Isn't that athiesm though?

This definitely started an argument
But true fr

Exactly what I wanted hehe

Lmao

Not really. Nothing implies that nothing exists. The universe clearly exists so this analogy doesn't work.

Elaborate please?

Nothing cannot create nothing. As Carl Sagan once said "The cosmos is all there was, all there is and all there ever will be."

Atheism isn't denying that *a god* created the universe as the meme implies. It's saying that we have no evidence for a god and we can't know or prove such a thing.

Nothing does not exist. Nothing cannot create more (or less) nothing.

Name one time when I said nothing could create nothing or that nothing even exists.

The meme above implies that.

The meme is referring to the side of athiesm where everything began to exist, but I believe that am infnite universe (time-wise) also makes no sense. Would you like to know why?

Time is an element of the universe that isn't absolute either. Time is relative and to give you an extreme example of how time can dilate and change is black holes: The closer you are to a black hole the faster time will speed up from your perspective. So time not existing is a scientific fact that occurred before the big bang and will occur again with the heat death of the universe.

The universe has always existed, if it didn't then nothing would exist at all and nothing existing is literally impossible. Nothing does not exist.

Ok but how does this change my point?
Since this doesn't really affect anything of what I said, I'll just make my point.
If the universe existed for an infinite amount of time, then it existed to withhold an infinite amount of events back to back. An infinite number of events back to back cannot exit because in order for one event to start, it must be caused by the one before. In order for that event to happen, it must also be caused by the one before. This chain of "dominoes" must have a starting point or not a single event could happen since the chain could never start or even have a start. Therefore, today could never happen. But it did happen, so a chain of infinite events back to back cannot exist. If the universe did not have a chain of events back to back then it did not have an infinite past. If it did exist idle for the past infinity years but it came to life and started it's finite number of events then it would require something/someone to push "play" on the universe since it cannot start itself.

The universe doesn't have a start or and end. It just simply exists. Time is an element within our universe and is not constant.

The universe just simply IS. It exists.

You still haven't countered my point. If the cause and effect chain of the universe (weither random or determined) exists, it could not have gone back to an infinite amount of causes and effects. It must always be finite. This is true for every chain of cause and effect for every corner of the universe. If the universe was just idle at a certain point and a cause and effect chain didn't exist for the remaining infinite amount of existence (no cause or effect, just chilling), then in order for any cause and effect chains to start it could not have been started by the already idle universe.

The universe doesn't have a 'cause and effect'. The universe just is. Whether the universe is finite or infinite is a matter of debate but what we do know is that the universe exists and has always existed.

I'm not typing in English for any reason at all. I just am. My parents teaching me English had absolutely nothing to do with it at all. Users don't get notifications for any reason at all. They just do. Not because the signal of a new comment was being sent to the Imgflip server and the server was programmed to send a message to the reciever of the comment, it just was. Actually, everything happened without any cause whatsoever, the universe is just a bunch of frames playing one after another that MIRACULOUSLY happened to have the illusion that each frame has some relation to the nearby frames. I am not typing these particular keystrokes because I'm replying to a post, the universe thought of this particular arrangement of me replying every single keystroke by complete randomness and it just so happens to look like I'm replying to a post because I got a message.
THAT was what "The universe doesn't have a cause and effect" implied. I don't think that disproves my point at all since it doesn't even make sense. Does it?

And what I meant by an infinite universe or finite universe was weither it has or has not always existed, I was in no way talking about the size. I thought that was obvious but there is the clarification.

retention of matter implies that all matter is actually infinite, since it could not have been created or destroyed

Agreed, matter can't be created nor destroyed without external interaction.

I believe that since matter is infinite, it makes perfect sense that some matter suddenly created the big bang
This is because of monkeys at typewriters

So you're just saying that the universe always existed?

Judging by the retention of matter, yes
If it cannot be created or destroyed, then it must have always been

The retention of mater applies to what goes on INSIDE the universe, it does NOT take into account to outside intervention.

I'm not accounting for a god because I don't necessarily believe in one
My point is that the universe very much still makes sense even if there is no god

I understand, I just wanted to clarify that point.
If the universe existed for an infinite amount of time, then it existed to withhold an infinite amount of events back to back. An infinite number of events back to back cannot exit because in order for one event to start, it must be caused by the one before. In order for that event to happen, it must also be caused by the one before. This chain of "dominoes" must have a starting point or not a single event could happen since the chain could never start or even have a start. Therefore, today could never happen. But it did happen, so a chain of infinite events back to back cannot exist. If the universe did not have a chain of events back to back then it did not have an infinite past. If it did exist idle for the past infinity years but it came to life and started it's finite number of events then it would require something/someone to push "play" on the universe since it cannot start itself.

who's to say it can't do the same thing multiple times
what if all of this has already happened except that world ended, and we're here now?

The same thing can't happen an infinite number of times if it can't even start happening in the first place. This is like saying all of the dominoes were exactly the same, doesn't change my point.

It can happen an infinite number of times and always *have been* happening

It CAN happen an infinite amount of times in the sense that it can keep going on and on, but still have repeated a finite number of times. The finite number is limitless, but it will never actually be infinite. The reason why an infinite number of repeats didn't happen already is what my rather long post explained.

this is uh
getting confusing
May we agree to disagree

Well you commented on MY post...

yes I understand
that was my mistake

Ok sure, agree to disagree. But please do think about this some more.

Will do

Oh yeah that makes much less sense than a magical man magically exploding things as opposed to just magically exploding

but at least that isn't necessarily nonsense

Thats a good line tbh

thx

Where did the magical man come from

It's a timeless spaceless entity that doesn't need to come from anywhere from definition but that's beside the point. Something doesn't come from nothing.

Okay so the answer is just “he just exists”

That makes a lot of sense yeah

An entity existing before time isn't metaphysically impossible. A physical universe actually "appearing out of nowhere" is.

Okay but where did he come from

Like seriously your answer is “f**k if we know but it makes more sense than evolution” which is like what

An entity existing before time VS Physical matter "appearing" without a cause.
If you wish I can provide a 3-step logical argument on why the latter is the nonsensical one. That's the point I'm trying to make. If you think the first also is nonsensical, then feel free to show how but that's outside the point of this meme. Now would you like to see the 3-step argument?