Yeah :-)

 

Just the final 2 chapters to go :-).

Much indebted indeed.

'Instead, as we've seen, the chief architects  of the theory (Quantum cosmology), such as Stephen Hawking, posed quantum cosmology as a counter to the cosmological argument for God's existence. In Hawking case, that meant formulating a theory that would undermine the implications of his own proof of the singularity at the beginning of the universe, which is only one of the reasons that Hawking stands as one of the ,ost interesting intellectual figures of recent memory."

"...by treating all of the merely mathematical possibilities described by the universal wave function as a real universe, the MWI (Many Worlds Interpretation) "reifies the math" on a literally unimaginable scale. Yet it still does not answer the question of  "what breathes fire" into the relevant equation. The MWI simply asserts that, for some unspecified reason and by some unknown cause, every possibility described by the universal wave function must actually exist-indeed, that every possible universe described by the universal wave function must exist as an actual universe."

(Just because you can create an equation for it doesn't mean it exist in reality.)

"Tegmark quite explicitly affirms such a reification, stating that "physical existence is equivalent to mathematical existence." But such a bold affirmation equating mathematical ideas with physical reality makes Tehmark's hypothesis no less problematic for materialism than quantum cosmological theories that do the same. As noted, we have absolutely experience of pure math causing anything physical to originate apart from the minds that have ideas and act upon physical reality guided by them. Consequently, Tegmark's proposal would also seem to require the existence and activity of a mind- indeed, an infinite mind-as a condition of it's plausibility,..."

"Thus, the inflationary multiverse hypothesis generates multiple absurdities. It implies that we are probably not the people we take ourselves to be and that our memories and perceptions are probably not reliable, but quite possibly the result of random quantum fluctuation. Neither is our universe itself what it appears to be under the hypothesis of eternal inflation. the inflationary multiverse would render  all scientific reasoning, explanation, and perception unreliable, undermining any basis for accepting  the multiverse hypothesis or any scientific hypothesis or conclusion whatsoever. It would be hard to invent  a more self-refuting hypothesis than that!."

"Thus, the attempt to refute the case for God based upon the science of cosmology has ultimately resulted in absurd cosmologies that undermine believe in the reliability of science. Unlike the founders of modern science, who understood that their belief in God gave them reason to trust in the uniformity and intelligibility of the universe and the reliability of the human mind, contemporary physicist averse to theistic belief have proffered ideas that deny, by implication, precisely such uniformity, intelligibility, and reliability."

(These "contemporary physicist averse to theistic belief" were/are trying to undue the need for God. They considered all religions merely old fables/made up stories that were nothing more than superstitions. In their attempt to undo the need for God? They created bigger superstitions than the one(s) they were trying to undo to start with.

Somebody else already said it better:

1 Corinthians 3:18-19

Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be wise.

For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness.)

"...throughout this book, I have argued that the scientific evidence we have concerning biological and cosmological origins leads logically to the knowledge of God. Now we see that the attempt to deny the explanatory power of the God hypothesis eventually and necessarily requires positing infinite probabilistic resources and universes- a postulation that denies the possibility of knowledge...I have argued that we can reasonably believe in the reality of God because of what we know about nature. The absurd implications of infinite-universe cosmologies now raise the possibility that we might well need such belief to have confidence in scientific rationality- and thus our ability to know nature at all."

Colossians 1:16

For in him ALL things were created...

See the part where is says except for science?

Yeah me neither...

I have been saying largely the same thing for a some time now. 

THE MORE YOU KNOW ABOUT THE WORLD(S) IN WHICH WE LIVE? THE LARGE SCALE STRUCTURES OF THE UNIVERSE AND THE SMALL SCALE STRUCTURES OF THE SUBATOMIC WORTLD?

THE MORE THERE CAN ONLY BE ONE CONCLUSION:

THERE IS ONE GOD.

HE SENT HIS ONLY SON AS A RANSON FOR MANY.

The more "contemporary physicist averse to theistic belief" try to show otherwise?

The more absurd they look.

To the point where they are the ones looking like they believe in superstitions they are making up, instead of the scientific facts they so  adamantly disprove of."