This is true but totally irrelevant when it comes to the nature of time, which is where all this started. You seem to be trying to bring in anything you can that is different from science as some sort of smokescreen to hide the fact that what was under discussion was about our physical reality and hence in the realm of scientific investigation.
There is no moral aspect to whether time may have had a start or not.
Time is measured with clocks. Clocks, by their nature, define increments of time based on changes within space. This can be the movement of the second hand in space, for the analog clock. Or the change of digital display in a given location of space, for the digital clock. Or the change in the amount of sand, in a given volume of space, for the hour glass. Or the change in the relative location of the moon or sun in space, etc.
Since the philosophy of science requires one prove time by correlating observational data, the clock does not allow one to measure pure time, but a version of time, connected to space and time; space-time. We do not have tools to measure pure time. This cannot be done by a clock, since all clocks are measuring time as it propagates in space; space-time, not just pure time. The clock, as a tool, is where things get philosophically messed up. It is like measuring body weight with a meter stick and hone having a debate about body weight. It is not easy and tidy.
I treat time as a potential for change, but change is not limited to just corresponding space as measured by clocks. In other words, if we separated space-time into independent space and independent time, clocks no longer work to measure time, since the concept of time you will try to measure is no longer connected to space. However, this time still has a potential for change. The lottery may have a winner tomorrow, but we do not know where in space this may occur. The potential for change is there, but we cannot predict where. We will know after the fact and now can use the clock. This is not the same as the second hand, which is predictable. We know, in advance in one minute it will return to same location in space.
This type of time; independent time, takes into account statistical uncertainty in space, human consciousness and the human imagination. Say I am watching a police drama on TV, where they, weekly, solve a complex crime, in less than hour; hour minus commercial breaks. Obviously, real police, in space-time, are not able to do this week after week. We can use clocks to measure the one hour program, but solving crimes in an hour does not add up to what is expected in space-time reality. Yet the TV drama expresses a duration of time. Each week we know the blueprint, with the plot changing, with each blueprint having the potential to solve any crime in one hour. It is a product of the human imagination and can be a fun exercise of unraveling the plot. It is a one hour puzzle. It is real in that sense.
We can use the scientific method and treat this TV drama as a phenomena to be investigated. We consciously analyze and collect data, just like any science project, with the method consistent. We will use clocks to measure time. However, the potential for change, which in this case is the action and drama of solving the crime, of one hour still occurs. This is much less time than expected in space-time reality, for other similar crimes. That that would tell us, although time is propagating, this version of time is too fast, for that series of actions, and therefore it is not in space-time reality. There may be relativity altering time, or it can be just an imaginary clock set to its own time.
If you look at Creation and Evolution, both use time, with Creation using independent time. Like the one hour TV crime drama, it uses an accelerated version of time, to define the potential for drastic universal change in just 6 days. They are not talking about the type of time measured by space-time clocks. That fast scenario would require independent time and independent space. It is a valid scenario where space and time are separated. But it is not valid where space-time are connected and is measured with clocks.
When you enter the quantum realm, both space-time and independent space and time appear together. The speed of light is not always the speed limit. Or in the case of the experiments of Heisenberg, space and time (position and momentum), can go in opposite directions, so the second hand and incremental time get more and more off, the more precise you try to get. Religions tend to deal in independent space and time, where more options open up from imaginary to prophetic. It is not worse or better, but is more connected to where space-time leaves off and more options begin to appear for consciousness. via consciousness within independent space and time. This has applications is physics.
If you look at the 2nd law, that states that the entropy of the universe has to increase. This potential for change appears to be connected to independent time. There is constant potential for change called entropy increase. We do not know where in space this may occur, unless we can harness this time potential. This is the nature of life, with water and organics causing surface tension, and water, by being the most dominant secondary bonding force, packs a protein lowering its entropy. Now change in time; time potential, has a more likely place in space to fulfill; enzyme. The entire cell is processing in time, all coordinated like a symphony orchestra, due to entropy manipulation. Consciousness works the same way, processing time potential by reversing entropy; ionic, to there are targets in space for independent time.
Going on about 'proof' is, err, proof that you don't understand how science works.
