General Discussion

NuclearDem

(16,184 posts)

126. Oh boy.

Fri Mar 21, 2014, 10:31 PM

Mar 2014

time and space AS WE KNOW IT started with the universe, are we not to ask what was before that

You just made a completely nonsensical statement. If there was no time, there was no "before." Simple as that.

This is your problem, you are willing to believe that 'all the forces of the universe condensed into one unified force' but are unwilling to entertain the idea of where the forces came from.

I'm willing to believe the former because that's what people with a lot more experience than me in their respective fields understand about it based on the evidence.

Again all we have are Newtonian physics and quantum physics for which to explain the question of how the universe originated. If those laws are inadequate to explain how according to your own words, 'the forces that condensed into one unified force' came into existing, then that not gonna cut it.

No, that's what we have right now. A century ago quantum mechanics would have been laughed out of the room, but with advances in technology, it's becoming more accepted. Do you have any evidence that Newtonian or quantum mechanics aren't going to be sufficient? If so, you may want to tell the scientific community.

Did this forces that condensed just always exist? Or was there conditions before those forces that allowed those forces to come into being?

The only answer I can give to you is that I don't know. And that you just used that illogical concept of "before the Big Bang" yet again.

After all, religion also teaches that humans are not capable of conceptualizing god, thus it relies on faith of something we don't understand. Not explaining the forces that were present to be able to condense and create the universe due to not being able to conceptualize it is also faith in something we don't understand.

Wrong, wrong, wrong. You're trying to say that our current lack of understanding about some aspects of the natural world at this point means that it will be forever beyond our comprehension, which is the textbook definition of the argument from incredulity fallacy.

There is evidence to support the Big Bang, gathered by people with far more credentials and experience than you or I over many, many years. That you are unable to understand or unwilling to accept it is not a problem with the theory.

Religion, on the other hand, at least in the case of Yahweh, makes claims that God is forever unknowable by our human minds, and we are required to accept a belief in its existence without evidence. That is the difference.

No rational person would accept explanations for cosmology, the origins of life, or any scientific discipline for that matter without sufficient evidence to explain it. If they did, they would be irrational by definition. Faith is irrational. Science is not. Though our limited technology may not grant us the opportunity to understand some aspects of the natural world, the scientific method is fully capable of explaining it given sufficient time and resources.

You don't seem to understand basic Science 101 concepts or epistemology (the study of how we know things), and I strongly suggest before continuing down this path you do some serious research. There are countless solid resources for explaining the Big Bang as a theory, and plenty of accessible resources for explaining the differences between science and faith. Please read up on them before wasting more of our time.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

268 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Does the Big Bang breakthrough offer proof of God? [View all] IDemo Mar 2014 OP

Bollocks. jsr Mar 2014 #1

Um...okay. randome Mar 2014 #2

It does nothing of the sort. CFLDem Mar 2014 #3

+1. closeupready Mar 2014 #54

As God, I Have To Say That This Is Actually True, But None Of You Will Be Able to Comprehend Why Skraxx Mar 2014 #267

oh FFS.... mike_c Mar 2014 #4

Well, accordding to "Holy Writ" Kelvin Mace Mar 2014 #5

I wish he'd get on with it then. MoonRiver Mar 2014 #50

I REALLY Kelvin Mace Mar 2014 #51

Absolutely! MoonRiver Mar 2014 #58

While it may be true that Hoyle coined the term "Big Bang" he did so derisively. CBGLuthier Mar 2014 #6

Do they still call themselves 'news'? AgingAmerican Mar 2014 #7

Chicken Noodle Network C_U_L8R Mar 2014 #8

Maybe god wants to bang that? Whisp Mar 2014 #14

I don't have a problem with it qazplm Mar 2014 #9

we are a country of idiots bowens43 Mar 2014 #10

People are scared and overwhelmed so they believe fantastical things. stillwaiting Mar 2014 #29

I am truly leaning toward that yuiyoshida Mar 2014 #77

Judeo-Christianity hardly possesses a monopoly on 'big-bang' cosmology-as-theology Cirque du So-What Mar 2014 #11

Has religion always co-opted scientific fact once sufrommich Mar 2014 #12

THIS nt redqueen Mar 2014 #34

But first! This just in! KansDem Mar 2014 #13

It is a blog nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #15

Yeah, I just prepended the 'breaking news' in keeping with this weeks CNN-ism n/t IDemo Mar 2014 #24

Well CNN news has been running that line of thought nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #28

But that is Nooz! Brother Buzz Mar 2014 #228

Oh-oh, Chongo!!! derby378 Mar 2014 #16

As a Christian, let me say: chrisa Mar 2014 #17

Good reply sarisataka Mar 2014 #30

No. Who made God? Hmmmm? catbyte Mar 2014 #18

This breaking news just in: CNN is completely brain-damaged. backscatter712 Mar 2014 #19

CNN published this? LittleBlue Mar 2014 #20

Wolf Blitzer reporting live from the Speculation Room Blue Owl Mar 2014 #21

DUzy malaise Mar 2014 #37

Idiots. Iggo Mar 2014 #22

What? Vashta Nerada Mar 2014 #23

oh jesus u. christ on a fucking trolley really CNN? snooper2 Mar 2014 #25

No. The Judeo-Christian concept of Yahweh has been defined as supernatural. NuclearDem Mar 2014 #26

Facepalm NoOneMan Mar 2014 #27

Humans created god seveneyes Mar 2014 #31

I want to believe that our universe was a being from another universe's equivalent to a... Humanist_Activist Mar 2014 #39

um... yuiyoshida Mar 2014 #83

My philosophy professor in college lordsummerisle Mar 2014 #253

So, is god paying for all this advertising, or is CNN doing it for free? FiveGoodMen Mar 2014 #32

the inflationary era just proves Satan's real MisterP Mar 2014 #33

Nobody is this stupid... okay, yes they are cthulu2016 Mar 2014 #35

This message was self-deleted by its author Warren DeMontague Mar 2014 #36

How many giraffes does it take to change a light bulb? Humanist_Activist Mar 2014 #38

If I'm understanding the argument, if it happened then God did it. LiberalAndProud Mar 2014 #40

That's pretty much my understanding of the article. Trillo Mar 2014 #105

It's the usual way of these things... Ron Obvious Mar 2014 #41

If by "God" they mean Alan Guth's theory of hyperinflation, and Andrei Linde's theory of chaotic Warren DeMontague Mar 2014 #42

I wish they would stop lumping "Judeo's" with Christians... PCIntern Mar 2014 #43

I agree. Basically it's cover, so they can disguise the fact that it's really a fundy Xtian agenda Warren DeMontague Mar 2014 #45

I always figured that everyone was geting the Judeo part wrong Tyrs WolfDaemon Mar 2014 #66

What is a "God"? maxsolomon Mar 2014 #44

People more emotionally invested in getting you to affirm or deny a concept, than defining it Warren DeMontague Mar 2014 #46

Did God do it Himself or contract it out? If so, He should fire the contractors. Tierra_y_Libertad Mar 2014 #47

There was no 'before'. GeorgeGist Mar 2014 #48

"offering strong support for biblical beliefs" Arugula Latte Mar 2014 #49

Only if it's turtles all the way down Scootaloo Mar 2014 #52

UNREC brooklynite Mar 2014 #53

After the "black hole ate MH370?" fiasco, I really thought this was going to be satire muriel_volestrangler Mar 2014 #55

This message was self-deleted by its author Warren DeMontague Mar 2014 #56

both god and big bang rely on some sort of faith for they can never be proven beyond doubt politicman Mar 2014 #57

"something just does not come from nothing" FiveGoodMen Mar 2014 #61

but didnt there need to be something forthe particles to appear in. politicman Mar 2014 #65

This message was self-deleted by its author Warren DeMontague Mar 2014 #71

dont natural processes need conditions for them to occur in politicman Mar 2014 #81

This message was self-deleted by its author Warren DeMontague Mar 2014 #137

science has it immeasurable benefits but it is inacapable of answering the question politicman Mar 2014 #147

This message was self-deleted by its author Warren DeMontague Mar 2014 #165

thanks for your answer politicman Mar 2014 #169

This message was self-deleted by its author Warren DeMontague Mar 2014 #171

this is fun now politicman Mar 2014 #173

This message was self-deleted by its author Warren DeMontague Mar 2014 #180

Facepalm nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #153

you think you so smart huh politicman Mar 2014 #157

Actually they have nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #159

wow politicman Mar 2014 #161

I know you are having a problem with the concept of nothingness nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #163

This message was self-deleted by its author Warren DeMontague Mar 2014 #167

thanks for your answer, if you could expand a little more politicman Mar 2014 #170

This message was self-deleted by its author Warren DeMontague Mar 2014 #172

I apologise for my mistake politicman Mar 2014 #174

Does a prosecutor in a murder case have to kill the victim over again to "prove" murder? Silent3 Mar 2014 #268

Theories are the equivalent of scientific facts. jpak Mar 2014 #197

really? politicman Mar 2014 #201

All theories can be falsified - with verifiable evidence. jpak Mar 2014 #209

You're thinking in human terms about inhuman topics cthulu2016 Mar 2014 #62

isnt that what religion is, believing in something higher than humans and human topics politicman Mar 2014 #63

Religion is completely based in human perception. HuckleB Mar 2014 #85

Miracles may be human imgaination, but so is belieing that something just always existed. politicman Mar 2014 #93

13.3 Billion years is not, in any way, shape or form, always. nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #102

doesnt matter the age of the universe, where did the original conditions for the universe come from. politicman Mar 2014 #107

You insist on faith nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #117

please dont think I want you to believe or say what you are against, thats your perogative. politicman Mar 2014 #127

The creator is not science nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #133

how about his simple question politicman Mar 2014 #141

Answered bellow nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #144

No. That is a human micro-perception cthulu2016 Mar 2014 #222

why is your faith in soemthing you cannot conceptaulize more valid than mine politicman Mar 2014 #223

Something from nothing LostOne4Ever Mar 2014 #64

can you have an explosion into nothing? doesnt there have to be something to have the explosion in? politicman Mar 2014 #69

Multiverse might be the actual explanation nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #73

half an explantion I think politicman Mar 2014 #91

In my mind the more we learn nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #99

please keep in mind that religion is in essence a belief in a originator. politicman Mar 2014 #101

You are inserting, forcing theology, into something where nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #103

not inserting, just saying there is no difference in faiths politicman Mar 2014 #110

You are once again inserting belief nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #114

pleased read carefully. politicman Mar 2014 #119

You are referring to a math paradox nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #120

do you have a better way politicman Mar 2014 #129

It is called the Russian Doll paradox nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #134

ok... politicman Mar 2014 #142

In theology, yes nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #143

gravity yes, something appear out of nowhere with no conditions for it to occur, no i dont believe politicman Mar 2014 #149

But it arose from the Big Bang nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #150

thanks, leave you to ponder these questions. politicman Mar 2014 #154

Yes really nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #156

If you want to insult go ahead, just makes your inability to provide answers politicman Mar 2014 #158

I know exactly where they came from nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #160

am i reading you right politicman Mar 2014 #162

Wrong. That is well after nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #164

great, now we are getting somewhere politicman Mar 2014 #168

Yes, it came from nothing nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #175

this is fun is it not:) politicman Mar 2014 #177

No it is not fun nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #219

Then who created the originator? NuclearDem Mar 2014 #113

exactly, bot ideas require faith, so why is anyone calling out the other for being wrong. politicman Mar 2014 #122

The "creator" or "originator" is not a theory. NuclearDem Mar 2014 #128

to each their won I say politicman Mar 2014 #132

When it comes to matters of science, there is no "to each their own." NuclearDem Mar 2014 #136

so the big bang didnt need any materials to occur. politicman Mar 2014 #145

Not in the conventional sense you are thinking off nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #241

An "ultimate creator" origin seems unlikely -- Arugula Latte Mar 2014 #116

.... politicman Mar 2014 #125

Adding a creator into the mix just moves it all back a place. Arugula Latte Mar 2014 #130

I can say the same about matter just coming into existence from nothing politicman Mar 2014 #140

"unless you argue that something just always existed with no beginning what so ever." NuclearDem Mar 2014 #131

ok then.... politicman Mar 2014 #139

Those absolute are not as absolute as you think LostOne4Ever Mar 2014 #76

heres another way to put it. politicman Mar 2014 #90

I understand your view LostOne4Ever Mar 2014 #213

theories can apparently explain alot if they never are able to be tested, dont you think politicman Mar 2014 #217

Jesus age we create water, and break it apart all the fucking time nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #220

honesly my question was a serious one. politicman Mar 2014 #221

First it is not the elements for water nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #230

Again, if it is a THEORY it has been tested in some way shape or form LostOne4Ever Mar 2014 #266

And here we go. NuclearDem Mar 2014 #70

Add a dash of multiverse nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #74

I'm more than willing to say "I just don't know" on a lot of this. NuclearDem Mar 2014 #108

Yup nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #111

a 'hot and dense entity' is still something, an entity is still something that needed a beginning politicman Mar 2014 #100

There was no "before the Big Bang" as far as space time is concerned. NuclearDem Mar 2014 #106

time and space AS WE KNOW IT started with the universe, are we not to ask what was before that politicman Mar 2014 #118

Oh boy. NuclearDem Mar 2014 #126

ok ill try this again politicman Mar 2014 #138

This is the last I'll reply to this. NuclearDem Mar 2014 #148

sorry to have pissed you off politicman Mar 2014 #151

Evolution is a fact, not theory RainDog Mar 2014 #184

yes i don't believe in evoulition, its too convienient that nothing has evolved since politicman Mar 2014 #185

Evolution has been observed RainDog Mar 2014 #186

thanks for the concern, but I am content politicman Mar 2014 #189

I hope you never use antibiotics RainDog Mar 2014 #190

I lose nothing by believing in god, instead I might gain something if I am right politicman Mar 2014 #193

You use the same talking points as a christian fundamentalist RainDog Mar 2014 #195

you may think reality is more inspiring, but I think a higher being is a lot more inspiring politicman Mar 2014 #198

It's about the way someone checks information RainDog Mar 2014 #199

yes we dont live in the dark ages, but we dont have the answers to all the questions either politicman Mar 2014 #202

wow RainDog Mar 2014 #204

mock me if you like, but answer this question if you can politicman Mar 2014 #210

other intelligent apes evolved VMA131Marine Mar 2014 #244

oh wait - you're claiming evolutionary evidence has been faked? RainDog Mar 2014 #187

you think i am nuts for playing the best hand available to me politicman Mar 2014 #192

so the benefit of religion to you RainDog Mar 2014 #196

again I will believe what you can show me through experiment politicman Mar 2014 #200

Virii evolve RainDog Mar 2014 #203

sorry if a cannot accept evolutionw without a proper explanation of why other creatures did not also politicman Mar 2014 #206

LOL RainDog Mar 2014 #207

mock all you like, but we will all lose in the end politicman Mar 2014 #212

I see nothing progressive about your words RainDog Mar 2014 #216

progressive does not mean believing in only science to explain everything politicman Mar 2014 #218

you rely on conspiracy theory, denial and bad argument RainDog Mar 2014 #224

If life evolves according to habitat, why did Mars not evolve its own life to live in its habitat politicman Mar 2014 #225

Against my better judgment, I'm getting back into this. NuclearDem Mar 2014 #227

I read what you say but if life began with water, the surely Mars.... politicman Mar 2014 #231

... NuclearDem Mar 2014 #235

I'm no astronomer or astrophysicist RainDog Mar 2014 #229

In our own galaxy nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #233

And humans may just be vehicles to transport bacteria RainDog Mar 2014 #237

Self important taxis at that nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #238

It did, and then it went away nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #242

It's why DU is seriously changing, not necessarily for the better...as results show TeamPooka Mar 2014 #258

I wonder who sent the alert? RainDog Mar 2014 #259

Me too, since alerting is a worthless exercise nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #264

First fallacy, humans, nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #248

No faith is required for the big bang theory. phil89 Mar 2014 #152

and something appearing out of nothing is not special pleading? politicman Mar 2014 #155

Why is there anything rather than nothing? longship Mar 2014 #205

We have been kind nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #239

This message was self-deleted by its author longship Mar 2014 #254

No. If god caused the big bang, you are still left with the problem of what caused god. FarCenter Mar 2014 #59

It's tortoises all the way down! Hissyspit Mar 2014 #176

Well, not anymore FarCenter Mar 2014 #215

It was round by the time of Greece, latest Rome. nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #257

First they need to prove the big bang. idendoit Mar 2014 #60

This message was self-deleted by its author Warren DeMontague Mar 2014 #67

Checkout the data at bicepkrek.org. idendoit Mar 2014 #78

This message was self-deleted by its author Warren DeMontague Mar 2014 #80

I agree with you on the god parts. idendoit Mar 2014 #95

Two things: NuclearDem Mar 2014 #109

In reply to those two things: idendoit Mar 2014 #243

1) No it doesn't. NuclearDem Mar 2014 #246

What doesn't what? idendoit Mar 2014 #260

The evidence doesn't fit a static model of the universe. NuclearDem Mar 2014 #261

Your statement provides evidence to support the static model. idendoit Mar 2014 #262

No. The static model was roundly rejected in the mid-20th century for the reasons I gave you. NuclearDem Mar 2014 #263

As I pointed out before. idendoit Mar 2014 #265

I have stronger proof that there is no God.... SidDithers Mar 2014 #68

No more than it denies it. hobbit709 Mar 2014 #72

No. XRubicon Mar 2014 #75

Please MattBaggins Mar 2014 #79

Ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm. .... .... .... No. HuckleB Mar 2014 #82

I always wonder why the anti-theists get so worked up over this goldent Mar 2014 #84

You like attention, don't you? HuckleB Mar 2014 #86

I do write posts for people to read, otherwise I wouldn't write them! goldent Mar 2014 #87

Coouhl. HuckleB Mar 2014 #88

Lol. nt La Lioness Priyanka Mar 2014 #251

Big Bang = God farted. VScott Mar 2014 #89

Sheldon comes pretty close! WinkyDink Mar 2014 #92

Of course it does. It also offers the same amount of proof of the non-existence of God. -nt Liberal Veteran Mar 2014 #94

Proof of God... Jeff In Milwaukee Mar 2014 #96

If so why did he create roaches long before 'humans' Rosa Luxemburg Mar 2014 #97

Cause he knew humans would have free will nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #121

not to mention the archebacteria! Rosa Luxemburg Mar 2014 #123

Well, somebody needs to be around to nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #124

This message was self-deleted by its author HarveyDarkey Mar 2014 #98

Maybe and maybe not. It's wonderful no matter what. nt Sarah Ibarruri Mar 2014 #104

What is God? Rex Mar 2014 #112

Only for people desperately grasping at straws to prove their "god"... Walk away Mar 2014 #115

Why is it that a religion that is all about 'faith" truebluegreen Mar 2014 #135

If you have faith, what difference does evidence make? nyquil_man Mar 2014 #146

Why wouldn't you ask if it DISPROVED the existence of God? cherokeeprogressive Mar 2014 #166

Because that's an irrational question n/t RainDog Mar 2014 #183

Yes it does. Kablooie Mar 2014 #178

Of course not. Iggo Mar 2014 #179

It's interesting physics: it has nothing to do with "proof of G-d" struggle4progress Mar 2014 #181

LOL RainDog Mar 2014 #182

The existence or non-existence of God makes not the slightest difference to the practice of science eridani Mar 2014 #188

Very interesting read. NaturalHigh Mar 2014 #191

All based on a false assumption Motown_Johnny Mar 2014 #194

Yes, that flawed logic edhopper Mar 2014 #211

God could easy prove God exists. JoePhilly Mar 2014 #208

Yo, Yahweh -- Arugula Latte Mar 2014 #232

God used to be far more extroverted. JoePhilly Mar 2014 #255

On a recent expedition to the East Coast, I discovered the ancient seaport of Nantucket Thor_MN Mar 2014 #214

Of course not, but it's unsurprising that CNN would think so. arcane1 Mar 2014 #226

Make it stop........... we can do it Mar 2014 #234

LOL. La Lioness Priyanka Mar 2014 #236

This message was self-deleted by its author Warren DeMontague Mar 2014 #240

science does not fully predict what i do. therefore i am divine. nt La Lioness Priyanka Mar 2014 #249

Proof, or did the writer mean, "evidence"? fascisthunter Mar 2014 #245

Message auto-removed Name removed Mar 2014 #247

Message auto-removed Name removed Mar 2014 #250

Oh, for heaven's sake (um, so to speak). Of course not. Jgarrick Mar 2014 #252

Last Saturday night was pretty close to proof. nt Zorra Mar 2014 #256