Author Topic: The big bang theory is bs!  (Read 22423 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline caveat_imperator

  • Undergraduate
  • ***
  • Posts: 198
  • Darwins +6/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: The big bang theory is bs!
« Reply #406 on: October 27, 2011, 02:36:25 AM »
Again, you should really make your homework first, before questioning something that is granted widely,  without dispute at all.
After you.
"In the end theologians are jealous of science, for they are aware that it has greater authority than do their own ways of finding “truth”: dogma, authority, and revelation. Science does find truth, faith does not. " - Jerry Coyne

Offline Godexists

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 332
  • Darwins +0/-65
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: The big bang theory is bs!
« Reply #407 on: October 27, 2011, 06:24:03 AM »
Godexists,

The Big Bang Theory does NOT have any opinion of what happened 'before' the BB or even if the concept 'before' is meaningfull.
Scientists using observations and mathematics can extrapolate the existence of the universe (and its nature) backwards in time right until the Planck epochWiki

The BBT uses the idea that 'time itself started' as a mathematical construct in order to make the model work.

The BBT does not concern itself with the philosophical implications of if there was a 'before' it just says for the purposes of the model time started just before the Planck epoch.

Just as Einstein's theories do not explain the microscopic world very well  Quantum Theory does not allow for gravity.

Also Theory of Evolution does NOT include abiogenisis despite the strawman created by many theists.

Science goes where observations and mathematics leads it and at the moment it cannot go backwards in time past the Planck era singularity.

SCIENCE DOES NOT SAY 'The universe/mutiverse had a beginning' it just says we cannot as yet describe anything that may have existed before the known universe. Any speculation would not be based on any evidence at all.

Feel free to ignore the quotes of many scientists, which just do not agree with you.

Alexander Vilenkin is Professor of Physics and Director of the Institute of Cosmology at Tufts University. A theoretical physicist who has been working in the field of cosmology for 25 years, Vilenkin has written over 150 papers and is responsible for introducing the ideas of eternal inflation and quantum creation of the universe from nothing.

Quote
Vilenkin is blunt about the implications:

It is said that an argument is what convinces reasonable men and a proof is what it takes to convince even an unreasonable man. With the proof now in place, cosmologists can no longer hide behind the possibility of a past-eternal universe. There is no escape, they have to face the problem of a cosmic beginning (Many Worlds in One [New York: Hill and Wang, 2006], p.176).

http://www.thekeyboard.org.uk/What%20is%20infinity.htm

Quote
Strictly speaking, according to Einstein's Theory of Relativity, a singularity does not contain anything that is actually infinite, only things that MOVE MATHEMATICALLY TOWARDS infinity. A black hole is formed when large stars collapse and their mass has been compressed down to a very small size and the powerful gravitational field so formed prevents anything, even light, from escaping from it. A black hole therefore forms a singularity at its centre from the concentrated mass of the collapsed star itself and from the accumulated mass that is sucked into it. A singularity's mass is therefore finite, the 'infinity' refers only to the maths.

Offline screwtape

  • The Great Red Dragon
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 12682
  • Darwins +709/-28
  • Gender: Male
  • Karma mooch
Re: The big bang theory is bs!
« Reply #408 on: October 27, 2011, 07:35:00 AM »
You've quoted a smart guy's opinion.  Here is the thing about smart guys - they make mistakes too, they are just better at convincing you they didn't. 

Wasted post, godexists.
Links:
Rules
Guides & Tutorials

What's true is already so. Owning up to it does not make it worse.

Online jaimehlers

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5242
  • Darwins +599/-19
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The big bang theory is bs!
« Reply #409 on: October 27, 2011, 07:57:20 AM »
I don't think a single person here has tried to argue that a singularity's mass must actually be infinite.  In fact, I know that I've said that the pre-Big Bang singularity cannot have actually been infinite.  Maybe you should actually start trying to understand what I'm saying rather than simply writing post after post to contradict what you think I'm talking about.

As for time, here's an analogy.  A movie where the same scene happens at the start and end.  So, where's the actual beginning of the movie?  I refer not to the filming or the way it's shown, but to the concept of the movie itself.  If the 'end' of the movie is the same as the 'beginning' of the movie, then it stands to reason that concept is actually a loop, rather than a line.  The universe could be the same way.  Without more evidence, we can't come to a definite conclusion one way or the other.  In this case, logic really is nothing more than a way to confidently screw up.

Offline Graybeard

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 6822
  • Darwins +551/-19
  • Gender: Male
  • Is this going somewhere?
Re: The big bang theory is bs!
« Reply #410 on: October 27, 2011, 08:37:18 AM »
Quote
The BBT uses the idea that 'time itself started' as a mathematical construct in order to make the model work.

All that is said here
Quote
Vilenkin is blunt about the implications:

It is said that an argument is what convinces reasonable men and a proof is what it takes to convince even an unreasonable man. With the proof now in place, cosmologists can no longer hide behind the possibility of a past-eternal universe. There is no escape, they have to face the problem of a cosmic beginning

Is that Vilenkin urges research – he makes no assumption that something began. The problem lies in the verb “to begin” this is semantics, not physics.

If there were a volume of emptiness how would you know anything of time. Time is an artefact of things happening – things changing. This is how time is measured.

We must make the distinction between the universe and the contents of the universe.

I don’t think there is much objection to the original singularity being finite in energy, whilst being massive and energetic. Once the sudden expansion of the singularity occurs, the expansion will continue unless another force acts upon it. The universe consists of energy of which mass is the most visible component.

As there is no other force, then it will continue expanding for eternity. At the moment, it appears that the gravitational forces working against expansion are reduced by the increase in distance at which masses find themselves from other masses.

So whilst the universe is potentially infinite, the total energy within it is not.

Your friend at the keyboard link spends a lot of time explaining ‘infinity’ to himself. He should have asked me – infinity is an abstract concept.

Anyhow, all this, in no way shows anything about any gods. To suppose that some being (coincidentally the one whose folktales are told in the Bible) is the causer of the universe would require that being to be capable of producing something from nothing – but you say that the universe could not have come from nothing.


Nobody says “There are many things that we thought were natural processes, but now know that a god did them.”

Offline Hatter23

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3956
  • Darwins +265/-8
  • Gender: Male
  • Doesn't believe in one more god than you
Re: The big bang theory is bs!
« Reply #411 on: October 27, 2011, 09:02:09 AM »
The Underwear Gnome school of theology:

Step One :Find some phenomena that scientific inquiry do not have a complete explanation for

Step Two: Shrug condecendingly

Step Three: Conclude the god of Christendom exists!
An Omnipowerful God needed to sacrifice himself to himself (but only for a long weekend) in order to avert his own wrath against his own creations who he made in a manner knowing that they weren't going to live up to his standards.

And you should feel guilty for this. Give me money.

Offline relativetruth

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 632
  • Darwins +11/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: The big bang theory is bs!
« Reply #412 on: October 27, 2011, 09:36:45 AM »

Alexander Vilenkin is Professor of Physics and Director of the Institute of Cosmology at Tufts University. A theoretical physicist who has been working in the field of cosmology for 25 years, Vilenkin has written over 150 papers and is responsible for introducing the ideas of eternal inflation and quantum creation of the universe from nothing.

Quote
Vilenkin is blunt about the implications:

It is said that an argument is what convinces reasonable men and a proof is what it takes to convince even an unreasonable man. With the proof now in place, cosmologists can no longer hide behind the possibility of a past-eternal universe. There is no escape, they have to face the problem of a cosmic beginning (Many Worlds in One [New York: Hill and Wang, 2006], p.176).

Have you read his book?
On Page 151 of his book  Vilenkin says
Quote
The observed value of the cosmological constant gives a strong indication that there is indeed a huge multiverse out there.
The statement he makes on page 171
is that the universe  that we observe has not always existed but probably came from a pre-existing multiverse. He is making no statement as to if the multiverse has always existed. The cosmic beginning he is referring to is the beginning of our known universe.
God(s) exist and are imaginary

Online jaimehlers

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5242
  • Darwins +599/-19
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The big bang theory is bs!
« Reply #413 on: October 27, 2011, 09:43:38 AM »
From the link Godexists provided:

Quote
However, there is not a particular direction that we could set off in our warp speed space craft that would lead us to a boundary, no matter how far or fast we travelled. The explanation for this seeming impossibility is that space-time is curved, thus you would be travelling in a circle that only appears to be a straight line. If it were possible to direct a laser beam from here through the centre of the universe it would not hit the other side of the universe, it would eventually hit the back of your head (metaphorically speaking).
In other words, the universe's space is actually a circle that only appears to be a straight line to us.  In fact, that same paragraph later says:  "Strictly speaking, the Sun does not actually curve the light around itself, the entire space-time continuum is curved, the light is still travelling in a 'straight' line."  Time is one of the universe's dimensions, just like space[1].  If space is curved so that a straight line would essentially go in a circle, what does that say about the "straight line" concept of time?

While it is true that to us, time only goes in one direction, whereas space can go any direction, that is only our perception of things.  There is no reason that time could not eventually curve back into itself just like space does.  Which is not to say that things will repeat themselves, like a universal Groundhog Day.  It just means that there'd be no beginning or end to it.  And if there's a mechanism which automatically causes spots of low entropy to form inside the universe (like a black hole, perhaps), then there's no saying that there couldn't have been other Big Bangs before this one, or that there wouldn't be other Big Bangs after the fact.

And the final point of that page bears repeating.
Quote
You could for example propose that our universe is indeed an atom of a 'mega-universe' but equally you could propose that it as an atom of a mega-donkey's hind leg, but as neither hypotheses is testable or falsifiable there is little point in proposing them.
 1. Thus why they say "space-time continuum".

Offline Godexists

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 332
  • Darwins +0/-65
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: The big bang theory is bs!
« Reply #414 on: October 27, 2011, 10:42:09 AM »
I don't think a single person here has tried to argue that a singularity's mass must actually be infinite.  In fact, I know that I've said that the pre-Big Bang singularity cannot have actually been infinite.  Maybe you should actually start trying to understand what I'm saying rather than simply writing post after post to contradict what you think I'm talking about.

As for time, here's an analogy.  A movie where the same scene happens at the start and end.  So, where's the actual beginning of the movie?  I refer not to the filming or the way it's shown, but to the concept of the movie itself.  If the 'end' of the movie is the same as the 'beginning' of the movie, then it stands to reason that concept is actually a loop, rather than a line.  The universe could be the same way.  Without more evidence, we can't come to a definite conclusion one way or the other.  In this case, logic really is nothing more than a way to confidently screw up.

To be as you propose , the universe would have to expand, and at some point, start to contract again.  Thats called a oscillating universe. And that hypotheses has been discarded based on many reasons.

pg.76 a case for a creator

Quote
in order for the universe to oscillate, it has to contract at some point. For this to happen, the universe would have to be dense enough to generate sufficient gravity that would eventually slow its expansion to a halt and then, with increasing rapidity, contract it into a big crunch. But estimates have consistently indicated that the universe is far below the density needed to contract, even when you include not only its luminous matter, but also all of the invisible dark matter as well.
"Recent tests, run by five different laboratories in 1998, calculated a ninety-five-percent certainty that the universe will not contract, but that it will expand forever. In fact, in a completely unexpected development, the studies indicated that the expansion is not decelerating, but it's actually accelerating. This really puts the nails in the coffin for the Oscillating Model.
"And one more problem: even if physics allowed the universe to contract, scientific studies have shown that entropy would be conserved from one cycle to the next. This would have the effect of each expansion getting bigger and bigger and bigger. Now, trace that backwards in time and what do you get? They get smaller and smaller and smaller, until you finally come to the smallest cycle-and then the beginning of the universe. So Joseph Silk, in his book The Big Bang, estimates that even if the universe were oscillating, it could not have gone through more than a hundred previous oscillations prior to today."37
All of this did, indeed, seem to doom this theory.

Offline Godexists

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 332
  • Darwins +0/-65
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: The big bang theory is bs!
« Reply #415 on: October 27, 2011, 10:45:06 AM »
but you say that the universe could not have come from nothing.

Hold on : i said it could not come from absolutely nothing. That's different.

Offline screwtape

  • The Great Red Dragon
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 12682
  • Darwins +709/-28
  • Gender: Male
  • Karma mooch
Re: The big bang theory is bs!
« Reply #416 on: October 27, 2011, 10:52:37 AM »
Quote
in order for the universe to oscillate, it has to contract at some point. For this to happen, the universe would have to be dense enough to generate sufficient gravity that would eventually slow its expansion to a halt and then, with increasing rapidity, contract it into a big crunch.

Nope.  that was the point of the curved space idea.  You should probably bother to read what people have written and try to understand it, rather than skim it so you can respond.  Imagine space as the surface of a ball.  It "Bangs" at one point on the ball, and all the matter moves away from that point.  It will move along the curved surface and meet at a point diametrically opposite the point of the Bang, where it all Crunches and starts again. 

And even if this is wrong, it still does not explain why you need a creator nor does it explain the creator.  You keep thinking that because one idea or another does not suit you that the default must (must I tell you!) be god.  That is a patently stupid way to arrive at an answer.  It is neither scientific nor logical.   

Links:
Rules
Guides & Tutorials

What's true is already so. Owning up to it does not make it worse.

Offline Godexists

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 332
  • Darwins +0/-65
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: The big bang theory is bs!
« Reply #417 on: October 27, 2011, 10:53:00 AM »
The statement he makes on page 171
is that the universe  that we observe has not always existed but probably came from a pre-existing multiverse. He is making no statement as to if the multiverse has always existed. The cosmic beginning he is referring to is the beginning of our known universe.

Yes, that is one of the few alternatives atheists have left, when trying to discard God. The multiverse proposal  has however itself many problems to deal with, which do make it rather a irrational alternative.

http://www.st-edmunds.cam.ac.uk/faraday/resources/Faraday%20Papers/Faraday%20Paper%2010%20Holder_EN.pdf

Quote
The most popular explanation and the one that appeals to Dawkins, is the ‘multiverse’. The idea here is that, unbeknown to us, there are other universes, all slightly different, so that it becomes more likely that in that number, a universe like ours might exist. Davies wrote, “The multiverse theory seeks to replace the appearance of design by the hand of chance.”[9] I have read some accounts that leave one to believe that a relatively small number of other universes would significantly alter the probabilities. That however is clearly not the case.

How many universes then would you need to make it at all probable that one of them could be like our universe? String theorists posit a number of 10 to the power of 500.

http://www.johnpiippo.com/2009/02/robin-collins-on-many-worlds-hypothesis.html

Quote
Reasons to Reject the Atheistic MUH ( multi universe hypotheses )

#1 – “Everything else being equal, we should prefer hypotheses for which we have independent evidence or that are natural extrapolations from what we already know.” (81)
It’s hard to see how the MUH could be a natural extrapolation from what we already observe. Whereas postulating a “super-mind” is a natural extrapolation from our observation of minds in general.
“Moreover, unlike the MUH, we have some experiential evidence for the existence of God, namely religious experience.” (81)


#2 – The MUH needs a “many-universe generator,” which seems to need to have been designed. Such a generator “is governed by a complex set of physical laws that allow it to produce the universes. It stands to reason, therefore, that if these laws were slightly different the generator probably would not be able to produce any universes that could sustain life. After all, even my bread machine has to be made just right in order to work properly, and it only produces loaves of bread, not universes.” (82)

The MUH seems unable to avoid the design issue, only moving the problem of design to another level.

William Lane Craig writes: “Now this recourse to the World Ensemble will be in vain if it turns out that the mechanism that generates the World Ensemble must itself be fine-tuned, for then one has only kicked the problem upstairs. And, indeed, that does seem to be the case. The most popular candidate for a World Ensemble today, the inflationary multiverse, does appear to require fine-tuning. For example, M-theory, the theory which supposedly governs the multiverse, works only if there are exactly eleven dimensions—but it does nothing to explain why precisely that number of dimensions should exist.”

#3 – Another reason to reject the MUH “is that the universe generator must not only select the parameters of physics at random, but must actually randomly create or select the very laws of physics themselves. This makes the hypothesis even more far-fetched since it is difficult to see what possible physical mechanism could select or create laws.” (82)

Because just the right parameters of physics are needed for life to occur, the right set of laws is also needed. “If, for instance, certain laws of physics were missing, life would be impossible.” (82)
#4 – The atheistic MUH “cannot explain other features of the universe that seem to exhibit apparent design, whereas theism can.”

For example, Einstein and other physicists felt that the laws of physics themselves exhibit beauty, elegance, harmony, and ingenuity. “Now such beauty, elegance, and ingenuity make sense if the universe was designed by God. Under the atheistic MUH, however, there is no reason to expect the fundamental laws of physics to be elegant or beautiful.” (82)

#5 – “Neither the atheistic MUH )nor the atheistic single-universe hypothesis) can at present adequately account for the improbable initial arrangement of matter in the universe required by the second law of thermodynamics.”
« Last Edit: October 27, 2011, 11:08:58 AM by Godexists »

Offline Godexists

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 332
  • Darwins +0/-65
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: The big bang theory is bs!
« Reply #418 on: October 27, 2011, 11:11:36 AM »
Quote
in order for the universe to oscillate, it has to contract at some point. For this to happen, the universe would have to be dense enough to generate sufficient gravity that would eventually slow its expansion to a halt and then, with increasing rapidity, contract it into a big crunch.

Nope.  that was the point of the curved space idea.  You should probably bother to read what people have written and try to understand it, rather than skim it so you can respond.  Imagine space as the surface of a ball.  It "Bangs" at one point on the ball, and all the matter moves away from that point.  It will move along the curved surface and meet at a point diametrically opposite the point of the Bang, where it all Crunches and starts again. 

And even if this is wrong, it still does not explain why you need a creator nor does it explain the creator.  You keep thinking that because one idea or another does not suit you that the default must (must I tell you!) be god.  That is a patently stupid way to arrive at an answer.  It is neither scientific nor logical.

i have a other alternative : The Flying Spaghettimonster TM  throw some meat balls, they crunched together, and the Bang of it formed our universe. You can make up whatever you want,
any fantastic explanation is possible. As long as there is no evidence whatever to back it up, it makes no sense at all. Not so with the Got of the bible. There are many different reasons to believe in a powerful intelligent God.

Online jaimehlers

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5242
  • Darwins +599/-19
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The big bang theory is bs!
« Reply #419 on: October 27, 2011, 11:27:08 AM »
To be as you propose , the universe would have to expand, and at some point, start to contract again.  Thats called a oscillating universe. And that hypotheses has been discarded based on many reasons.
No, it doesn't have to oscillate.  What matters when it comes to a proto-universe singularity is mass, not empty space.  If enough mass comes together in the singularity, in other words being in a state where the normal rules of entropy don't apply, any empty space outside the singularity is unimportant, because gravity doesn't affect empty space.  The empty space could just as easily have been outside the singularity as inside.

Also, you need to stop assuming other people are trying to 'discard' God because they don't accept your statement that God exists.  That statement is speculation, plain and simple.  As I already said, speculation proves nothing.  The fact that someone else doesn't accept your speculation as true doesn't mean anything but that they don't accept your speculation as true.  That is not the same as discarding it.

And instead of telling people that "there are many powerful reasons to believe in a powerful intelligent God", why don't you list them (preferably in a different topic, since this is about the Big Bang)?  Assuming they aren't emotional reasons[1], you should be able to provide evidence for them to be true.  And if you cannot provide such evidence, then those reasons are not powerful at all.
 1. I am excluding those for the very simple fact that emotions are not rational and are easy to manipulate.

Offline Hatter23

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3956
  • Darwins +265/-8
  • Gender: Male
  • Doesn't believe in one more god than you
Re: The big bang theory is bs!
« Reply #420 on: October 27, 2011, 11:51:57 AM »

i have a other alternative : The Flying Spaghettimonster TM  throw some meat balls, they crunched together, and the Bang of it formed our universe. You can make up whatever you want,
any fantastic explanation is possible. As long as there is no evidence whatever to back it up, it makes no sense at all. Not so with the Got of the bible. There are many different reasons to believe in a powerful intelligent God.


Please show us exactly, concretely, and objectively, how this is not special pleading. I'm wagering you cannot.

An Omnipowerful God needed to sacrifice himself to himself (but only for a long weekend) in order to avert his own wrath against his own creations who he made in a manner knowing that they weren't going to live up to his standards.

And you should feel guilty for this. Give me money.

Offline DVZ3

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1377
  • Darwins +42/-8
  • Gender: Male
Re: The big bang theory is bs!
« Reply #421 on: October 27, 2011, 11:54:19 AM »
As long as there is no evidence whatever to back it up, it makes no sense at all. Not so with the Got of the bible. There are many different reasons to believe in a powerful intelligent God.

This is a massive logical failure (a big bang of failure, and we also have no way predicting how many huge failures you've made in life prior to this one!  ;) )and it's also a ridiculous opinion to come to as a foregone conclusion. Because you say 'As long as there is no evidence' you sure do make silly conclusions.

If I told you there was a box with something in it, but you had no evidence of what it contained and what could possibly be in it, I sure would put meatballs on the list of what could be in the box verses your conclusion of an intelligent, powerful god. If you don't understand the logic on this conclusion then you are easily fooled and manipulated by human 'born' mythology.
« Last Edit: October 27, 2011, 12:06:09 PM by DVZ3 »
Hguols: "Its easier for me to believe that a God created everything...."

Offline violatedsmurf80

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 392
  • Darwins +2/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: The big bang theory is bs!
« Reply #422 on: October 27, 2011, 11:58:22 AM »
Not so with the Got of the bible. There are many different reasons to believe in a powerful intelligent God.

It is taken from the old Sumerian text and reformed to fit the Jews, Christian, and any other folklore, just like the Lilith was taken out of the book of genesis. It the earliest form of plagiarism from the Jews.





When fascism comes to America it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross.”--- Sinclair Lewis

I believe there is something out there watching over us. Unfortunately, it's the government.

Offline Aaron123

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2781
  • Darwins +80/-1
  • Gender: Male
Re: The big bang theory is bs!
« Reply #423 on: October 27, 2011, 01:14:03 PM »
You can make up whatever you want,
any fantastic explanation is possible. As long as there is no evidence whatever to back it up, it makes no sense at all. Not so with the Got of the bible. There are many different reasons to believe in a powerful intelligent God.

Godexists, even if we assume that the universe must've been created by a super-being of some kind, why assume that it's your particular version of a super-being?  What makes you think your super-being is more likely than another, unrelated super-being?

For that matter, why assume only one super-being?  There's no reason to assume it couldn't have been hundreds, or thousands of super-beings.  After all, the universe is a BIG place...
Being a Christian, I've made my decision. That decision offers no compromise; therefore, I'm closed to anything else.

Offline caveat_imperator

  • Undergraduate
  • ***
  • Posts: 198
  • Darwins +6/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: The big bang theory is bs!
« Reply #424 on: October 27, 2011, 01:28:49 PM »
For that matter, why assume only one super-being?  There's no reason to assume it couldn't have been hundreds, or thousands of super-beings.  After all, the universe is a BIG place...
Because he has no faith in any other super-being other than his.
"In the end theologians are jealous of science, for they are aware that it has greater authority than do their own ways of finding “truth”: dogma, authority, and revelation. Science does find truth, faith does not. " - Jerry Coyne

Online One Above All

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 11196
  • Darwins +294/-37
  • Supreme ruler of the multiverse; All In One
Re: The big bang theory is bs!
« Reply #425 on: October 27, 2011, 01:32:18 PM »
For that matter, why assume only one super-being?  There's no reason to assume it couldn't have been hundreds, or thousands of super-beings.  After all, the universe is a BIG place...
Because he has no faith in any other super-being other than his.

I believe the technical term is "narcissism".
The truth is absolute. Life forms are specks of specks (...) of specks of dust in the universe.
Why settle for normal, when you can be so much more? Why settle for something, when you can have everything?
We choose our own gods.

A.K.A.: Blaziken/Lucifer/All In One/Orion.

Offline screwtape

  • The Great Red Dragon
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 12682
  • Darwins +709/-28
  • Gender: Male
  • Karma mooch
Re: The big bang theory is bs!
« Reply #426 on: October 27, 2011, 02:18:45 PM »
i have a other alternative : The Flying Spaghettimonster TM  throw some meat balls, they crunched together, and the Bang of it formed our universe. You can make up whatever you want,
any fantastic explanation is possible. As long as there is no evidence whatever to back it up, it makes no sense at all. Not so with the Got of the bible. There are many different reasons to believe in a powerful intelligent God.

you are out of your mind, buckaroo.

from an evidentiary stand point, fsm = yhwh.
Links:
Rules
Guides & Tutorials

What's true is already so. Owning up to it does not make it worse.

Offline ungod

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 580
  • Darwins +15/-9
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The big bang theory is bs!
« Reply #427 on: October 27, 2011, 02:52:59 PM »
but you say that the universe could not have come from nothing.

Hold on : i said it could not come from absolutely nothing. That's different.

But, but...God's representatives claim it DID - "EX NIHILO" - "from nothing!

 :police:
Reason is a whore, the greatest enemy that faith has.
Faith must trample under foot all reason, sense, and understanding. - Martin Luther

"What good fortune for those in power that people do not think." - Hitler

Offline Godexists

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 332
  • Darwins +0/-65
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: The big bang theory is bs!
« Reply #428 on: October 27, 2011, 05:41:42 PM »
why don't you list them (preferably in a different topic, since this is about the Big Bang)?  Assuming they aren't emotional reasons[1], you should be able to provide evidence for them to be true.  And if you cannot provide such evidence, then those reasons are not powerful at all.
 1. I am excluding those for the very simple fact that emotions are not rational and are easy to manipulate.

i have presented these reasons already at this topic. If you want to discuss them, you can open a new topic, and i'll eventually participate.


Offline Hatter23

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3956
  • Darwins +265/-8
  • Gender: Male
  • Doesn't believe in one more god than you
Re: The big bang theory is bs!
« Reply #429 on: October 27, 2011, 05:46:38 PM »
why don't you list them (preferably in a different topic, since this is about the Big Bang)?  Assuming they aren't emotional reasons[1], you should be able to provide evidence for them to be true.  And if you cannot provide such evidence, then those reasons are not powerful at all.
 1. I am excluding those for the very simple fact that emotions are not rational and are easy to manipulate.

i have presented these reasons already at this topic. If you want to discuss them, you can open a new topic, and i'll eventually participate.

I haven't seen reasons, I've seen excuses for poor reasoning.
An Omnipowerful God needed to sacrifice himself to himself (but only for a long weekend) in order to avert his own wrath against his own creations who he made in a manner knowing that they weren't going to live up to his standards.

And you should feel guilty for this. Give me money.

Offline Godexists

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 332
  • Darwins +0/-65
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: The big bang theory is bs!
« Reply #430 on: October 27, 2011, 05:46:45 PM »
Godexists, even if we assume that the universe must've been created by a super-being of some kind, why assume that it's your particular version of a super-being?  What makes you think your super-being is more likely than another, unrelated super-being?

The bible is the only religious book of ancient times, which got it right in stating a God above its creation. Other religions made gods of wood and stone, declared them God, and worshipped them.
But nontheless, the cosmological argument does not serve much to evidence specifically the God of the bible.

Quote
For that matter, why assume only one super-being?  There's no reason to assume it couldn't have been hundreds, or thousands of super-beings.  After all, the universe is a BIG place...

I agree.

Offline 12 Monkeys

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4708
  • Darwins +107/-11
  • Gender: Male
  • Dii hau dang ijii
Re: The big bang theory is bs!
« Reply #431 on: October 27, 2011, 07:46:46 PM »
Godexists, even if we assume that the universe must've been created by a super-being of some kind, why assume that it's your particular version of a super-being?  What makes you think your super-being is more likely than another, unrelated super-being?

The bible is the only religious book of ancient times, which got it right in stating a God above its creation. Other religions made gods of wood and stone, declared them God, and worshipped them.
But nontheless, the cosmological argument does not serve much to evidence specifically the God of the bible.

Quote
For that matter, why assume only one super-being?  There's no reason to assume it couldn't have been hundreds, or thousands of super-beings.  After all, the universe is a BIG place...

I agree.
Hey class-A Fuckhead,,,,these stone and wood monuments were representations of their gods,they were not actually the gods. Your book is just another stone or wood statue or monument. There is no proof outside the bible to back it up....much like there is only stone or wood monuments and oral stories to back up gods of other times and civilizations.

 To say something exists with just words(heavilly edited over time) and no tangible evidence can understandibly be dismissed as easy as an oral teaching and a stone statue...neither civilization can prove their gods real.
There's no right there's no wrong,there's just popular opinion (Brad Pitt as Jeffery Goines in 12 monkeys)

Offline Godexists

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 332
  • Darwins +0/-65
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: The big bang theory is bs!
« Reply #432 on: October 27, 2011, 07:48:21 PM »
I haven't seen reasons, I've seen excuses for poor reasoning.

And what have you presented so far ?

Offline Godexists

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 332
  • Darwins +0/-65
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: The big bang theory is bs!
« Reply #433 on: October 27, 2011, 07:49:26 PM »
Hey class-A Fuckhead,,,,these stone and wood monuments were representations of their gods,they were not actually the gods. Your book is just another stone or wood statue or monument. There is no proof outside the bible to back it up....much like there is only stone or wood monuments and oral stories to back up gods of other times and civilizations.

 To say something exists with just words(heavilly edited over time) and no tangible evidence can understandibly be dismissed as easy as an oral teaching and a stone statue...neither civilization can prove their gods real.

bible bashing is easy, and boring. Present rather a better explanation for our existence. Have any ?

Offline jetson

  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 7312
  • Darwins +170/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Meet George Jetson!
    • Jet Blog
Re: The big bang theory is bs!
« Reply #434 on: October 27, 2011, 07:55:50 PM »

The bible is the only religious book of ancient times, which got it right in stating a God above its creation. Other religions made gods of wood and stone, declared them God, and worshipped them.
But nontheless, the cosmological argument does not serve much to evidence specifically the God of the bible.


Please.  Show me this god.  For fucks sake, I wish for once that one of you theists would step up and show me the money.  Such bullshit to sit there and make proclamations without a single attempt at even remotely showing evidence.  "Got it right"?  The Bible got it right?  The Only thing the Bible got right was the fact that it managed to scare the shit of you to the point that you can't even think straight.  You're so afraid to step back and call it fiction and mythology.

Do you have any idea how sad it is that a modern human being, with at least a 12 year education is trapped in an ancient mess of stories and letters to the point that they actualy believe that a man survived inside of a fish for three days, or that snakes can talk, or that there was a woman made from a mans rib?  It's really, really sad to think about.