• 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!

The Big Bang Theory is dead.

Sargonski

Well-Known Member
Big Bang is dead.



Big Bang is not Dead friend -- there be banging since the beginning of the Universe .. the Canaanites were good at banging.. and it don't matter whether or not they got everything exactly right in how it happened .. some silly amature showing they got one thing incorrect does not discount the whole idea .. so a silly fallacy on that account.

Doesn't matter whether expanding or contracting -- just different stages in the cycle of the Big Bang .. oh . they got it wrong .. and we are contracting rather than expanding great .. then we are that much closer to gravity pulling everything back together .. and the thing re-exploding again .. with a "Big Bang" .. like we see happen in the universe .. in .. and out .. in and out .. the big bang continues
 

SavedByTheLord

Well-Known Member
Big Bang is not Dead friend -- there be banging since the beginning of the Universe .. the Canaanites were good at banging.. and it don't matter whether or not they got everything exactly right in how it happened .. some silly amature showing they got one thing incorrect does not discount the whole idea .. so a silly fallacy on that account.

Doesn't matter whether expanding or contracting -- just different stages in the cycle of the Big Bang .. oh . they got it wrong .. and we are contracting rather than expanding great .. then we are that much closer to gravity pulling everything back together .. and the thing re-exploding again .. with a "Big Bang" .. like we see happen in the universe .. in .. and out .. in and out .. the big bang continues
Apparently they are so desperate that there are considering that the universe is just a computer simulation.


Option #492 no doubt.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Apparently they are so desperate that there are considering that the universe is just a computer simulation.


Option #492 no doubt.
No "they" are not doing that. No astronomers are seriously making that argument. That is more speculation from some for entertainment. The idea was first brought up by a philosopher. And some people try to see if they can refute it or support it as a mental exercise. That was not a serious article.

One suggestion, be very leery of people selling bridges and Nigerian princes.
 

F1fan

Veteran Member
The timeline is just adding the years from the genealogies to Adam being created on day 6. Then just 2000 years since the ressurction,
That’s the Ussher timeline. It doesn’t work.
So I have no idea what you are saying about failed timeline.
That’s because you are poorly informed about current knowledge. Yet seeking poor quality disinformation that was designed for Christians who are easily exploited.
Have you met the simple challenge?
Your claims are not credible.
 

SavedByTheLord

Well-Known Member
No "they" are not doing that. No astronomers are seriously making that argument. That is more speculation from some for entertainment. The idea was first brought up by a philosopher. And some people try to see if they can refute it or support it as a mental exercise. That was not a serious article.

One suggestion, be very leery of people selling bridges and Nigerian princes.
It says "Neil deGrasse Tyson, the director of Hayden Planetarium and America’s favorite science popularizer"
Maybe it is a gag.

Options for where universe came from:
#2 Big Bang already proven false.
#3 Big bang plus inflation with the Big Fudge factors - already proven false.
Then there is the Big Bounce, The Big Crunch, The Big Oscillation, The ever increasing expansion, the expansion that is slowing, the contraction, multi universes, universes that always existed, the universe that came from nothing.

And option #492 - the computer similautaion.
Is there a reset or pause button?
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
It says "Neil deGrasse Tyson, the director of Hayden Planetarium and America’s favorite science popularizer"
Maybe it is a gag.

Options for where universe came from:
#2 Big Bang already proven false.
#3 Big bang plus inflation with the Big Fudge factors - already proven false.
Then there is the Big Bounce, The Big Crunch, The Big Oscillation, The ever increasing expansion, the expansion that is slowing, the contraction, multi universes, universes that always existed, the universe that came from nothing.

And option #492 - the computer similautaion.
Is there a reset or pause button?
Do you think that scientists have to be deadly serious all of the time? Oh you have never listened to "Star Talk". Tyson's cohost is a comedian. The topic does not appear to be a very serious one.

And your options are incorrect.
 

SavedByTheLord

Well-Known Member
Do you think that scientists have to be deadly serious all of the time? Oh you have never listened to "Star Talk". Tyson's cohost is a comedian. The topic does not appear to be a very serious one.

And your options are incorrect.
Well it could be a joke.
The Big Bang was a Big Joke.

Here is a simple challenge for those that believe in billions of years for the age of things. Give real evidence of anything that is more than 6000 years old. NO ASSUMPTIONS ALLOWED.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Well it could be a joke.
The Big Bang was a Big Joke.

Here is a simple challenge for those that believe in billions of years for the age of things. Give real evidence of anything that is more than 6000 years old. NO ASSUMPTIONS ALLOWED.
And it has been explained to you why that is a failed challenge.

If you cannot even write a proper challenge how are you going to refute anything?
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Give real evidence the Earth is only 6000 years old
NO ASSUMPTIONS ALLOWED
Unfortunately I know his response. Sadly he does not understand the burden of proof. But then he does not understand logic or the concept of evidence either. I have tried to get him to go over those basics but he runs from those discussions.
 

Sargonski

Well-Known Member
God, the Almighty, created all things about 6000 years ago.

God didn't say that .. got everything all wrong friend .. even the Bible don't say that.. The creation story in the Bible does not have God creating all things .. aka - the Universe - multiverse -- and everything else

Sorry Brother SBL -- but I tell you true .. its back to Sunday schoool for you because, the Bible has GOD .. creating the Earth and the Sun .. a few planets in our solar system .. the word Heavens is taken as "Sky" the ancient texts talk about people coming from the Sky ... not the entire Universe.. but regardless .. what ever it was that God Created .. The God of Genesis 1 does not say the earth was created 6000 years ago.

The Sun doesn't show up until the fourth Day .. How long is a Day .. when there is no sun ? .. could be a really long time billions of years because there is no 24 hour Day until there is a Sun .. as we read in scripture

14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark sacred times, and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth.” And it was so. 16 God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17 God set them in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day.


-- So you see there is nothing to govern the day and the night prior the fourth day .. the fourth day was the first sunset and sunrise ... marking our 24 hour day. Claiming the first 3 days were also 24 hours is an assumption based on nothing .. God didn't say nor imply this .. and thus your 6000 year claim is not Biblical ..

You can perhaps claim that the line of humans from Adam to today is 6000 years old from the Bible .. but thats about it .. who knows when the Gods came down and decided to start modern Humans .. Ancient Alien Theorists suggest all kinds of timelines .. most being within the last 500,000 years though .. some much earlier say within 12,000 years around the time when Gobekli Tepe was being built .. the time when the visitors from the Heavens came .. as told to us in Genesis 6 When human beings began to increase in number on the earth and daughters were born to them, 2 the sons of God saw that the daughters of humans were beautiful, and they married any of them they chose.

So this is presumably shortly after the aliens that came down from the sky created the humans -- wouldn't think the time to increase in number would be tens of thousands of years .. how many humans did these Sky People want after all ?

at any rate .. at some point these sky people- who had created humans to do laborious tasks they didn't want to do like mining .. created as a genetic hybrid of sorts between them and some primative human .. likely Neanderthal .. hence why humans have Neanderthal genes .. and in fact the more Neanderthal you have the more healthy you are likely to be .. fun fact.

Anyway .. at some point these hybrids were attractive to the to these Sky people .. so they took earthly woman as wives .. the sons of daughers of whome were the heros of the stories of old 4 when the sons of God went to the daughters of humans and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown.

So there you go friend
 

SavedByTheLord

Well-Known Member
God didn't say that .. got everything all wrong friend .. even the Bible don't say that.. The creation story in the Bible does not have God creating all things .. aka - the Universe - multiverse -- and everything else

Sorry Brother SBL -- but I tell you true .. its back to Sunday schoool for you because, the Bible has GOD .. creating the Earth and the Sun .. a few planets in our solar system .. the word Heavens is taken as "Sky" the ancient texts talk about people coming from the Sky ... not the entire Universe.. but regardless .. what ever it was that God Created .. The God of Genesis 1 does not say the earth was created 6000 years ago.

The Sun doesn't show up until the fourth Day .. How long is a Day .. when there is no sun ? .. could be a really long time billions of years because there is no 24 hour Day until there is a Sun .. as we read in scripture

14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark sacred times, and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth.” And it was so. 16 God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17 God set them in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day.


-- So you see there is nothing to govern the day and the night prior the fourth day .. the fourth day was the first sunset and sunrise ... marking our 24 hour day. Claiming the first 3 days were also 24 hours is an assumption based on nothing .. God didn't say nor imply this .. and thus your 6000 year claim is not Biblical ..

You can perhaps claim that the line of humans from Adam to today is 6000 years old from the Bible .. but thats about it .. who knows when the Gods came down and decided to start modern Humans .. Ancient Alien Theorists suggest all kinds of timelines .. most being within the last 500,000 years though .. some much earlier say within 12,000 years around the time when Gobekli Tepe was being built .. the time when the visitors from the Heavens came .. as told to us in Genesis 6 When human beings began to increase in number on the earth and daughters were born to them, 2 the sons of God saw that the daughters of humans were beautiful, and they married any of them they chose.

So this is presumably shortly after the aliens that came down from the sky created the humans -- wouldn't think the time to increase in number would be tens of thousands of years .. how many humans did these Sky People want after all ?

at any rate .. at some point these sky people- who had created humans to do laborious tasks they didn't want to do like mining .. created as a genetic hybrid of sorts between them and some primative human .. likely Neanderthal .. hence why humans have Neanderthal genes .. and in fact the more Neanderthal you have the more healthy you are likely to be .. fun fact.

Anyway .. at some point these hybrids were attractive to the to these Sky people .. so they took earthly woman as wives .. the sons of daughers of whome were the heros of the stories of old 4 when the sons of God went to the daughters of humans and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown.

So there you go friend
Or you do not understand the passage.

Scientists have looked everywhere. They have used amazing telescopes, even from space, and have peered into the far recesses of the universe. They have probed into matter and living things at the smallest of scales. They have built large particle colliders to smash particles together with enormous energies and analyzed the results. Mankind has been to the moon, landed probes on Mars, sent probes past all the planets, had close ups of comets, asteroids, and meteors. They have searched the very depths of the oceans, been to the mountaintops, drilled into the earth, been to Antarctica, searched deserts, rain forests, and drilled into glaciers. They have studied the sun, moon, earth, the planets, asteroids, comets, stars, galaxies, pulsars, quasars, star clusters, nova, supernova, neutron stars, dwarf stars, and black holes. They have analyzed proteins, enzymes, organs, and DNA from countless creatures. They have dug up many millions of fossils. They have searched for signs of aliens. They have analyzed tree rings, varves, ice cores, sediments, studied all the radioactive isotopes. They have very many equations, even used computers, and now will try AI.

And for all that, the only thing they have proved is that there is nothing older than 6000 years old without an assumption. On the contrary, they have proved that God Almighty exists, that God created all things about 6000 years ago in 6 days, and that the Bible is true.
 

Sargonski

Well-Known Member
Apparently they are so desperate that there are considering that the universe is just a computer simulation.


Option #492 no doubt.

Dont know who "They" is friend .. did you mean there are groups of morons out there saying silly things .. other groups with wild hypothesis .. ? OK good to know there are whacky theories out there .. . but what has this to do with the Big Bang being the best explanation that we have so far? Did you not understand the "In/Out" analogy ?? think of it like breathing .. when you breath in your belly expands .. when out it contracts ..

This is a wee bit different but in general you first have a Big Bang -- where everything explodes outwards .. for long long time .. against the pull of gravity .. until it eventually gets slowed down and comes back .. think of throwing a ball into the air .. ball goes away from gravitational source .. and then comes back ..

Then .. when everything comes back into what is known as a massive singularity .. cause they don't know anything else to call it .. it then re-explodes .. and things start all over. the continuous cycle of death and rebirth . which we can see happening in the death and formation of Stars .. and be happy .. because you get reborn as well .. your existence is infinite under the rules by which this universe operates. .. The Holy Grail :)
 

Sargonski

Well-Known Member
Or you do not understand the passage.

Scientists have looked everywhere nothing older than 6000 years old without an assumption.

What about the Passage do I not understand ? The Sun doesn't show up until the fourth day ..

16 God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17 God set them in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day.

What part of "To govern the day and the night" do you not understand ? the period is separated into light .. and dark .. and when you have one of each .. that is a day .. the time it takes for this to happen is 24 hours these days

What did you not understand .. what did you think I don't understand .. about the fact that for period prior to this .. there is nothing to govern the day or the night.

Your claim about scientists finding nothing older than 6000 years is pure falsehood .. and it is moronic to say "without assumption" .. did you forget the computer simulation .. how do you know it is not ..without assumption - so that means the world is not 6000 years old .. We call this the existential fallacy .. but never mind.

I told you previously the Ice cores are hundreds of thousands of years old .. a scientific Fact .. we have dendochronology going back 13,000 years. Are you going to try and claim the tree ring is an assumption ?

and how would you know anything was less than 1 second old without assumption by the way .. just for giggles .. as your assumption argument shoots its legs out from under itself
 

SavedByTheLord

Well-Known Member
What about the Passage do I not understand ? The Sun doesn't show up until the fourth day ..

16 God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17 God set them in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day.

What part of "To govern the day and the night" do you not understand ? the period is separated into light .. and dark .. and when you have one of each .. that is a day .. the time it takes for this to happen is 24 hours these days

What did you not understand .. what did you think I don't understand .. about the fact that for period prior to this .. there is nothing to govern the day or the night.

Your claim about scientists finding nothing older than 6000 years is pure falsehood .. and it is moronic to say "without assumption" .. did you forget the computer simulation .. how do you know it is not ..without assumption - so that means the world is not 6000 years old .. We call this the existential fallacy .. but never mind.

I told you previously the Ice cores are hundreds of thousands of years old .. a scientific Fact .. we have dendochronology going back 13,000 years. Are you going to try and claim the tree ring is an assumption ?

and how would you know anything was less than 1 second old without assumption by the way .. just for giggles .. as your assumption argument shoots its legs out from under itself
Light is created on day 1, and then separated from the darkness. That is directed light. So with the Earth spinning on its axis at about a rate of once every 24 hours, you get night and day.
 

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
Well it could be a joke.
The Big Bang was a Big Joke.

Here is a simple challenge for those that believe in billions of years for the age of things. Give real evidence of anything that is more than 6000 years old. NO ASSUMPTIONS ALLOWED.

Tree ring dates go back farther than that. Lake varves go back much farther than that. Ice layers go back much farther than that. Radioactive dating is reliable and goes back much, much farther than that.

Assumptions are allowed if they are supported by the evidence.

The universe *is* expanding. Of that, there is no question. The distances across *our* galaxy are in the hundreds of thousands of light years. So the fact that we can see stars that far shows that the galaxy is much older than that. We can determine the distances to nearby galaxies and know that they are millions of light years away, implying the universe is, at least, millions of years old. This does NOT depend on Big Bang cosmology.

And yes, we know of galaxies that are *billions* of light years away. Again, there is no doubt about that. And that alone implies the universe is *at least* billions of years old (no, tired light does not change that conclusion).

Now, let me know what assumptions you think I made and I will *happily* show you why they are NOT assumptions, but are conclusions based on the evidence.

Sorry, but a 6000 yer old Earth or universe simply doens't fit the known facts.
 

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
It says "Neil deGrasse Tyson, the director of Hayden Planetarium and America’s favorite science popularizer"
Maybe it is a gag.
Yes, it is a gag.
Options for where universe came from:
#2 Big Bang already proven false.
Wrong. It is supported by even the most recent evidence from JWST.
#3 Big bang plus inflation with the Big Fudge factors - already proven false.
Which fudge factors? Inflation isn't relevant for anything after the first second or so into the current expansion. Whether there was an inflationary epoch or not is *irrelevant* to the overall age of the universe.
Then there is the Big Bounce, The Big Crunch, The Big Oscillation, The ever increasing expansion, the expansion that is slowing, the contraction, multi universes, universes that always existed, the universe that came from nothing.
The expansion is accelerating. This isn't new. It was discovered about 20 years ago and is well established now. The others are speculation and are understood as being so.
And option #492 - the computer similautaion.
Is there a reset or pause button?
None needed. LCDM works very well. There will likely be changes for the very earliest stages, but anything after about a second into the expansion is covered by the standard BB theory quite well.
 

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
Not me and not all are pushing the timeline.
Newton also had a timeline that was close to Ussher's

newton lived well before any real evidence for the age of the Earth, let alone the universe, was discovered. His opinions are not relevant.
 
Top