additional than what you said.
Maybe I should just have said , “I AGREE”.
Yes, imaginary numbers are useful, to solve problems, but do we leave the answer in imaginary land?
Short on time, long on interest.
Cheers!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.