So, I read your argument from yesterday. Both sides made really good arguments in my opinion, and I couldn't decide who was right, but the following argument supporting Dark came to my mind. Please read the whole thing before you start responding.
Consider this scenario: A computer, which runs two different operations systems--a binary one and a ternary one. Assume, for the sake of simplicity, that they require different arrangements of electronic components, since they use two sorts of logic and it wouldn't really work if they were all using the same stuff. Now, these two parts are slightly separated from each other, such that they don't go trying to run themselves in parts which don't make sense. That would break everything. However, the two systems can get data from each other, using a translator.
So why don't they break? Because they're separated. But, even still, they use the same electronic components--just arranged differently. Or, even better, they use the same materials which make the electronic components--just arranged differently. Therefore, the same framework (the materials) is running two entirely different systems of operation which are normally incompatible with each other.
As one more basis, note that the electronic components obviously are not made out of binary, or ternary. The electronic components which binary and ternary run on use a different logic of arrangement. Two different systems of logic running on another system of logic which makes them both happen.
Now we extend the metaphor. Two universes. Two different kinds of logic which make zero sense to each other. If one universe tried to reach into the other universe and use its logic, everything would break. So they're kind of separated. What are these two universes running on? A framework: Code. Code, arranged in different ways so that the two kinds of logic can run separately. The Code has its own form of logic which allows both types to run.
Now, this logic is not necessarily our logic. In this example, we are binary, and the other universe is ternary. It doesn't use our logic. It doesn't make sense to us. It defies our human reason. And yet, is it not avarice to say that ours is the only system of reason that should ever work? Why shouldn't Code have its own form of logic which supersedes ours and yet allows ours to exist? Why shouldn't Code be able to allow other forms of logic?
A perfect example is God--He certainly doesn't run on our reason. He has His own way. Heaven will, of course, be filled with many things which we can't comprehend right now. And yet it will make sense, once we're running on a better framework of logic--God's framework. So, that said, if we have an example of this very thing which I describe happening in real life, how can we say that it couldn't happen in Existence?
