• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Big Bang in Trouble

Status
Not open for further replies.

dad

Undefeated
Cherry picking then throwing in a strawman, you really are struggling
If the first floor of a twenty story building is collapsed, that does affect the rest of the floors. When they admit knowing almost nothing (hahaha) about the early stage of their theory they really messed up.
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
Cite the post. Tell us what you think someone 'messed up' about? Ha

You stated nothing is known prior too

10e12
I.e. 1/1,000,000,000,000

That is nonsensical.

The number is 10e43
I.e 1/10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000

Now do you see the difference?
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
If the first floor of a twenty story building is collapsed, that does affect the rest of the floors. When they admit knowing almost nothing (hahaha) about the early stage of their theory they really messed up.

What a load of strawman and ignorance
 

dad

Undefeated
You stated nothing is known prior too

10e12
I.e. 1/1,000,000,000,000

That is nonsensical.

The number is 10e43
I.e 1/10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000

Now do you see the difference?
You have a big imagination? By the way I never quoted "10e12
I.e. 1/1,000,000,000,000" Try to be honest.

I did mention a tiny fraction of a second.
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
You have a big imagination? By the way I never quoted "10e12
I.e. 1/1,000,000,000,000" Try to be honest.

I did mention a tiny fraction of a second.

You stated 1 trillionth of a second 10e-12 is one trillionth. Like i said you also know ziltch about scientific notation
 

ecco

Veteran Member
I have an (apparently rare) ability to ignore fables in science articles.

More accurately stated, you have an ability to ignore all science that does not agree with your 6000 year old stories.

You have repeatedly demonstrated that your entire belief system is based on fables in books of fables.
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
Where did I say this!? Post? No idea what you are talking about.

Its in Your OP

And when i mentioned your error you mocked, now you deny it. What point is there continuing with this charade???
 

ecco

Veteran Member
"they know relatively little about the first seconds that followed the Big Bang — and next to nothing about the first trillionth of a second. When it comes to how our universe may have evolved, or to the events that may have taken place during these earliest moments, we have essentially no direct observations on which to rely."

I posted the article because they have problems themselves! Also to show they admit they don't know what they are talking about and admit it.

There was a time when mankind did not know why hot rocks exploded from the tops of some mountains. When asked about it, the village elders would say, GodDidIt. Ignorant people applauded the elders for their wisdom.

There was a time when mankind did not know why locusts ate all their crops. When asked about it, the village elders would say, GodDidIt. Ignorant people applauded the elders for their wisdom.

These days, when faced with things unknown, honest elders, scientists, admit they don't know. Ignorant people deride them for their honesty..
 

blü 2

Veteran Member
Premium Member
All forces that exist and others we do not know about are involved.
That's far too vague to count as an explanation. It explains nothing.
ALL of them jump to the tune of His voice.
What were the steps involved? What did [he] have to say in each case? What "sound of his voice" was involved in each case? How did "the sound of his voice" bring about the particular result in each case?
He speaks and it is so.
Oh, magic again. Magic explains nothing.
Don't blame me if science has such limited understanding.
It's your limited understanding that won't stand up here. Science explains by defining its claims and demonstrating their correctness. You, by contrast, appear not to have a clue.
Isa 55:9 - For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.
But of course the author of that part of Isaiah thought the earth was flat and the sky was a fixed dome to which sun, moon, stars and planets were attached. It thus appears not to have occurred to him that because the earth is a rotating sphere, any point in the sky above him is beneath his feet twelve hours later.
The standard model in cosmology and their claims about how stars evolve and where they come from, and what they are is the thing I disagree with.
That's a work in progress. There are data from observation about the content, mass, location, movement, distribution and red-shift of the objects in the cosmos, and from the CMBR. There is unresolved debate about various details, not least the causes of the observed phenomena that give rise to the "dark energy" and "Modified Newtonian Dynamics" hypotheses.

The thing to notice is that the resolution of these questions results in an explanation.

You offer magic, which does not explain and does not lead to understanding.

So despite your claim in the OP, it can't be question of "creation" being a better explanation, because it's no explanation at all.
 

dad

Undefeated
More accurately stated, you have an ability to ignore all science that does not agree with your 6000 year old stories..
Only when it is false science based on nothing at all but belief. Should we ignore the topic here, and how science admits they know next to nothing at all on the key aspect of the BB theory?
 

dad

Undefeated
Its in Your OP

And when i mentioned your error you mocked, now you deny it. What point is there continuing with this charade???
Then you were not telling the truth. Thanks for that. The only thing I said in the OP was this -

"Creation is a better explanation."

I quoted an article in a science news site.
 

dad

Undefeated
There was a time when mankind did not know why hot rocks exploded from the tops of some mountains. When asked about it, the village elders would say, GodDidIt. Ignorant people applauded the elders for their wisdom.
Nice story. Not sure why you choose this thread to tell it.

There was a time when mankind did not know why locusts ate all their crops. When asked about it, the village elders would say, GodDidIt. Ignorant people applauded the elders for their wisdom.
You were not there to hear what they actually talked about. Face it.

These days, when faced with things unknown, honest elders, scientists, admit they don't know.
They should do more of that. Much much more! They also should not build huge houses on a fable foundation of admitted ignorance! When they admit knowing almost nothing about some soup speck quickly growing into a universe for example! Hahahahahaha
Ignorant people deride them for their honesty..
No. Smart people deride them for dishonesty.
 

Milton Platt

Well-Known Member
Is the Big Bang in crisis?
Stubborn problems with dark matter, dark energy, and cosmic expansion have some astronomers rethinking what we know about the early universe.

"...cosmologists have struggled — if not outright failed — to understand essential facets of the universe. We know almost nothing about dark matter and dark energy, which together make up more than 95 percent of the total energy in existence today. We don’t understand how the universe’s protons, electrons, and neutrons could have survived the aftereffects of the Big Bang. In fact, everything we know about the laws of physics tells us that these particles should have been destroyed by antimatter long ago. And in order to make sense of the universe as we observe it, cosmologists have been forced to conclude that space, during its earliest moments, must have undergone a brief and spectacular period of hyperfast expansion — an event known as cosmic inflation. Yet we know next to nothing about this key era of cosmic history."

.."scientists generally assume that space expanded steadily during the first fraction of a second, without any unexpected events or transitions. It is entirely plausible that this simply was not the case."

"they know relatively little about the first seconds that followed the Big Bang — and next to nothing about the first trillionth of a second. When it comes to how our universe may have evolved, or to the events that may have taken place during these earliest moments, we have essentially no direct observations on which to rely."

Is the Big Bang in crisis?

Creation is a better explanation.

i think we know many facts about the universe.....I don't know how you are separating out "essential" from other facts, though. What makes a fact essential?
Just because the details of the big bang or any other theory are still being challenged does not represent a crisis. It is the way science works. All theories are challenged by those who think they have new insights. Either the insights prove to be correct and become pat of the theory, or even supplant the theory, or they do not stand scrutiny and are discarded. Not a problem.
 

dad

Undefeated
That's far too vague to count as an explanation. It explains nothing.

It actually say more than science can say.
What were the steps involved? What did [he] have to say in each case? What "sound of his voice" was involved in each case? How did "the sound of his voice" bring about the particular result in each case?

If science knew all that they would be smart. The fact you even have to ask all the things science doesn't know shows something else about you.

Oh, magic again. Magic explains nothing.
Everything above the pay grade of science is magic to you.

It's your limited understanding that won't stand up here. Science explains by defining its claims and demonstrating their correctness. You, by contrast, appear not to have a clue.
The problem is science cannot explain these things at all, and does not even so much as realize there is a God! (forget how He does stuff)

But of course the author of that part of Isaiah thought the earth was flat
Falsehood.
and the sky was a fixed dome to which sun, moon, stars and planets were attached.
Not true.

It thus appears not to have occurred to him that because the earth is a rotating sphere, any point in the sky above him is beneath his feet twelve hours later.
If that obvious thing did occur to him you think he would have written it in Scripture?? No.

That's a work in progress. There are data from observation about the content, mass, location, movement, distribution and red-shift of the objects in the cosmos, and from the CMBR.
You don't even know if time exists as we know it in deep space! Forget how it might affect light and shift it. Forget how big or far away objects are, etc etc.

There is unresolved debate about various details, not least the causes of the observed phenomena that give rise to the "dark energy" and "Modified Newtonian Dynamics" hypotheses.
In other words they need to invent stuff to explain stuff when the stuff they use for explaining is hopelessly inadequate.
The thing to notice is that the resolution of these questions results in an explanation.
What we actually notice is that they not only do not resolve the issue, but they admit not knowing almost anything about the key part of it! (they know nothing of the rest either but are not smart enough to admit it)

So despite your claim in the OP, it can't be question of "creation" being a better explanation, because it's no explanation at all.
It explains how we got here. It explains why you can't know how and when and why. That'll do er.
 

dad

Undefeated
i think we know many facts about the universe.....I don't know how you are separating out "essential" from other facts, though. What makes a fact essential?
Where did I even mention the word essential in the OP? Hate to break it to you but your fables are anything BUT essential!

Just because the details of the big bang or any other theory are still being challenged does not represent a crisis.
The use of the word crisis in the article denotes an inward conflict within science itself. There is some dissension in their own ranks. Outside that puddle the fable is not only in crisis but D.O.A.!
It is the way science works.
Nothing about ignorance and admitted ignorance actually works. They admit not knowing almost anything about the claimed event. (hot soup quickly expands)


All theories are challenged by those who think they have new insights. Either the insights prove to be correct and become pat of the theory, or even supplant the theory, or they do not stand scrutiny and are discarded. Not a problem.
The thing is the fable will never prove to be correct. It never has yet.
 

blü 2

Veteran Member
Premium Member
The problem is science cannot explain these things at all, and does not even so much as realize there is a God!
You can't explain how God actually does anything ─ that is, how magic actually works ─ so plainly you can't back your OP claim that 'creation' is a better explanation, since it's not an explanation at all.

Good to get these things clear.
 

dad

Undefeated
You can't explain how God actually does anything ─ that is, how magic actually works ─ so plainly you can't back your OP claim that 'creation' is a better explanation, since it's not an explanation at all.

Good to get these things clear.
You think you are God? Why would little man whose wisdom is so much lower than His know how He does everything? His explanation to man was that He spoke and it was so. You can't even get that much! There should be less pretending to know when we don't and more admitting it when we know next to nothing!
 

blü 2

Veteran Member
Premium Member
You think you are God?
No, I don't think I'm imaginary.
His explanation to man was that He spoke and it was so.
That's only in a story, like Aladdin and Open Sesame. We're talking about the real cosmos.
There should be less pretending to know when we don't and more admitting it when we know next to nothing!
That's odd, coming from you. I have no trouble admitting what I don't know. But however little science knows, it's actually your friend, doing things that God doesn't do like finding a vaccine for coronavirus; illuminating your understanding of the universe with facts (like, the earth is not flat); improving your computer, car, toaster. Give it a big hug and say Thank you!
 

dad

Undefeated
No, I don't think I'm imaginary.
That's only in a story, like Aladdin and Open Sesame. We're talking about the real cosmos.
You thought if you say cosmos that means there was no God?
That's odd, coming from you. I have no trouble admitting what I don't know.
In this thread in regards to the BB theory, I am here to make it even easier for you to admit you don't know.

But however little science knows, it's actually your friend, doing things that God doesn't do like finding a vaccine for coronavirus; illuminating your understanding of the universe with facts (like, the earth is not flat); improving your computer, car, toaster. Give it a big hug and say Thank you!
So there is no God, and science is our friend. Got it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top