I really am very boring. My wife and kids have figured me out though.
I don't reject philosophy, I just don't indulge philosophers.
I believe you said in post 108 that you did, but I may have misunderstood. I thought you said that it was a "waste of time."
We don't kow that there was nothing before the big bang. There is interesting work being done that suggests our universe came from a preexisting on.
So you are denying Big Bang, Entropy, the findings of COBE, WMAP, the findins of Wilson and Penais, the findings of Hubbell? Are you asserting the universe has always been? It seems in acutuality, all relevant science points to a beginning. A BEGINNING. But, you don't believe that? What is the scientific objective data which indicates a previous universe?
There are many complex organic molecules in space. Two precursor of RNA were found in the Murchison Meteorite.
You know better than I know that the murchison meteorite does not prove a complex nucleoside or nucleoprotein.
Ribozymes and riboswitches have been found in nature as predicted by the RNA World Hypothesis
I do not assert otherwise. Of Course ribosomes are found in nature. I want to have it explained to me how ribosomes exist in inorganic nature.
It is funny that a creationist would ciete causation, because you do not accept that God had a cause.
Nice try. The Law of Causality says, "Everything that comes to be has a cause." It does not say, "Everything has a cause." Theists do not assert that God was caused. The Bible is clear that God is from everlasting to everlasting. He is uncaused. It is completely consistent. Please answer my question honestly and don't try to throw us such a silly smoke screen. If you had studied your philosophy more you would have known that.
As to your last series of questions...How, when, how to test...My answer to you is....from science, from objective, emperic, hard core science,..It seemingly is a miracle. I can give you no explaination the how (Physics) because science stops at the edge of this time, space, matter, energy continuum we call the universe. God is not part of this universe. He is separate and distinct from the universe. He is not responsive to Cause and Effect like you and I are. If you can expain otherwise, I will listen.
Why is there anything at all rather than nothing? It had to be this way due to the necessity of the laws of physics.
The necessity of the laws of physics? Tell me, which laws of physics bring something out of nothing. The world is waiting for you to make this new finding clear. No doubt you will be a very wealthy man for clarifying this profound assertion. The laws of physics acting on NOTHING to birth the universe. I want to hear this.
There are other models out there, too, but Carroll proposed, and seemed to favor the idea of multi-universes that keep creating “baby” universes. “Our observable universe might not be the whole story,” he said. “If we are part of a bigger multiverse, there is no maximal-entropy equilibrium state and entropy is produced via creation of universes like our own.”
Carroll also discussed new research he and a team of physicists have done, looking at, again, results from WMAP. Carroll and his team say the data shows the universe is “lopsided.”
Measurements from WMAP show that the fluctuations in the microwave background are about 10% stronger on one side of the sky than on the other.
An explanation for this “heavy-on-one-side universe” would be if these fluctuations represented a structure left over from the universe that produced our universe.
http://www.universetoday.com/2008/06/13/thinking-about-time-before-the-big-bang/