Questions about the Big Bang

  • 115 Replies
  • 4150 Views
Re: Questions about the Big Bang
« Reply #60 on: April 10, 2017, 08:17:36 AM »
You haven't done your homework on the Rosetta comet, have you?
Sandokhan

Now that's the best joke yet!
And by that he's referring to a pathetic flat earth collection of utter tripe!
Of course your closed as a duck's arse tiny mind must be running around looking for excuses whenever a space mission lifts off. You must have a drawer full of them.
Mars rovers
Saturn probes
Space X
Mars mission
Chinese and Indian Moon missions
Pluto probes and any other probe you care to mention...
Hubble...you must be working on one right now for the New Webb telescope that going to be launched soon.

Anything that may shine some light of reason into your closed and dark mind is dismissed so that you can live in a world of make believe built on no more than flimsy belief....poor you.
« Last Edit: April 10, 2017, 02:52:26 PM by Lonegranger »

Re: Questions about the Big Bang
« Reply #61 on: April 10, 2017, 08:46:00 AM »
As explain in Genesis perhaps that is the big bang. God created the heavens (celestial bodies) and the earth.

Re: Questions about the Big Bang
« Reply #62 on: April 10, 2017, 09:31:29 AM »
As explain in Genesis perhaps that is the big bang. God created the heavens (celestial bodies) and the earth.

And the water? - Dark primeval water, that no one talked about and its nature, and wasn't considered in any of the hypothesizes about creation! They simply ignored that because it didn't make sense to them, or thought God wasn't capable of doing so!

And why did God call the darkness "dark primeval water", and called it night, and called the light day -
take note: at that period the Sun & the Moon didn't even exist!

No - they did not take anything in Genesis or any other book of god into account, when they hypothesized creation, and came up with an explosion, instead, that chaotically expanded into NOTHING, because they said space was as a result and within the explosion!

They built up a theory based on their imagination, and forced the education system to enroll it into its curriculum, and called whoever believe in creation as a FACT; as it came identical in ALL holy books, they called them nut cases!!!

When we take God's words literary, then we are stupid, uneducated and nut cases!

And that's exactly what's happening in our days - all God's words have been taken metaphorically - it's ok to steal > god didn't really mean what he said/ you can commit an adultery - there are no laws to prohibit you, and in short - you can do anything you wish, because there is no god after all to judge you when you die!
 
God—the knower—is non-dimensional.
God's thinking is two-dimensional.
God's creative actions are three-dimensional.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 39109
Re: Questions about the Big Bang
« Reply #63 on: April 10, 2017, 10:03:16 AM »
So, when all of those books agree that creation literally happened in water, I am sure God was not referring to something else, or He would've simply said empty space or vacuum!

Was space created within the water after separating the water from the water - that is a big possibility that no scientist has considered or maybe were afraid to even think about!
Just out of curiosity, how could evening come and morning follow on the first 3 days when God didn't create the sun until the 4th day?
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

Re: Questions about the Big Bang
« Reply #64 on: April 10, 2017, 11:26:49 AM »
So, when all of those books agree that creation literally happened in water, I am sure God was not referring to something else, or He would've simply said empty space or vacuum!

Was space created within the water after separating the water from the water - that is a big possibility that no scientist has considered or maybe were afraid to even think about!
Just out of curiosity, how could evening come and morning follow on the first 3 days when God didn't create the sun until the 4th day?

Did any of the scientists ask that question (just out of curiosity)? No!!!

Because they also read, "God is the light of Heaven and Earth" - there is no other light upon us except for the light of God! They simply did not accept that as a fact!
Because if they confess there was day before the Sun was created, then they would've to believe that the cause of the day is the light from god > and that is something they can't prove on paper!

God separated the darkness/ the dark primeval water with the light, then created the Sun to rule the day, and the Moon to rule the night!

And how did the darkness come to exist? > The throne - the barrier between God and His creation. The darkness is the absence of light!
Nothing would stand to exist in the direct presence of God's light (even the angels take their direct orders from below the throne) - and that's why there were seven skies upon us to reduce the intensity of the light (which is shown on the electromagnetic spectrum) - the spectrum of light that reaches us (the visible light).

And that is why the sun was there to govern or rule the day - to give us just enough light so life would flourish!
Just by looking at sun spots, you can see how the sun's power is directed inward and not outward - or it would've burned everything in its way, if it wasn't!

Science did not spend enough time (I think none) trying to decipher what came in the holy books - in what concerns creation and a lot of other scientific issues the books are full of!

If we shouldn't take creation literally as it came in the books, then God, Angels, Demons, Heaven & Hell are all metaphoric concepts and fairy tails!

And then, we should replace
God >>> Science
Creation >>> Big Bang
Dark primeval water >>>> Space/ Vacuum
Angels & Demons >>> Fairies

I don't have scientific answers to creation (God's way), because I was taught (as most of you) the science that denied the existence of a Creator!

But, maybe, one day, science would start listening to reason and stop believing in uncertainties!
God—the knower—is non-dimensional.
God's thinking is two-dimensional.
God's creative actions are three-dimensional.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 39109
Re: Questions about the Big Bang
« Reply #65 on: April 10, 2017, 11:35:35 AM »
So, when all of those books agree that creation literally happened in water, I am sure God was not referring to something else, or He would've simply said empty space or vacuum!

Was space created within the water after separating the water from the water - that is a big possibility that no scientist has considered or maybe were afraid to even think about!
Just out of curiosity, how could evening come and morning follow on the first 3 days when God didn't create the sun until the 4th day?

Did any of the scientists ask that question (just out of curiosity)? No!!!
Any of which scientists? ???
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

Re: Questions about the Big Bang
« Reply #66 on: April 10, 2017, 12:44:43 PM »
So, when all of those books agree that creation literally happened in water, I am sure God was not referring to something else, or He would've simply said empty space or vacuum!

Was space created within the water after separating the water from the water - that is a big possibility that no scientist has considered or maybe were afraid to even think about!
Just out of curiosity, how could evening come and morning follow on the first 3 days when God didn't create the sun until the 4th day?

Did any of the scientists ask that question (just out of curiosity)? No!!!
Any of which scientists? ???

I mean; NONE did! Because if they even tried, they would've found some answers - they simply excluded God from their equations; because can't be proven on paper, and can't be detected by their instruments!
God—the knower—is non-dimensional.
God's thinking is two-dimensional.
God's creative actions are three-dimensional.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 39109
Re: Questions about the Big Bang
« Reply #67 on: April 10, 2017, 01:03:03 PM »
So, when all of those books agree that creation literally happened in water, I am sure God was not referring to something else, or He would've simply said empty space or vacuum!

Was space created within the water after separating the water from the water - that is a big possibility that no scientist has considered or maybe were afraid to even think about!
Just out of curiosity, how could evening come and morning follow on the first 3 days when God didn't create the sun until the 4th day?

Did any of the scientists ask that question (just out of curiosity)? No!!!
Any of which scientists? ???

I mean; NONE did! Because if they even tried, they would've found some answers - they simply excluded God from their equations; because can't be proven on paper, and can't be detected by their instruments!
You don't need to be a scientist to wonder why God didn't create the sun until the 4th day.  Just like you don't need to be a genealogist to wonder where Adam and Eve's grandchildren came from.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

Re: Questions about the Big Bang
« Reply #68 on: April 10, 2017, 02:53:09 PM »
As explain in Genesis perhaps that is the big bang. God created the heavens (celestial bodies) and the earth.

Says who?

?

Kami

  • 993
Re: Questions about the Big Bang
« Reply #69 on: April 10, 2017, 04:13:06 PM »
They built up a theory based on their imagination, and forced the education system to enroll it into its curriculum, and called whoever believe in creation as a FACT; as it came identical in ALL holy books, they called them nut cases!!!
Sorry man, I usually really respect you for being both very religious and curious. But here I have to heavily disagree with you. The one building up a theory based on imagination are the religious people. Creation is identical in the thora and the bible because half of the bible is based on the thora (the half where genesis is in, conveniently). I do not know about the Qu'ran, but I bet there is a similar connection. However

The Big Bang is not something that has arisen from a fantasy and was immediately accepted - it was hugely debated for a long time. The thing is that it predicted the cosmic microwave background, which was later found, it explains the expansion of the universe, the amount of helium in our universe, the formation of galaxies, the neutrino radiation background (which was found a loooong time later), the age of the universe, ...
and everything fits with the data that we observe. THAT is why it is such a hugely accepted model nowadays. Because it explains a lot of things that are going on in our universe. Of course that does not mean that it 100% happened that way (god could have created us all 5 minutes ago and have given us false memories of a long life), but it is a very high probability.

Re: Questions about the Big Bang
« Reply #70 on: April 11, 2017, 02:23:26 AM »

Because they also read, "God is the light of Heaven and Earth" - there is no other light upon us except for the light of God! They simply did not accept that as a fact!
Because if they confess there was day before the Sun was created, then they would've to believe that the cause of the day is the light from god > and that is something they can't prove on paper!

God separated the darkness/ the dark primeval water with the light, then created the Sun to rule the day, and the Moon to rule the night!

And how did the darkness come to exist? > The throne - the barrier between God and His creation. The darkness is the absence of light!
Nothing would stand to exist in the direct presence of God's light (even the angels take their direct orders from below the throne) - and that's why there were seven skies upon us to reduce the intensity of the light (which is shown on the electromagnetic spectrum) - the spectrum of light that reaches us (the visible light).

And that is why the sun was there to govern or rule the day - to give us just enough light so life would flourish!
Just by looking at sun spots, you can see how the sun's power is directed inward and not outward - or it would've burned everything in its way, if it wasn't!

Science did not spend enough time (I think none) trying to decipher what came in the holy books - in what concerns creation and a lot of other scientific issues the books are full of!

If we shouldn't take creation literally as it came in the books, then God, Angels, Demons, Heaven & Hell are all metaphoric concepts and fairy tails!

And then, we should replace
God >>> Science
Creation >>> Big Bang
Dark primeval water >>>> Space/ Vacuum
Angels & Demons >>> Fairies

I don't have scientific answers to creation (God's way), because I was taught (as most of you) the science that denied the existence of a Creator!

But, maybe, one day, science would start listening to reason and stop believing in uncertainties!

We reject it because it has no evidence. It is a baseless claim that God sends light. Whether it is true or not, we don't accept it until you provide verifiable evidence. As you say, we can't prove it on paper nor can we get evidence, so we are going to reject it. Moreover, we understand how light works. If I had to give you a convincing explanation, I would have to start from zero. I made a terrible mitake in my first post to this topic by assuming that you had some understanding in physics but now I seem to feel that you actually don't. My entire post was pointless because you wouldn't understand it and hence the criticism.

If you were abducted by an alien today and you happen to tell us your story, we are not going to accept your story until you give evidence even though it really really really happened.

Science is evidence-based reasoning. The holy books are just a book with a collection of facts (some of which are subjectively true, objectively true and also objectively false).

In few years, we won't have people criticizing space exploration because it would become so cheap that anybody could space travel. You guys will catch hold of something new to criticize. This process will keep continue and along with it, the number of people who take the holy book will keep decreasing.

Don't you feel stupid to critize science which actually works? Your car, phone, eye glasses, telescopes, computer, home, etc. are all product of science. How can you claim that science is wrong? If science was wrong, then we shouldn't have been able to predict and manufacture things.

And by the way, Science does not deny the existence of a creator; it denies the 'literal' meaning of the holy books.
« Last Edit: April 11, 2017, 02:34:08 AM by Yashas »

Re: Questions about the Big Bang
« Reply #71 on: April 11, 2017, 02:51:49 AM »
They built up a theory based on their imagination, and forced the education system to enroll it into its curriculum, and called whoever believe in creation as a FACT; as it came identical in ALL holy books, they called them nut cases!!!
Sorry man, I usually really respect you for being both very religious and curious. But here I have to heavily disagree with you. The one building up a theory based on imagination are the religious people. Creation is identical in the thora and the bible because half of the bible is based on the thora (the half where genesis is in, conveniently). I do not know about the Qu'ran, but I bet there is a similar connection. However

The Big Bang is not something that has arisen from a fantasy and was immediately accepted - it was hugely debated for a long time. The thing is that it predicted the cosmic microwave background, which was later found, it explains the expansion of the universe, the amount of helium in our universe, the formation of galaxies, the neutrino radiation background (which was found a loooong time later), the age of the universe, ...
and everything fits with the data that we observe. THAT is why it is such a hugely accepted model nowadays. Because it explains a lot of things that are going on in our universe. Of course that does not mean that it 100% happened that way (god could have created us all 5 minutes ago and have given us false memories of a long life), but it is a very high probability.

We did not come up with the theory of creation - it came very specific in all holy books!
And why should we not take the words God literally, and simply accept a theory full of uncertainties, backed up with some mathematical equations.

Tell the scientists to answer my simple questions about the big bang, then we can talk science!
Until then, I shall stick to my belief and to what God has told us about creation.

If the scientists have started their theory based on what God has informed us, then I would have no doubt in what they say, even if it would take them ages to prove it scientifically!

When scientists failed to answer how they concluded that a massive ball of energy that came from nowhere and existed in nothing and expanded into nothing, then I have no doubt that this theory was built in someone's imagination and worked hard to prove it right on paper.

The scientists were not there 13 billion years ago, but God was, is and will always be there!
God—the knower—is non-dimensional.
God's thinking is two-dimensional.
God's creative actions are three-dimensional.

Re: Questions about the Big Bang
« Reply #72 on: April 11, 2017, 03:12:54 AM »

Because they also read, "God is the light of Heaven and Earth" - there is no other light upon us except for the light of God! They simply did not accept that as a fact!
Because if they confess there was day before the Sun was created, then they would've to believe that the cause of the day is the light from god > and that is something they can't prove on paper!

God separated the darkness/ the dark primeval water with the light, then created the Sun to rule the day, and the Moon to rule the night!

And how did the darkness come to exist? > The throne - the barrier between God and His creation. The darkness is the absence of light!
Nothing would stand to exist in the direct presence of God's light (even the angels take their direct orders from below the throne) - and that's why there were seven skies upon us to reduce the intensity of the light (which is shown on the electromagnetic spectrum) - the spectrum of light that reaches us (the visible light).

And that is why the sun was there to govern or rule the day - to give us just enough light so life would flourish!
Just by looking at sun spots, you can see how the sun's power is directed inward and not outward - or it would've burned everything in its way, if it wasn't!

Science did not spend enough time (I think none) trying to decipher what came in the holy books - in what concerns creation and a lot of other scientific issues the books are full of!

If we shouldn't take creation literally as it came in the books, then God, Angels, Demons, Heaven & Hell are all metaphoric concepts and fairy tails!

And then, we should replace
God >>> Science
Creation >>> Big Bang
Dark primeval water >>>> Space/ Vacuum
Angels & Demons >>> Fairies

I don't have scientific answers to creation (God's way), because I was taught (as most of you) the science that denied the existence of a Creator!

But, maybe, one day, science would start listening to reason and stop believing in uncertainties!

We reject it because it has no evidence. It is a baseless claim that God sends light. Whether it is true or not, we don't accept it until you provide verifiable evidence. As you say, we can't prove it on paper nor can we get evidence, so we are going to reject it. Moreover, we understand how light works. If I had to give you a convincing explanation, I would have to start from zero. I made a terrible mitake in my first post to this topic by assuming that you had some understanding in physics but now I seem to feel that you actually don't. My entire post was pointless because you wouldn't understand it and hence the criticism.

If you were abducted by an alien today and you happen to tell us your story, we are not going to accept your story until you give evidence even though it really really really happened.

Science is evidence-based reasoning. The holy books are just a book with a collection of facts (some of which are subjectively true, objectively true and also objectively false).

In few years, we won't have people criticizing space exploration because it would become so cheap that anybody could space travel. You guys will catch hold of something new to criticize. This process will keep continue and along with it, the number of people who take the holy book will keep decreasing.

Don't you feel stupid to critize science which actually works? Your car, phone, eye glasses, telescopes, computer, home, etc. are all product of science. How can you claim that science is wrong? If science was wrong, then we shouldn't have been able to predict and manufacture things.

And by the way, Science does not deny the existence of a creator; it denies the 'literal' meaning of the holy books.

And because you know something about radioactivity and physics, you think that puts you in a position to judge the holy books and call them a collection of facts, that should not be taken literally!

And no - I don't feel stupid to criticize a science full of bullshit!
It's stupid for someone to believe that something came from nowhere, existed in nothing and expanded in nothing, is the cause of our existence!

I don't claim all science is wrong, but rather the one that doesn't accept God as a fact, because simply can't be proven on paper!
God—the knower—is non-dimensional.
God's thinking is two-dimensional.
God's creative actions are three-dimensional.

Re: Questions about the Big Bang
« Reply #73 on: April 11, 2017, 06:12:00 AM »

Because they also read, "God is the light of Heaven and Earth" - there is no other light upon us except for the light of God! They simply did not accept that as a fact!
Because if they confess there was day before the Sun was created, then they would've to believe that the cause of the day is the light from god > and that is something they can't prove on paper!

God separated the darkness/ the dark primeval water with the light, then created the Sun to rule the day, and the Moon to rule the night!

And how did the darkness come to exist? > The throne - the barrier between God and His creation. The darkness is the absence of light!
Nothing would stand to exist in the direct presence of God's light (even the angels take their direct orders from below the throne) - and that's why there were seven skies upon us to reduce the intensity of the light (which is shown on the electromagnetic spectrum) - the spectrum of light that reaches us (the visible light).

And that is why the sun was there to govern or rule the day - to give us just enough light so life would flourish!
Just by looking at sun spots, you can see how the sun's power is directed inward and not outward - or it would've burned everything in its way, if it wasn't!

Science did not spend enough time (I think none) trying to decipher what came in the holy books - in what concerns creation and a lot of other scientific issues the books are full of!

If we shouldn't take creation literally as it came in the books, then God, Angels, Demons, Heaven & Hell are all metaphoric concepts and fairy tails!

And then, we should replace
God >>> Science
Creation >>> Big Bang
Dark primeval water >>>> Space/ Vacuum
Angels & Demons >>> Fairies

I don't have scientific answers to creation (God's way), because I was taught (as most of you) the science that denied the existence of a Creator!

But, maybe, one day, science would start listening to reason and stop believing in uncertainties!

We reject it because it has no evidence. It is a baseless claim that God sends light. Whether it is true or not, we don't accept it until you provide verifiable evidence. As you say, we can't prove it on paper nor can we get evidence, so we are going to reject it. Moreover, we understand how light works. If I had to give you a convincing explanation, I would have to start from zero. I made a terrible mitake in my first post to this topic by assuming that you had some understanding in physics but now I seem to feel that you actually don't. My entire post was pointless because you wouldn't understand it and hence the criticism.

If you were abducted by an alien today and you happen to tell us your story, we are not going to accept your story until you give evidence even though it really really really happened.

Science is evidence-based reasoning. The holy books are just a book with a collection of facts (some of which are subjectively true, objectively true and also objectively false).

In few years, we won't have people criticizing space exploration because it would become so cheap that anybody could space travel. You guys will catch hold of something new to criticize. This process will keep continue and along with it, the number of people who take the holy book will keep decreasing.

Don't you feel stupid to critize science which actually works? Your car, phone, eye glasses, telescopes, computer, home, etc. are all product of science. How can you claim that science is wrong? If science was wrong, then we shouldn't have been able to predict and manufacture things.

And by the way, Science does not deny the existence of a creator; it denies the 'literal' meaning of the holy books.

And because you know something about radioactivity and physics, you think that puts you in a position to judge the holy books and call them a collection of facts, that should not be taken literally!

And no - I don't feel stupid to criticize a science full of bullshit!
It's stupid for someone to believe that something came from nowhere, existed in nothing and expanded in nothing, is the cause of our existence!

I don't claim all science is wrong, but rather the one that doesn't accept God as a fact, because simply can't be proven on paper!

So basically what you are saying is -
Science is ok as long as it doesn't say things that upset me or my beliefs

Ah the contrary mind of the religiously motivated.


Re: Questions about the Big Bang
« Reply #74 on: April 11, 2017, 07:11:12 AM »

Because they also read, "God is the light of Heaven and Earth" - there is no other light upon us except for the light of God! They simply did not accept that as a fact!
Because if they confess there was day before the Sun was created, then they would've to believe that the cause of the day is the light from god > and that is something they can't prove on paper!

God separated the darkness/ the dark primeval water with the light, then created the Sun to rule the day, and the Moon to rule the night!

And how did the darkness come to exist? > The throne - the barrier between God and His creation. The darkness is the absence of light!
Nothing would stand to exist in the direct presence of God's light (even the angels take their direct orders from below the throne) - and that's why there were seven skies upon us to reduce the intensity of the light (which is shown on the electromagnetic spectrum) - the spectrum of light that reaches us (the visible light).

And that is why the sun was there to govern or rule the day - to give us just enough light so life would flourish!
Just by looking at sun spots, you can see how the sun's power is directed inward and not outward - or it would've burned everything in its way, if it wasn't!

Science did not spend enough time (I think none) trying to decipher what came in the holy books - in what concerns creation and a lot of other scientific issues the books are full of!

If we shouldn't take creation literally as it came in the books, then God, Angels, Demons, Heaven & Hell are all metaphoric concepts and fairy tails!

And then, we should replace
God >>> Science
Creation >>> Big Bang
Dark primeval water >>>> Space/ Vacuum
Angels & Demons >>> Fairies

I don't have scientific answers to creation (God's way), because I was taught (as most of you) the science that denied the existence of a Creator!

But, maybe, one day, science would start listening to reason and stop believing in uncertainties!

We reject it because it has no evidence. It is a baseless claim that God sends light. Whether it is true or not, we don't accept it until you provide verifiable evidence. As you say, we can't prove it on paper nor can we get evidence, so we are going to reject it. Moreover, we understand how light works. If I had to give you a convincing explanation, I would have to start from zero. I made a terrible mitake in my first post to this topic by assuming that you had some understanding in physics but now I seem to feel that you actually don't. My entire post was pointless because you wouldn't understand it and hence the criticism.

If you were abducted by an alien today and you happen to tell us your story, we are not going to accept your story until you give evidence even though it really really really happened.

Science is evidence-based reasoning. The holy books are just a book with a collection of facts (some of which are subjectively true, objectively true and also objectively false).

In few years, we won't have people criticizing space exploration because it would become so cheap that anybody could space travel. You guys will catch hold of something new to criticize. This process will keep continue and along with it, the number of people who take the holy book will keep decreasing.

Don't you feel stupid to critize science which actually works? Your car, phone, eye glasses, telescopes, computer, home, etc. are all product of science. How can you claim that science is wrong? If science was wrong, then we shouldn't have been able to predict and manufacture things.

And by the way, Science does not deny the existence of a creator; it denies the 'literal' meaning of the holy books.

And because you know something about radioactivity and physics, you think that puts you in a position to judge the holy books and call them a collection of facts, that should not be taken literally!

And no - I don't feel stupid to criticize a science full of bullshit!
It's stupid for someone to believe that something came from nowhere, existed in nothing and expanded in nothing, is the cause of our existence!

I don't claim all science is wrong, but rather the one that doesn't accept God as a fact, because simply can't be proven on paper!

We have no evidence that universe erupted from nothing and so we don't comment on it. We have countless hypothesis which explain the origin. Just because we do not know does not mean it is bullshit.

It is better than holy books which justify by saying "God did it". Few years later, we discover what really happened and then the religious people shift their answer: "God did what started the big bang but not the big bang". (This is what has been happening for hundreds of years)

Even high school students know radioactivity. I never said the holy book is entirely wrong. I just mentioned that there are several facts mentioned in the holy book which are 100% and obviously wrong.

There is no science which accepts god as a fact. We don't know.

We don't know so we don't comment on it but what we know is that the holy book is wrong (and it isn't god's own words if it was really written by god because it is wrong). There are scientsits who believe in the holy book and they circumvent all the scientifically wrong facts by saying it is a metaphore and it shouldn't be taken literally.

You call science to be bullshit because you don't understand it. When a theory overhelming explains what we observe and also makes predictions, it is likely that it is correct or it could also be a conincidience but the chances of it being a coincidence is very small. Moreover, understand that we cannot repeat Big Bangs. It is not repeatable. Well, we know nothing in science with 100% accuracy. The computers might be working because of coincidence and we might be completely wrong but the chances that we are wrong about how semiconductors work is so small: probably has tons of zeros after the decimal point (0.0000000...0000001).

With what confidence are you saying that the holy book was written by God? What if some naughty person secretly sneaked in some of Shakesphere's work into the holy book?

You say that you don't consider all science to be wrong but do you agree that science (or math) is correct at some cases even though it contradicts the holy book?

The Bible defines the value of pi to be 3; do you believe in it? The value of pi is actually 3.14.

Do you have any idea of the consquences of pi being 3 instead of its actual value?

Re: Questions about the Big Bang
« Reply #75 on: April 11, 2017, 10:27:14 AM »

Because they also read, "God is the light of Heaven and Earth" - there is no other light upon us except for the light of God! They simply did not accept that as a fact!
Because if they confess there was day before the Sun was created, then they would've to believe that the cause of the day is the light from god > and that is something they can't prove on paper!

God separated the darkness/ the dark primeval water with the light, then created the Sun to rule the day, and the Moon to rule the night!

And how did the darkness come to exist? > The throne - the barrier between God and His creation. The darkness is the absence of light!
Nothing would stand to exist in the direct presence of God's light (even the angels take their direct orders from below the throne) - and that's why there were seven skies upon us to reduce the intensity of the light (which is shown on the electromagnetic spectrum) - the spectrum of light that reaches us (the visible light).

And that is why the sun was there to govern or rule the day - to give us just enough light so life would flourish!
Just by looking at sun spots, you can see how the sun's power is directed inward and not outward - or it would've burned everything in its way, if it wasn't!

Science did not spend enough time (I think none) trying to decipher what came in the holy books - in what concerns creation and a lot of other scientific issues the books are full of!

If we shouldn't take creation literally as it came in the books, then God, Angels, Demons, Heaven & Hell are all metaphoric concepts and fairy tails!

And then, we should replace
God >>> Science
Creation >>> Big Bang
Dark primeval water >>>> Space/ Vacuum
Angels & Demons >>> Fairies

I don't have scientific answers to creation (God's way), because I was taught (as most of you) the science that denied the existence of a Creator!

But, maybe, one day, science would start listening to reason and stop believing in uncertainties!

We reject it because it has no evidence. It is a baseless claim that God sends light. Whether it is true or not, we don't accept it until you provide verifiable evidence. As you say, we can't prove it on paper nor can we get evidence, so we are going to reject it. Moreover, we understand how light works. If I had to give you a convincing explanation, I would have to start from zero. I made a terrible mitake in my first post to this topic by assuming that you had some understanding in physics but now I seem to feel that you actually don't. My entire post was pointless because you wouldn't understand it and hence the criticism.

If you were abducted by an alien today and you happen to tell us your story, we are not going to accept your story until you give evidence even though it really really really happened.

Science is evidence-based reasoning. The holy books are just a book with a collection of facts (some of which are subjectively true, objectively true and also objectively false).

In few years, we won't have people criticizing space exploration because it would become so cheap that anybody could space travel. You guys will catch hold of something new to criticize. This process will keep continue and along with it, the number of people who take the holy book will keep decreasing.

Don't you feel stupid to critize science which actually works? Your car, phone, eye glasses, telescopes, computer, home, etc. are all product of science. How can you claim that science is wrong? If science was wrong, then we shouldn't have been able to predict and manufacture things.

And by the way, Science does not deny the existence of a creator; it denies the 'literal' meaning of the holy books.

And because you know something about radioactivity and physics, you think that puts you in a position to judge the holy books and call them a collection of facts, that should not be taken literally!

And no - I don't feel stupid to criticize a science full of bullshit!
It's stupid for someone to believe that something came from nowhere, existed in nothing and expanded in nothing, is the cause of our existence!

I don't claim all science is wrong, but rather the one that doesn't accept God as a fact, because simply can't be proven on paper!

So basically what you are saying is -
Science is ok as long as it doesn't say things that upset me or my beliefs

Ah the contrary mind of the religiously motivated.

No - basically what I'm saying; knowledge & science are the greatest things that happened to humanity after religion!

Islamic scholars & scientists have ruled the world for over 1000 years with their knowledge & science, which is still been taught today!
But, they never for a second have doubted what the Qur'an came with, and did not need to prove the existence of God on paper to believe in Him!

Science and knowledge were meant for the advancement of humanity and not for the destruction of its morals and beliefs!

When you come up with a theory that tells me God was not the cause of creation, but rather happened chaotically, then of course I shall not accept it!

When you tell me a nuclear bomb is the result of science, then my answer would be your science is evil!
But, when you tell me you discovered a way to harness power from nature, cheap, clean and doesn't cause pollution, then you deserve a Nobel prize!

If you think someone who believes in God would reject knowledge and science, then think again, because this is not the case here!
The crux of the matter here; God is the designer, the creator and the sustainer - everything happens with a command from Him > the whole knowledge and science are His, and we are only here learning his ways!

Anything outside this equation, is false science to me! And any science will lead me away from God, is evil science!
God—the knower—is non-dimensional.
God's thinking is two-dimensional.
God's creative actions are three-dimensional.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 39109
Re: Questions about the Big Bang
« Reply #76 on: April 11, 2017, 10:41:17 AM »
We did not come up with the theory of creation - it came very specific in all holy books!
Yes, it seems that a very similar creation story was found in ancient Mesopotamian holy books too.

And why should we not take the words God literally, and simply accept a theory full of uncertainties, backed up with some mathematical equations.
What evidence do you have that the words in the Bible are God's words and not just recycled stories from other, earlier holy books?
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

Re: Questions about the Big Bang
« Reply #77 on: April 11, 2017, 11:04:53 AM »
We did not come up with the theory of creation - it came very specific in all holy books!
Yes, it seems that a very similar creation story was found in ancient Mesopotamian holy books too.

And why should we not take the words God literally, and simply accept a theory full of uncertainties, backed up with some mathematical equations.
What evidence do you have that the words in the Bible are God's words and not just recycled stories from other, earlier holy books?

God has sent a messenger or a prophet to every nation on the face of Earth, since the dawn of humanity! Some believed and others didn't!
Then how would God judge those nations in the day of judgement, if he didn't identify Himself to them as the creator - they will simply tell god, we didn't hear of you to believe in you!

So, maybe the story of creation is true, and that's why it came identical in all those books and ancient beliefs!

I did mention before the Bible was subject to some falsification sometime after Jesus, and some of its meanings were lost in translation, but that doesn't mean the whole book was words of ordinary men!
But, when all three books confirm the same story, we can't simply ignore it or take it in a metaphoric concept!

When the Qur'an came down to the Prophet Mohammed, those people in the desert had no access to the bible at the time, nor they were aware of its content to copy what came in it!
God—the knower—is non-dimensional.
God's thinking is two-dimensional.
God's creative actions are three-dimensional.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 39109
Re: Questions about the Big Bang
« Reply #78 on: April 11, 2017, 11:33:49 AM »
When the Qur'an came down to the Prophet Mohammed, those people in the desert had no access to the bible at the time, nor they were aware of its content to copy what came in it!
Since there was no formal bible when the Qur'an came down, you're probably technically correct.  However, Jews and Christians were known to the Arabs in and around Mecca during Mohammad's time so I doubt that the Torah and some early Christian writings would be that hard for Mohamed to access if he so desired.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

Re: Questions about the Big Bang
« Reply #79 on: April 11, 2017, 12:47:24 PM »
When the Qur'an came down to the Prophet Mohammed, those people in the desert had no access to the bible at the time, nor they were aware of its content to copy what came in it!
Since there was no formal bible when the Qur'an came down, you're probably technically correct.  However, Jews and Christians were known to the Arabs in and around Mecca during Mohammad's time so I doubt that the Torah and some early Christian writings would be that hard for Mohamed to access if he so desired.

I think not!

I have read so many stories about the Jews present around Mecca at the time of Mohammed - when they heard of an Arab man claiming to be a prophet of God and has come with a new religion, they used to come to him and ask him questions ONLY mentioned in the Torah (that no one but them know about), trying to prove him wrong, but they were surprised that he answered every question with exact information that came in their book - because the source of information in both books was the same - God!

The Qur'an was a continuation of the Abrahamic books, and most importantly; it came to correct the falsifications that was added to the previous books, especially the Bible!
God—the knower—is non-dimensional.
God's thinking is two-dimensional.
God's creative actions are three-dimensional.

*

Antithecyst

  • 700
  • Epistemological Anarchist
Re: Questions about the Big Bang
« Reply #80 on: April 11, 2017, 12:48:59 PM »
Why do scientists think the universe is expanding?
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."

Aristotle

If you're not sinning against the scientific, religious and political status quo, than you're not really thinking.

Re: Questions about the Big Bang
« Reply #81 on: April 11, 2017, 03:21:15 PM »
Why do scientists think the universe is expanding?

Because it is.
Have you been living in a dark basement for the last 90 years or so?
Edwin Hubble, you may  have heard of him..

Hubble's brilliant observation was that the red shift of galaxies was directly proportional to the distance of the galaxy from earth. That meant that things farther away from Earth were moving away faster. In other words, the universe must be expanding. He announced his finding in 1929......you are possibly slow on the uptake.

?

Kami

  • 993
Re: Questions about the Big Bang
« Reply #82 on: April 11, 2017, 03:25:27 PM »
Why do scientists think the universe is expanding?
Redshift of distant objects, existence of the CMB, existence and temperature of the neutrino background. Those are the three that come to mind, if you want more I will have to do some research :)

Re: Questions about the Big Bang
« Reply #83 on: April 11, 2017, 03:26:06 PM »

Because they also read, "God is the light of Heaven and Earth" - there is no other light upon us except for the light of God! They simply did not accept that as a fact!
Because if they confess there was day before the Sun was created, then they would've to believe that the cause of the day is the light from god > and that is something they can't prove on paper!

God separated the darkness/ the dark primeval water with the light, then created the Sun to rule the day, and the Moon to rule the night!

And how did the darkness come to exist? > The throne - the barrier between God and His creation. The darkness is the absence of light!
Nothing would stand to exist in the direct presence of God's light (even the angels take their direct orders from below the throne) - and that's why there were seven skies upon us to reduce the intensity of the light (which is shown on the electromagnetic spectrum) - the spectrum of light that reaches us (the visible light).

And that is why the sun was there to govern or rule the day - to give us just enough light so life would flourish!
Just by looking at sun spots, you can see how the sun's power is directed inward and not outward - or it would've burned everything in its way, if it wasn't!

Science did not spend enough time (I think none) trying to decipher what came in the holy books - in what concerns creation and a lot of other scientific issues the books are full of!

If we shouldn't take creation literally as it came in the books, then God, Angels, Demons, Heaven & Hell are all metaphoric concepts and fairy tails!

And then, we should replace
God >>> Science
Creation >>> Big Bang
Dark primeval water >>>> Space/ Vacuum
Angels & Demons >>> Fairies

I don't have scientific answers to creation (God's way), because I was taught (as most of you) the science that denied the existence of a Creator!

But, maybe, one day, science would start listening to reason and stop believing in uncertainties!

We reject it because it has no evidence. It is a baseless claim that God sends light. Whether it is true or not, we don't accept it until you provide verifiable evidence. As you say, we can't prove it on paper nor can we get evidence, so we are going to reject it. Moreover, we understand how light works. If I had to give you a convincing explanation, I would have to start from zero. I made a terrible mitake in my first post to this topic by assuming that you had some understanding in physics but now I seem to feel that you actually don't. My entire post was pointless because you wouldn't understand it and hence the criticism.

If you were abducted by an alien today and you happen to tell us your story, we are not going to accept your story until you give evidence even though it really really really happened.

Science is evidence-based reasoning. The holy books are just a book with a collection of facts (some of which are subjectively true, objectively true and also objectively false).

In few years, we won't have people criticizing space exploration because it would become so cheap that anybody could space travel. You guys will catch hold of something new to criticize. This process will keep continue and along with it, the number of people who take the holy book will keep decreasing.

Don't you feel stupid to critize science which actually works? Your car, phone, eye glasses, telescopes, computer, home, etc. are all product of science. How can you claim that science is wrong? If science was wrong, then we shouldn't have been able to predict and manufacture things.

And by the way, Science does not deny the existence of a creator; it denies the 'literal' meaning of the holy books.

And because you know something about radioactivity and physics, you think that puts you in a position to judge the holy books and call them a collection of facts, that should not be taken literally!

And no - I don't feel stupid to criticize a science full of bullshit!
It's stupid for someone to believe that something came from nowhere, existed in nothing and expanded in nothing, is the cause of our existence!

I don't claim all science is wrong, but rather the one that doesn't accept God as a fact, because simply can't be proven on paper!

So basically what you are saying is -
Science is ok as long as it doesn't say things that upset me or my beliefs

Ah the contrary mind of the religiously motivated.

No - basically what I'm saying; knowledge & science are the greatest things that happened to humanity after religion!

Islamic scholars & scientists have ruled the world for over 1000 years with their knowledge & science, which is still been taught today!
But, they never for a second have doubted what the Qur'an came with, and did not need to prove the existence of God on paper to believe in Him!

Science and knowledge were meant for the advancement of humanity and not for the destruction of its morals and beliefs!

When you come up with a theory that tells me God was not the cause of creation, but rather happened chaotically, then of course I shall not accept it!

When you tell me a nuclear bomb is the result of science, then my answer would be your science is evil!
But, when you tell me you discovered a way to harness power from nature, cheap, clean and doesn't cause pollution, then you deserve a Nobel prize!

If you think someone who believes in God would reject knowledge and science, then think again, because this is not the case here!
The crux of the matter here; God is the designer, the creator and the sustainer - everything happens with a command from Him > the whole knowledge and science are His, and we are only here learning his ways!

Anything outside this equation, is false science to me! And any science will lead me away from God, is evil science!

...and that is you choice and you are welcome to it  as long as you don't expect others to adopt your beliefs, or remove their heads if they disagree.

?

Kami

  • 993
Re: Questions about the Big Bang
« Reply #84 on: April 11, 2017, 03:29:33 PM »
They built up a theory based on their imagination, and forced the education system to enroll it into its curriculum, and called whoever believe in creation as a FACT; as it came identical in ALL holy books, they called them nut cases!!!
Sorry man, I usually really respect you for being both very religious and curious. But here I have to heavily disagree with you. The one building up a theory based on imagination are the religious people. Creation is identical in the thora and the bible because half of the bible is based on the thora (the half where genesis is in, conveniently). I do not know about the Qu'ran, but I bet there is a similar connection. However

The Big Bang is not something that has arisen from a fantasy and was immediately accepted - it was hugely debated for a long time. The thing is that it predicted the cosmic microwave background, which was later found, it explains the expansion of the universe, the amount of helium in our universe, the formation of galaxies, the neutrino radiation background (which was found a loooong time later), the age of the universe, ...
and everything fits with the data that we observe. THAT is why it is such a hugely accepted model nowadays. Because it explains a lot of things that are going on in our universe. Of course that does not mean that it 100% happened that way (god could have created us all 5 minutes ago and have given us false memories of a long life), but it is a very high probability.

We did not come up with the theory of creation - it came very specific in all holy books!
And why should we not take the words God literally, and simply accept a theory full of uncertainties, backed up with some mathematical equations.

Tell the scientists to answer my simple questions about the big bang, then we can talk science!
Until then, I shall stick to my belief and to what God has told us about creation.

If the scientists have started their theory based on what God has informed us, then I would have no doubt in what they say, even if it would take them ages to prove it scientifically!

When scientists failed to answer how they concluded that a massive ball of energy that came from nowhere and existed in nothing and expanded into nothing, then I have no doubt that this theory was built in someone's imagination and worked hard to prove it right on paper.

The scientists were not there 13 billion years ago, but God was, is and will always be there!
As for the standard cosmological model I feel quite qualified to answer all of your questions regarding the recent state of science.

No, science can not explain everything. For example the energies at very early times simply can not be reproduced in particle accelerators, so there is no way to be sure for now.

For you "god did it, it is written in a book" might be a satisfactory answer, but for most people it is not. It is called faith for a reason. Those books were written by people, they did not magically appear out of nowhere.

If you want 100% certainty, you need to do math.
If you want to believe you can read the bible.
If you want to believe evidence, statistics and logic, then physics is the right place.

*

Shifter

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 12804
  • ASI
Re: Questions about the Big Bang
« Reply #85 on: April 11, 2017, 03:59:51 PM »
Why does God have to be sentient?
Why does God have to be omnipotent?
Why does God have to have the ability to change what goes on in our lives?

It is US (mankind) that have decided what traits God must possess.

If the universe came about through some freak quantum energy particle that popped into an empty universe that that energy particle is God.

If our universe spawned from another, where some alien smashing particles together in a particle accelerator then that alien is our God whether he knows we ever existed or not. In his time scale, the explosion that followed would only last a nanosecond. Or maybe it resulted in a black hole that destroyed his world and we a literally 'inside a black hole'. Maybe our experience with the LHC has spawned universes all of their own. Some that had life, some totally weird and not capable of it.

My point is, the origins of the universe are completely unknown and limited only by your imagination. Just add 'quantum fluxuation' and it will be legit. Even if it has 0.0^google1% probability. It's mathematically sound.


*

Antithecyst

  • 700
  • Epistemological Anarchist
Re: Questions about the Big Bang
« Reply #86 on: April 11, 2017, 04:00:25 PM »
Why do scientists think the universe is expanding?
Redshift of distant objects, existence of the CMB, existence and temperature of the neutrino background. Those are the three that come to mind, if you want more I will have to do some research :)
I'm somewhat familiar with redshifts.
I've heard of CMB, but I know nothing about it beyond the self-explanatory.
The last one I've never heard of.

Didn't scientists come to believe in a big bang solely on the basis of redshifts, long before they discovered the CMB and the neutrino background?

I find redshifts somewhat perplexing.
Perhaps it's easier just to discount/dismiss them as an optical illusion, rather than conclude there was a big bang, since, and correct me if I'm wrong, don't galaxies clump together far more than a big bang would entail?
I mean you can explain away excessive clumping with dark matter, or you could explain away the redshifts with excessive clumping, alternatively.
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."

Aristotle

If you're not sinning against the scientific, religious and political status quo, than you're not really thinking.

*

Antithecyst

  • 700
  • Epistemological Anarchist
Re: Questions about the Big Bang
« Reply #87 on: April 11, 2017, 04:14:11 PM »
It seems like the redshift phenomenon could be interpreted in multiple ways.

A couple others besides there have been a big bang are, the earth could be at the center of the universe, and every other object is running away from it, perhaps because every other object is like the aftermath of the earth having come into being.

Or, like I said redshifts are misleading.
I mean, in addition to there being a lot more clumping in places than there should be, and having to excuse that with dark matter, which itself is at best speculation and at worst conjecture, how could all objects possibly be traveling away from earth simultaneously?

Don't asteroids, comets, meteors, planets, stars and galaxies sometimes move towards the earth?
And if when they do, yet're still producing redshifts (light is coming from sources moving away from the earth) as opposed to blue (from sources moving towards), than doesn't that mean this whole redshift thing is bogus?
« Last Edit: April 11, 2017, 04:23:48 PM by Antithecyst »
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."

Aristotle

If you're not sinning against the scientific, religious and political status quo, than you're not really thinking.

Re: Questions about the Big Bang
« Reply #88 on: April 11, 2017, 06:06:53 PM »

Because they also read, "God is the light of Heaven and Earth" - there is no other light upon us except for the light of God! They simply did not accept that as a fact!
Because if they confess there was day before the Sun was created, then they would've to believe that the cause of the day is the light from god > and that is something they can't prove on paper!

God separated the darkness/ the dark primeval water with the light, then created the Sun to rule the day, and the Moon to rule the night!

And how did the darkness come to exist? > The throne - the barrier between God and His creation. The darkness is the absence of light!
Nothing would stand to exist in the direct presence of God's light (even the angels take their direct orders from below the throne) - and that's why there were seven skies upon us to reduce the intensity of the light (which is shown on the electromagnetic spectrum) - the spectrum of light that reaches us (the visible light).

And that is why the sun was there to govern or rule the day - to give us just enough light so life would flourish!
Just by looking at sun spots, you can see how the sun's power is directed inward and not outward - or it would've burned everything in its way, if it wasn't!

Science did not spend enough time (I think none) trying to decipher what came in the holy books - in what concerns creation and a lot of other scientific issues the books are full of!

If we shouldn't take creation literally as it came in the books, then God, Angels, Demons, Heaven & Hell are all metaphoric concepts and fairy tails!

And then, we should replace
God >>> Science
Creation >>> Big Bang
Dark primeval water >>>> Space/ Vacuum
Angels & Demons >>> Fairies

I don't have scientific answers to creation (God's way), because I was taught (as most of you) the science that denied the existence of a Creator!

But, maybe, one day, science would start listening to reason and stop believing in uncertainties!

We reject it because it has no evidence. It is a baseless claim that God sends light. Whether it is true or not, we don't accept it until you provide verifiable evidence. As you say, we can't prove it on paper nor can we get evidence, so we are going to reject it. Moreover, we understand how light works. If I had to give you a convincing explanation, I would have to start from zero. I made a terrible mitake in my first post to this topic by assuming that you had some understanding in physics but now I seem to feel that you actually don't. My entire post was pointless because you wouldn't understand it and hence the criticism.

If you were abducted by an alien today and you happen to tell us your story, we are not going to accept your story until you give evidence even though it really really really happened.

Science is evidence-based reasoning. The holy books are just a book with a collection of facts (some of which are subjectively true, objectively true and also objectively false).

In few years, we won't have people criticizing space exploration because it would become so cheap that anybody could space travel. You guys will catch hold of something new to criticize. This process will keep continue and along with it, the number of people who take the holy book will keep decreasing.

Don't you feel stupid to critize science which actually works? Your car, phone, eye glasses, telescopes, computer, home, etc. are all product of science. How can you claim that science is wrong? If science was wrong, then we shouldn't have been able to predict and manufacture things.

And by the way, Science does not deny the existence of a creator; it denies the 'literal' meaning of the holy books.

And because you know something about radioactivity and physics, you think that puts you in a position to judge the holy books and call them a collection of facts, that should not be taken literally!

And no - I don't feel stupid to criticize a science full of bullshit!
It's stupid for someone to believe that something came from nowhere, existed in nothing and expanded in nothing, is the cause of our existence!

I don't claim all science is wrong, but rather the one that doesn't accept God as a fact, because simply can't be proven on paper!

So basically what you are saying is -
Science is ok as long as it doesn't say things that upset me or my beliefs

Ah the contrary mind of the religiously motivated.

No - basically what I'm saying; knowledge & science are the greatest things that happened to humanity after religion!

Islamic scholars & scientists have ruled the world for over 1000 years with their knowledge & science, which is still been taught today!
But, they never for a second have doubted what the Qur'an came with, and did not need to prove the existence of God on paper to believe in Him!

Science and knowledge were meant for the advancement of humanity and not for the destruction of its morals and beliefs!

When you come up with a theory that tells me God was not the cause of creation, but rather happened chaotically, then of course I shall not accept it!

When you tell me a nuclear bomb is the result of science, then my answer would be your science is evil!
But, when you tell me you discovered a way to harness power from nature, cheap, clean and doesn't cause pollution, then you deserve a Nobel prize!

If you think someone who believes in God would reject knowledge and science, then think again, because this is not the case here!
The crux of the matter here; God is the designer, the creator and the sustainer - everything happens with a command from Him > the whole knowledge and science are His, and we are only here learning his ways!

Anything outside this equation, is false science to me! And any science will lead me away from God, is evil science!

You can't put religion ahead of science. Religion has hundreds of mistakes. There are even websites dedicated at finding such mistakes.

The difference b/w religion and science is that science is driven by curiosity and religion is driven by a force of justification using God. You say god created everything. We scientists say that stars are created by a specific process from smaller components. Life is created by processes. In fact, we have created life in the lab. I was arguing with religious people few days ago about life being created in the lab; they tell that we did created simple life but not create complex life. It is just a matter of time before we create complex life.

Of course, science has no explanation for the very beginning but we know the process through which complex structures evolve. The holy books are having a really bad time at this moment because science has enabled us to do all sorts of things. It will be a matter of time (few decades) until people stop taking the book literally.

1. We have created life in the lab from non-living inorganic materials. Do you still believe that only God can create life?
2. Space tourism will begin in few decades; once you get yourself to space, are you still going to believe in a flat earth?

If you put religion ahead of science, you would have never bothered to investigate how life works and take steps to create aritifical life. Science did it because we don't assume that only God can do it. We keep trying to do whatever we can iirespective of whether it is possible or not. On the other hand, religious people don't try because their fundamental assumption is that only God can do few things and they get shocked when they read the news.

In a nutshell, Religion inhibits progress. A flat earther will never get a job in any scientific community because it is so wrong and so dumb. If you believe it or not, it is wrong. All FEers justifiy evidence as CGI or fake or they are too bad at math to understand. Super religious people are too bad at both science and math to understand. As you progress in Science, you get more faith in science.

*

disputeone

  • Ranters
  • 16810
  • Or should I?
Re: Questions about the Big Bang
« Reply #89 on: April 11, 2017, 07:25:07 PM »
Quote
1. We have created life in the lab from non-living inorganic materials. Do you still believe that only God can create life?

No we haven't. I am aware of the study.

Yes, I do. Call god whatever you want.
For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this.

The reason I am consistently personally attacked here.
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=69306.msg1960160#msg1960160