Cosmology: Latest theories of everything (Introduction)

by Balance_Maintained , U.S.A., Friday, August 04, 2017, 04:58 (2668 days ago) @ John Kalber

Reblask: It seems to me, not surprisingly perhaps, that atheism presents an unambiguous view of nature. Together with the extension of its logic in considering the state of ‘matter’ and other basic configurations, I suggest that following the path it sets will be the preferred choice for a rational thinker.
In this sense, a 'rational thinker' is one who seeks logical advances that employ no help from a 'superpower'.

Right here, you lost me. By classifying a 'rational thinker' as only people who agree with you, you label anyone that disagrees with you as 'irrational', i.e. thinking without reason or rational thought. Yet, as a theist, I HAVE a rational, reasoned approach to my belief in God, and that belief is formed much like our belief in gravity. We can not measure it directly, but we can measure the indirect evidence and follow the

Reblask: In support of my view, I make the following points:
1. This first point is absolutely fundamental. The Universe is composed of the material we call ‘Matter’.
2. Matter can be neither created nor destroyed. There is nowhere for Matter to come from or ‘disappear’ into.(Bold Italics mine)
3. On this point, if you fantasise(sic) some other place, you face only more problems! Where is this other place? How does the Matter become destroyed? How then does it get fed into that ‘other place’? But - It still hasn't ‘disappeared'. It lives on in some invented ‘other place’!

Your logic fails here. You talk about matter not 'disappearing', but ignore the more fundamental question of how did it appear from nothing if it can neither be created nor destroyed? If you fantasize that it comes from nowhere and from nothing, you only face more problems.

(...blah blah nothing can disappear and you are crazy irrational if you think it does.. blah blah..)

Reblask: 5. This conclusion, viewed now (by me) as a certainty, indicates that no superpower has any useful place in the Universe nor is it needed. Considering it at all, from a research angle is a complete waste of time. as it leads nowhere other than to yet another cosmological gum tree!
These considerations make a nonsense of gods etc., exposing these superstitions for what they are – superstition.
6. This allows us to consider ideas in a rational and logical manner. The Big Bang proposes that our present Universe manifested itself, theoretically, from ‘another outside universe’ that was able to invest all the Matter necessary to constitute our present Universe into a miniscule point called a Singularity. No information on how this can be achieved...

...

8. It is a shame (for me) that space on this site limits the length and breadth of my case which will later include web references that further support the case against the shoddy ‘science’ that presents supposition, unsupported by real evidence, as proven fact. Outrageous abuse of position and authority. The underlying motive force is (of course) money and professional position in a greedy world.

Site limits don't matter. As it currently stands, this argument is still born because you can not explain the existence of matter or energy that 'can neither be created nor destroyed'. It had to come from somewhere, no matter how many regressions you make.

--
What is the purpose of living? How about, 'to reduce needless suffering. It seems to me to be a worthy purpose.