1. 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!

Featured The Big Bang and Evolution

Discussion in 'General Religious Debates' started by Ubon, Jan 30, 2017.

  1. jonathan180iq

    jonathan180iq Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2014
    Messages:
    3,594
    Ratings:
    +1,923
    For all we know, the physical laws of existence were present and acting upon ( and possibly within) the condensed soup of matter and energy that would have been the primordial origin. It's fun to speculate different sets of rules, but you have to show evidence that they can exist before you can pretend that they do, even in a hypothetical scenario like this discussion.

    Asking "what" or "who" caused the initial moment of expanse is like asking what or who formed the Sun, the planets, or any other object in our Solar System. Like all other solar systems in the Cosmos, they self-formed via wholly natural and well understood processes.

    Stellar nucleosynthesis - Wikipedia
    Accretion (astrophysics) - Wikipedia

    If we ask the same question, "What or who caused any of those things to happen", would it make sense as a question?


    The Word "Before"

    There are two conversations going on here. They seem contradictory because you're assuming they are equal to one another. Common understandings of how things work, and what they mean, are very different from how they actually work and what they actually mean. We may find it very logical to discuss "before" because that's how our brains work. The seemingly eternal nature of our Universe and its governing laws have been in place since before our arrival on the scene and they will persist long after our departure. I'm trying to maintain both conversations with you, the common and the actual.

    The word "before" cannot exist when discussing anything that happened before the BB. That is a true statement because Space and Time (as we know it) did not exist before that moment. There is a wall of ignorance that will forever exist in regards to the origin of time because of that. It is impossible to know what happened before the origins of Space Time. All of human knowledge can only account for what has happened since. Anything more is speculation. This is true of both Theistic and Scientific endeavors. The Universe could just as easily be a reverberating cycle of expanding and contracting eternities as it could be a snot goblet on the nostril of a Magic Celestial Unicorn.

    On Matter
    Matter - Wikipedia

    Remember how I told you evolution is a comprehensive understanding of existence, and not just a description of human development? This is what I was talking about. Even the complexity of atoms which you think are required in order for matter (as you've described it) to exist have undergone an evolutionary process.

    All of physicality evolves. Even the basic constants in chemistry, which must have been synthesized during the BB, namely Hydrogen and Helium, had to undergo physical changes over time in order to produce more complex elements and molecules. Hydrogen is the "Adam" of the elements. Without it, there is nothing else.


    Your emotional rejection of Evolutionary Biology is not tenable in a scientific conversation. You can't argue something to be false simply because you don't like it... That's not how knowledge works.

    You have evolved from much more than just a monkey - You are the product of a 14 Billion year old process of adaptation and change, culminating in the majesty of a living existence. The atoms in your body have seen eons of time pass by - They've been to, and have been part of, other planets - they've been crushed in the bellies of stars - they've spent whole epochs traveling through space - they've been dirt, clouds, rain, mountains, rivers, trees, dinosaurs... they've also been monkeys and every other creature that you can imagine. Our species directly evolved from primates, yes. Would you have preferred it if we directly descended from something else?

    This is who we are. It's where our species came from. There's a lot more to evolution than just "Monkeys to man..."
     
    • Like Like x 2
  2. metis

    metis aged ecumenical anthropologist

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2013
    Messages:
    18,921
    Ratings:
    +5,935
    Religion:
    ecumenical/unaffiliated/attend wife's Catholic church
    The evidence suggest that there was indeed singularity, so one of the questions we have is what actually caused it to expand, and there are a fair number of theories dealing with that.

    Unknown at this time, and it may never be known, and my guess is with the latter.

    Let me recommend you read my signature statement at the bottom of my posts to get where I'm coming from on this. I am not stating nor implying that there could not be a theistic causation.
     
  3. metis

    metis aged ecumenical anthropologist

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2013
    Messages:
    18,921
    Ratings:
    +5,935
    Religion:
    ecumenical/unaffiliated/attend wife's Catholic church
    Then that would have it that the books and articles that I've been reading written by research cosmologists are wrong, which I guess is a possibility.

    Again, according to the articles and books I've read, this also is wrong-- at least according to the calculations put forth by cosmologists. I have to rely on them because, even though I've been involved in science for 50 years, my area of specialization is not cosmology.

    An excellent book I'd recommend that covers this is "The Universe Before the Big Bang: Cosmology and String Theory" by Maurizio Gasperini. It is VERY technical, thus being too much over my head as far as the calculations are concerned. Scientific American has had myriads of articles on this as well, and fortunately they're much easier for me to digest.
     
  4. Ben Avraham

    Ben Avraham Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2016
    Messages:
    2,170
    Ratings:
    +236
    Religion:
    Jewish
    What or Who caused those physical laws to exist?

    Eternal nature of our Universe! I thought you were serious when you said that the BB was the beginning of the Universe. For something to have had a beginning, there is nothing in its nature to be referred to as eternal nature.

    Any kind of evolution, physical or intellectual is part of the development of Man. When Man was caused to exist, the word was to grow and multiply. To grow not only biologically but also intellectually. (Genesis 1:28) That's called real evolution. The evolution taught by Darwin is only a theory that, like almost all theories never come to fruition.

    The meaning of my "not liking a theory" is based on the lack of evidences to stand against reality; not simply because I don't like it. If you tell me something which in your opinion can stand against my views, I don't like but only until I am entirely persuaded of the truth about it. Monkeys for instance, do enjoy evolution but within the monkey species, not from monkey to man which is a theory which has not yet been proved as a fact. That's why I don't liked it.
     
    #164 Ben Avraham, Feb 15, 2017
    Last edited: Feb 15, 2017
  5. Guy Threepwood

    Guy Threepwood Mighty Pirate

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2014
    Messages:
    4,866
    Ratings:
    +917
    Religion:
    Non atheist
    David Raup was a good example, he passed away recently, but he was curator of the Chicago Field Museum (of Lucy and Sue fame) and a prominent paleontologist, about as qualified as anyone on the planet to have an opinion on this

    He publicly 'believed in evolution' but also clearly qualified that as 'merely change' not how things changed- "


    "ironically, we have even fewer examples of evolutionary transitions than we had in Darwin's time.[] we still have a record which does show change but one that can hardly be looked upon as the most reasonable consequence of natural selection."
     
  6. Ben Avraham

    Ben Avraham Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2016
    Messages:
    2,170
    Ratings:
    +236
    Religion:
    Jewish
    What is a theist causation! Causation is of Physics to be used to promote the truth about the Primal Cause.
     
  7. metis

    metis aged ecumenical anthropologist

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2013
    Messages:
    18,921
    Ratings:
    +5,935
    Religion:
    ecumenical/unaffiliated/attend wife's Catholic church
    We need to remember that each current species are in reality are "transitional species", and there's simply no reason to believe that this would have been different thousands to millions of years ago. Something has to explain all the changes we've seen in the fossil record and the genome testing, and there is not one single piece of evidence to suggest that any deities were involved. Maybe there were, but we certainly cannot tell that from what we see.
     
  8. metis

    metis aged ecumenical anthropologist

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2013
    Messages:
    18,921
    Ratings:
    +5,935
    Religion:
    ecumenical/unaffiliated/attend wife's Catholic church
    It is your assumption that there was a "Primal Cause", which would be contrary to the concept of infinity. However, I am not saying that the latter is true.

    "Theistic causation" is the concept that all was created by a god or gods.
     
  9. Ben Avraham

    Ben Avraham Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2016
    Messages:
    2,170
    Ratings:
    +236
    Religion:
    Jewish
    No! First, we must know what caused the singularity to exist. Then, yes, how it expanded into causing the Universe to exist.
     
  10. metis

    metis aged ecumenical anthropologist

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2013
    Messages:
    18,921
    Ratings:
    +5,935
    Religion:
    ecumenical/unaffiliated/attend wife's Catholic church
    That's pretty much what I was saying, although each could be covered independent of the other.
     
  11. Ben Avraham

    Ben Avraham Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2016
    Messages:
    2,170
    Ratings:
    +236
    Religion:
    Jewish
    Yes, you are right!. I only find "to be created by a god or gods" is too rudimentary. To have been caused to exist by the Primal Cause is more fitting as Logic is concerned.
     
  12. Valjean

    Valjean Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2004
    Messages:
    16,105
    Ratings:
    +5,152
    Religion:
    Vedanta (reform)
    Why must we perfectly understand our own universe before we turn our eye to the cosmos? Science discovers principles and relationships. They apply where they apply.

    You seem to be comparing apples and oranges. What do cosmology or M Theory have to do with 'ordinary' sciences like biology or geology?
    True science ignores what the Bible teaches. Science does its own investigation and testing.The Bible is not a science book.

    Evolution was unknown to the authors of the Bible, so it's no surprise it's not in there.
    Evolution is a fact. Life has changed over time. As for controversy, the fact of evolution is only disputed by the religious -- generally those that don't understand the ToE. Among scientists, it's the details of mechanism that are disputed, not the fact of evolution or the overall mechanisms involved.

    A decreasing number of scientists are rejecting the ToE. Scientific support for the ToE continues to grow.You could probably count the number of legitimate scientific dissidents on one hand.
     
    #172 Valjean, Feb 15, 2017
    Last edited: Feb 15, 2017
    • Like Like x 1
  13. metis

    metis aged ecumenical anthropologist

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2013
    Messages:
    18,921
    Ratings:
    +5,935
    Religion:
    ecumenical/unaffiliated/attend wife's Catholic church
    I also think "infinity" is in the running, so I'm comfortable with my "I don't know" stance on this.
     
  14. Valjean

    Valjean Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2004
    Messages:
    16,105
    Ratings:
    +5,152
    Religion:
    Vedanta (reform)
    What does "caused to exist" mean? Man developed like any other animal, didn't he?
    Evolution was occurring for billions of years before man appeared on the scene. Moreover, when man appeared the world began to degrade, not grow. The megafauna were extirpated, forests destroyed and deserts created.
    Intellectual evolution is no different than the evolution of any other feature, and now that civilization has obviated the selective advantage of intellect, I'd expect a metabolically costly feature like a large brain to shrink.

    All science is "only a theory" A scientific theory is not speculation or conjecture.

    Why do you cite Darwin? What does Darwin have to say about current biological research? You don't see Hippocrates cited in medical journals, or Copernicus in Astronomy journals.
    Who proposed monkey to man? Where did you get that idea? -- certainly not from any biology text.
    How do physical changes know when to stop, so as to avoid producing new species, and how do you explain the speciation we've already observed with our own eyes?
    This quotation is misinterpreted and taken out of context. On a Common Creationist Quotation of Dr. David M. Raup
    Why do facts have to appear or be applied in a particular order? Why does the singularity need a cause?
    I think you're trying to apply ordinary experience to a physics where it's inapplicable. Square peg -- round hole.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  15. rusra02

    rusra02 Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2009
    Messages:
    5,730
    Ratings:
    +487
    According to this source, over 3,000 scientists and intellectuals are listed who reject macro evolution. The author claims that is a small percentage of the scientists who reject macro evolution as "fact". I find your claim that one could count dissidents from the theory on one hand far from reality.
     
  16. Guy Threepwood

    Guy Threepwood Mighty Pirate

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2014
    Messages:
    4,866
    Ratings:
    +917
    Religion:
    Non atheist

    Raup identified many direct conflicts between the predictions of Darwin's theory, and the actual evidence presented in paleontology. No way around this
     
  17. Valjean

    Valjean Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2004
    Messages:
    16,105
    Ratings:
    +5,152
    Religion:
    Vedanta (reform)
    You've been reading Creation Institute propaganda, haven't you?
    Jerry Bergman - RationalWiki
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Scientific_Dissent_From_Darwinism
     
  18. jonathan180iq

    jonathan180iq Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2014
    Messages:
    3,594
    Ratings:
    +1,923
    The physical laws as we know them can only be applied to the Universe in which we live. They're either an eternal pre-existing set of ordinances through which all existences are subject, or they were synthesized during the BB just like everything else that we'll ever know. To claim otherwise is to do so out of ignorance.

    There is only so far that reductionist reasoning can go before it hits the barrier of time, which is the Universal moment of origin in the BB. We will never know what came "before", because of what I have already mentioned.

    Read it again, Ben...

    "Seemingly eternal" is what I said - and that's based on our perspective. The laws of nature that we have discovered are seemingly eternal. You cannot posit that other laws exist, or that laws were somehow different in the past, until you find evidence that it could be (or has been) so.

    I'm sorry. But you're conflating a necessarily limited view of man's existence, as written in a mythological textbook by people who knew no better, to the superior understanding of knowledge that is attained through observation and testing. The Evolutionary model has made, and is making, predictions that come to fruition through study. It has been so for well over a century. There are no better explanations for the origins of current biologies than the comprehensive study of evolution. If you feel otherwise, you're free to present your substantiating data in Swim's thread challenging all creationists to present their case:

    A Challenge To All Creationists

    You're also free to attempt to falsify Evolutionary understandings. If you can, I encourage you to do so.

    Understanding Evolution

    Man is a primate. There's no two ways about it.
    We are an adapted primate that shares lineages with not only the other primates currently inhabiting the Earth, but also with all other living organisms that have ever existed.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  19. jonathan180iq

    jonathan180iq Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2014
    Messages:
    3,594
    Ratings:
    +1,923
    In your first sentence you engage in presuppositional special pleading, making an unsubstantiated claim that there was a Primal Cause, and exempting it from the rules that you are requiring of literally everything else....

    You're arguing, as all creationists inevitably do, that an infinitely more complex being than the Universe caused the Universe to exist. You do not require this Unmoved Mover to follow the same rules that you require of everything else... Why is your deity of choice immune from your criticisms?

    The Sun's creation analogy was meant to show you that at any point in a timeline you can ask "what caused this to be, since it cannot cause itself to be?" It is a flawed question because it makes no sense. There are a seemingly infinite number of variables that caused the sun to be, just as there was for all other stars that we observe coming and going into existence. There is no magic mover involved in any of these creations, though they've obviously "come to be."
     
    • Like Like x 1
  20. rusra02

    rusra02 Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2009
    Messages:
    5,730
    Ratings:
    +487