Why do science hide the truth?

[Polymath257]

But how does people know that for sure without any certain proof to back it up.

Unless of course someone can produce someone as actually being there to give witness of how it actually happened.

Otherwise it's just playing a big guessing game

(The Big Bang didn't 'come about'. it wasn't caused. Spacetime, as a whole, simply exists.) But how do you know that for sure, without any certain proof of evidence.

All a person is doing is taking a big wild guess, without any certain proof that's how it happened.

Well, there is plenty of evidence that looking at space and time together as a single geometry is the right approach. That is the whole point of general relativity, our best description of gravity.

We have very detailed scientific theories that are incredibly accurate with, yes, plenty of evidence to back them up, that show causality is part of the universe, not something outside of it.

We know that there are events that are uncaused. There is NOTHING prior to the events that makes those events happen: they just happen anyway.

From what I can see, you like to label ideas as 'guesses' even if there is an incredible amount of evidence extending back over a century in support of them, including detailed mathematical predictions that are verified by actual observations.

 

[Faithofchristian]

So where is the slightest hint of any evidence for "god's word"? You keep on demanding evidence from other people, where is even the hint of any evidence for your god?



I'm relying on actual evidence for what we have good theories about and am concluding that we don't know for the rest.

So where is your evidence or the hint of any sort of logical argument?

It's all there within the bible/scriptures that's where the evidence lays.
Of course you can't handle that of course.

 

[Faithofchristian]

Wrong. We know the universe is expanding. We know it was expanding in the past. We know it was once much hotter and denser. We know it was once hot and dense enough for nuclear reactions to occur everywhere. We know that when it cooled down, the cosmic background radiation was formed. We know from that how old the universe (well, the current expansion phase) is.

What we don't know is the 'cause' or even if there was a cause.

In your gas leak analogy, we have found the gas leak. We just don't know why the gas started leaking. Did something hot the gas line? Did it erode?



Why do you think it needed to have a cause? That is your *assumption* that may or may not be true. You claim it *has* to be that way. But that claim is not proved.

As to how do you know that for sure, Seeing there was no one there to give the evidence that it happened that way.

All anyone has is just, speculation, opinions, theory, suggestion, Without any certain proof of evidence that someone was there to give witness that's how it exactly happened.

 

[Polymath257]

To answer your last sentence at the very bottom, can you actually give proof of that, That Spacetime, as a whole, simply exist.

Well, we know it does exist. Look around you.

As for 'simply existing', since causes are always inside of spacetime, there can be no cause for spacetime itself.

Done.

How do you know that for sure?
Was someone there to actually see that.

Where's the proof of that. So all a person has is speculation, suspect, opinion,Theory.
Without any proof of evidence thats all it is.
This brings me to remember when I was back in school and my science teacher, started to us kids, that how the big bang came about.
As he went to explain how the big bang came about, Then I ask him, can you explain to us what caused that to happen for the big bang to come about.

Then as he went into explain how this happened to bring the big bang to happen

Then I ask him, if he explain what caused that to happen

Then as he went into to explain that, Then I ask him, can you explain to us what caused that

Then he came to where he couldn't explain, that he started getting mad, because he found himself stuck of having nothing.
And showing that the big bang has nothing to support it.
Just someone's, speculation, suggestion, suspect, theory, opinion, without any certain proof of evidence.and that's all it amounts to.

You are *assuming* that everything must have a cause--what 'brought it about'. That is a faulty assumption. Some events are uncaused.

 

[Polymath257]

It's all there within the bible/scriptures that's where the evidence lays.
Of course you can't handle that of course.

The Bible isn't evidence, except for what some people believed a few thousand years ago.

 

[Polymath257]

As to how do you know that for sure, Seeing there was no one there to give the evidence that it happened that way

But there *is* evident today that is the result of what happened in the past. Nobody had to 'be there' in order for us to get this evidence and understand what is says about how the universe was in the past.

 

[Polymath257]

That means for trillions and trillions and trillions of years God existed. Before time ever existed or anything else. .

Can't you see that talking about 'trillions of years' and 'before time ever existed' is nonsense?

 

[Faithofchristian]

But there *is* evident today that is the result of what happened in the past. Nobody had to 'be there' in order for us to get this evidence and understand what is says about how the universe was in the past.

Got to be kidding, if no one was there to give the account what exactly happened so all people have is just a theory, opinions, suggestions, of others, and that's all people have

 

[Polymath257]

As to how do you know that for sure, Seeing there was no one there to give the evidence that it happened that way.

All anyone has is just, speculation, opinions, theory, suggestion, Without any certain proof of evidence that someone was there to give witness that's how it exactly happened.

Not true. In fact, eye-witness reports are known to be much less reliable than scientific methods of detection and interpretation. Nobody had to 'be there' for us to know what happened in some detail.

The evidence comes from the physical artifacts from that time period. We can see and measure them today. We can understand how they came about using the known, tested, physical laws.

That is *far* better than having a 'witness'.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Got to be kidding, if no one was there to give the account what exactly happened so all people have is just a theory, opinions, suggestions, of others, and that's all people have

Sometimes, that's enough. In fact, it has to be enough because we can't possibly do anything else. The existence of uncertainty does not cancel out the existence of knowledge, and building theories on the back of the available evidence is a time-tested and reliable method of testing for and ascertaining the truth.

 

[Faithofchristian]

Can't you see that talking about 'trillions of years' and 'before time ever existed' is nonsense?

Nope not at all, when God was there to give the account as to how everything came about.
But then you can't take God's word on it. But can take man's word on it, who wasn't even there .
Now how is this to work.

 

[Polymath257]

Got to be kidding, if no one was there to give the account what exactly happened so all people have is just a theory, opinions, suggestions, of others, and that's all people have

No, I am not kidding. We don't need a witness. The witness is the physical evidence that remains from that time period. And the report from that evidence is quite clear.

The universe is expanding. It has been expanding for billions of years. It was once hot and dense enough for nuclear reactions to happen everywhere. When it cooled down, the background radiation was formed. ALL of these have been extensively tested against the evidence and have been shown to be valid.

 

[Faithofchristian]

Sometimes, that's enough. In fact, it has to be enough because we can't possibly do anything else. The existence of uncertainty does not cancel out the existence of knowledge, and building theories on the back of the available evidence is a time-tested and reliable method of testing for and ascertaining the truth.

Of not knowing how exactly everything came into existence, That means there is lack of knowledge

 

[Polymath257]

Nope not at all, when God was there to give the account as to how everything came about.
But then you can't take God's word on it. But can take man's word on it, who wasn't even there .
Now how is this to work.

I don't take the word of a book written by men who claimed to know what God said.

I do take the physical evidence provided by the universe itself and that physical laws we have discovered that show how it works.

 

[Faithofchristian]

No, I am not kidding. We don't need a witness. The witness is the physical evidence that remains from that time period. And the report from that evidence is quite clear.

The universe is expanding. It has been expanding for billions of years. It was once hot and dense enough for nuclear reactions to happen everywhere. When it cooled down, the background radiation was formed. ALL of these have been extensively tested against the evidence and have been shown to be valid.

And how exactly do you know this sure, That the Universe has been expanding for billions of years, was there someone there to prove this?

 

[Polymath257]

Of not knowing how exactly everything came into existence, That means there is lack of knowledge

yes, there is plenty we do not know. But there is also plenty we do. I point out what is speculation (anything talking about a cause of the Big Bang, for example) and what is NOT speculation (that the universe is expanding from a very dense, hot condition).

 

[Polymath257]

And how exactly do you know this sure, That the Universe has been expanding for billions of years, was there someone there to prove this?

Th light from distant galaxies shows this. It takes time for light to get to us. That allows us to know what the universe was like billions of years ago. We can see that light *now* and learn how the universe was *then*.

 

[Faithofchristian]

I don't take the word of a book written by men who claimed to know what God said.

I do take the physical evidence provided by the universe itself and that physical laws we have discovered that show how it works.

Well it plan to see that you haven't a clue or idea who those men were and from where they came from.

 

[Polymath257]

Well it plan to see that you haven't a clue or idea who those men were and from where they came from.

Irrelevant. I place my trust in the physical evidence, not in men with their biases and propaganda.

 

[Faithofchristian]

Th light from distant galaxies shows this. It takes time for light to get to us. That allows us to know what the universe was like billions of years ago. We can see that light *now* and learn how the universe was *then*.

Ok, so now explain exactly what caused that light from distance galaxies?