XPost: alt.talk.creationism, alt.atheism   
   From: Dean"@gmail.com   
      
   On 11/19/2016 1:32 PM, Christopher A. Lee wrote:   
   > On Sat, 19 Nov 2016 13:19:24 -0500, "R. Dean" <"R. Dean"@gmail.com>   
   > wrote:   
   >   
   >> On 11/18/2016 5:04 PM, Christopher A. Lee wrote:   
   >>> On Fri, 18 Nov 2016 17:02:54 -0500, "R. Dean" <"R. Dean"@gmail.com>   
   >>> wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>> On 11/15/2016 5:34 PM, Lucifer Morningstar wrote:   
   >>>>> On Tue, 15 Nov 2016 13:18:04 -0500, "R. Dean" <"R. Dean"@gmail.com>   
   >>>>> wrote:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>> There is some theatrical basis for the multiverse found   
   >>>>>> in the expansion of the  universe.   
   >>>>>> Also in the interpretation of quantium  mechanics. But   
   >>>>>> there is no direct empirical evidence for other universes.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> That's true. The multiverse idea was made up by someone   
   >>>>> who wants an explanation and who has no concept of science.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>> Then I suppose these people have no concept of science because   
   >>>> they are proponents of the multiverse concept:   
   >>>   
   >>> Grow up.   
   >>>   
   >>>> Stephen Hawking, Brian Greene, Max Tegmark, Alan Guth, Andrei Linde,   
   >>>> Michio Kaku, David Deutsch, Leonard Susskind, Alexander Vilenkin   
   >>>> Yasunori Nomura, Raj Pathria, Laura Mersini-Houghton, Neil deGrasse   
   >>>> Tyson, and Sean Carroll.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiverse   
   >>>   
   >>> THEY ALL ADMIT IT IS SPECULATIVE, imbecile.   
   >>>   
   >> Prove it. - you cannot!   
   >   
   > READ WHAT THEY WROTE, IN THE FULL CONTEXT INSTEAD OF CHERRY-PICKING   
   > THE PART WHERE THEY DESCRIBE A COMMONLY HELD BELIEF AND THEN GO ON TO   
   > SHOW WHY IT IS WRONG.   
   >   
   > Pick one of them that you can cut'n'paste, giving not just the bit you   
   > cherry pick but also the following paragraphs.   
   >   
   > Try reading them for comprehension.   
   >   
   You are deliberately lying! You haven't read any of it, so you are   
   just blowing smoke. Not a single one of them called it "speculation".   
   Why do they even become caught up in such a hairbrained notion.   
   They admit there is no direct empirical evidence, but not even   
   one of them call it Speculation. But I personally think the multiverse   
   idea is pure BS! There can be only one reason for it.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)