There are many many highly intelligent people who believe these ideas hold merit. Sorry to have to appeal to authority here, but I'm saying that it's not just Carrier, or even only a handful of people. What theory of time do you subscribe to? A model or B model? No model? Flann model? Yes, it's headache inducing, but that doesn't mean it isn't grounded on understanding.I think he tries unsuccessfully to water down the usual madness of 11 dimensions and different laws that string theorists build their bizarre universes from, by appealing to what on the surface suggests less such outcomes. Once you get an infinity of varied universes you are really in string theory land, whether it's admitted or not.
He tries to fool around with headache inducing theories about time.
It's always the same few people. The supreme arrogance to think that a small fraction of a percent is correct, when the consensus says otherwise. I've been over their ideas many times, and I apologize for sounding rude, but I don't find the ideas holding any water. How old is the youtube video?Carrier maintains that the Theistic explanation is poor and intellectually deficient. I'm going to provide a link to a discussion by three Christian thinkers from Oxford University. Alister Mc Grath, John Lennox and Keith Ward. The subject is Atheism,Science and God. It's on youtube. I can't get a working link. Sorry.
I think he makes an excellent point about which brute fact we accept. No wand waving or magic. Just good reasoning. Rather than give a negative generalization, where do you find issue with it?He just waves the magic wand ala Krauss and hey presto! it creates itself.He desperately wants to eliminate the problem of a beginning from nothing but up his sleeve is something,just as with Krauss.