IOW, the only way science had to write God out of the picture was to appeal to infinity of chance. The plentitude argument requires that anything that could happen, did.
Since the beginning was so strongly established, the meaning had to be reduced by appealing to a multiplicity of prior universes or prior geometry (ekpyrotic or brane theories). IMHO, that is the main reason for multi-verse theories.
But despite all these efforts, there can be no infinity past because all prior universes require geometry as well. Even cyclic universes require geometry (the cyclic model of Steinhardt allows for infinity future but a beginning of real time). Likewise, the imaginary time model of Hawking posits a boundaryless universe, but nevertheless a beginning of real time.
A less theologically "motivated" group of theories involve Everett's multi-worlds (and the many subsequent theories based on his speculations, e.g. multi-histories and such). His was not focused on geometry, especially time, but rather on superposition, suggesting that Schrodinger’s cat is actually both alive and dead. The issue more correctly “goes to” the lack of a bridge in physics between the quantum and classic worlds. That problem remains.
The third type – the one which is the real “gotcha” that betty boop addresses here – is the cause of physical causality.
Virtually all cosmologies (except perhaps Tegmark) begin with a presupposition of pre-existing physical causality. That presumption biases the conclusion and is therefore a poison pill, IMHO.
The context of a beginning is a not merely a vacuum, it is a complete void, a true chaos: no geometry, no space, no time, no energy, no matter, no physical causality. Order cannot arise from such chaos in an unguided system. The obvious conclusion is that God exists.
Nice to see you active again. I like reading your posts.