[Wisconsin155]

You may not of brought it up, but you did throw down the dare to use it. Clearly you are asking him to explain something that you yourself do not understand.

"And yet mass and energy were created in violation of the Conservation Laws" Did I say that? Nope. Since t=0 is an unobservable event, neither you nor I can say for certain what occurred before. Indeed BBT does not and can not say what came before. It could very well of been another universe that collapsed. That does not however prove the existence of a Biblical God. By arguing such, you are simply proving the possible existence of a Deistic definition of God, not a Christian one

"The probability that I brought Quantum Theory into the debate is null" I never said you did, but you dared the other guy to go there, so I went.

"Does God consult with you often on the mechanisms he uses?" No, but you didn't answer the question. You simply appealed to authority. A rather weak argumentative tactic

[grey_whiskers]

Oh, yes, about your other post regarding tags, try the article / topic search in Free Republic and type in the words HTML sandbox.

Enjoy!

[jwalsh07]

You may not of brought it up, but you did throw down the dare to use it.

:-} I don't "throw down dares". And I am simply a blue collar Luddite who knows what little about Quantum Theory that I do from reading about it on the internet.

Clearly you are asking him to explain something that you yourself do not understand.

Isn't that the general way of acquiring knowledge or are the really smart folks like you born with omniscience?

"And yet mass and energy were created in violation of the Conservation Laws" Did I say that? Nope.

You don't have to say it, it is implied by the BBT. Evidently you are unaware of that.

Since t=0 is an unobservable event, neither you nor I can say for certain what occurred before.

That would be correct.

Indeed BBT does not and can not say what came before. It could very well of been another universe that collapsed.

Doesn't matter a wit, you simply move the creation event back in time. That should be obvious to a man of your obvious scientific capabilities.

That does not however prove the existence of a Biblical God. By arguing such, you are simply proving the possible existence of a Deistic definition of God, not a Christian one.

Yeah, so what? I'm arguing that a creation event, of necessity, requires a creator. I believe in the big C Creator who sent Jesus Christ to save souls. What you believe is up to you.

"The probability that I brought Quantum Theory into the debate is null" I never said you did, but you dared the other guy to go there, so I went.

Now you're dissembling, thats exactly what you said. It was false.

"Does God consult with you often on the mechanisms he uses?" No, but you didn't answer the question. You simply appealed to authority. A rather weak argumentative tactic

You got the answer you deserved, such is life.