Nice to see O'Bama working on getting rid of midnight Bush rules

[kandrathe]

Strictly speaking, anything unprovable is unknowable. We can postulate it, speculate about it, imagine it, write sf stories about it, etc., etc., but we can't know it. We can believe in it, but it would have to be a faith based belief.

Agreed.

Major difference: 'god' is a concept that has no basis. Belief in god is strictly unsupported faith. There is no theory that falsifiability explains part of existence and that extrapolates to 'god'.

True. Ontological arguments, and anecdotal (heresay) evidence, but no testable hypothesis.

Parallel universes come about from extension of theories (quantum mechanics and general relativity) which are testable (and have been extensively tested). Parallel universes today stand in the same place that electromagnetic waves stood in 1865. They are predictions made on the basis of equations which are in turn based on observation and experiment. ... Parallel universes are a prediction generated from the extension of tested theories, god is just an unsupported hypothesis, underivable and untestable.

To someone who is versed in understanding physics, and/or mathematics this might make some sense, but for the vast majority of people on the planet it is just so much mumbo jumbo. For many, to believe in these untestable cosmological ideas requires faith. In the spirit of Kant, I can't sufficiently prove to all doubters that my reality is not just of figment of my imagination either. In my contemplation, I find three possible solutions; a) The universe has always existed. It has an infinite past and future. b) The universe winked into existence randomly, or c) The universe was caused to exist by something beyond it (created perhaps). I'm not sure which one is true, so until there is overwhelming evidence for one of the options, I'm willing to entertain them all.