In a comment to this post dmullenix writes: “What happened before the Big Bang? The multiverse already existed, it just hadn’t created this particular universe yet. What about space and time? No problem, they’re a part of the universe and came into existence when it did. . . we know that this universe came into existence from something . . .”
When I read dmullenix’s comment I was reminded of a statement widely attributed to G.K. Chesterton: “When men stop believing in God, it is not that they believe in nothing; they will believe in anything.” Dmullenix insists the multiverse existed prior to this universe and it “created” this universe. How does he know this? If we define a “scientific statement” as a statement that may, in principle, be falsified by empirical investigation this statement is not a scientific statement for the simple reason that all of our empirical investigations are limited to this universe. If it is not a scientific statement then what is it? It is a metaphysical/philosophical statement of a priori faith/belief no different in principle than the a priori statements of six-day creationists.
Dmullenix goes on to say that we “know” this universe came into existence from something. As a matter of simple logic his statement is undoubtedly true, because we can be certain that only nonbeing proceeds from nonbeing. But I get the impression that dmullenix is arguing for a material cause of this universe and he thinks he has found it in the multiverse. He does not seem to understand that this gambit just pushes the inquiry back one step: Where did the multiverse come from? Did it itself come from yet another multiverse and if so where did that multiverse come from? The obvious infinite regress seems to escape most materialists like dmullenix, blinkered as they are by their faith commitments.