So we Live in a Black Hole...
closed account (1yR4jE8b)
And? What does that have to do with my question at all? You say you disagree with the Big Bang Theory: what scientific model do you agree with that offers better predictions than the current scientific consensus?
closed account (jwkNwA7f)
Okay, I think I know what you mean...
I believe that God created the universe.
Edit: If you wonder why I am not responding anymore, I am going to bed :(
I believe that God created the universe.
Edit: If you wonder why I am not responding anymore, I am going to bed :(
Last edited on
http://www.bible.ca/tracks/b-design-requires-creator.htm
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab2/information-evidence-for-a-creator
http://www.creationism.org/heinze/SciEvidGodLife.htm
http://www.reasons.org/articles/convergence-evidence-for-a-single-creator
http://www.reasonablefaith.org/the-origin-and-creation-of-the-universe-a-response-to-adolf-grunbaum
http://www.npr.org/blogs/13.7/2013/03/26/175352714/the-origin-of-the-universe-from-nothing-everything
http://www.answersingenesis.org/get-answers/features/evolution-impossible?utm_source=adwords&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=evolution-impossible&gclid=CLKC5bjnobkCFY3m7AodtgMAQQ
Thats just the begining.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab2/information-evidence-for-a-creator
http://www.creationism.org/heinze/SciEvidGodLife.htm
http://www.reasons.org/articles/convergence-evidence-for-a-single-creator
http://www.reasonablefaith.org/the-origin-and-creation-of-the-universe-a-response-to-adolf-grunbaum
http://www.npr.org/blogs/13.7/2013/03/26/175352714/the-origin-of-the-universe-from-nothing-everything
http://www.answersingenesis.org/get-answers/features/evolution-impossible?utm_source=adwords&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=evolution-impossible&gclid=CLKC5bjnobkCFY3m7AodtgMAQQ
Thats just the begining.
closed account (1yR4jE8b)
Yaaaaaaaaawn.
Nothing I haven't seen before, and nothing worth wasting my time here refuting because anyone with a lick of scientific literacy and 10 seconds on Google can do it for themselves.
Nothing I haven't seen before, and nothing worth wasting my time here refuting because anyone with a lick of scientific literacy and 10 seconds on Google can do it for themselves.
Late to the topic as always, I would like to say a few (too many) words:
A) The greeks knew the earth was round (spherical), 'nuff of that sh*t. Aristotle even went as far as to venture a measurement which, considering the equipment available at the time, was surprisingly accurate.
B) Did God create the Big Bang? Short answer: no. Longer answer: the very question is illogical. The Big Bang is a theory which traces back the expanding universe back to it's starting point. To use an analogy, it's a bit like reconstructing an accident. You have your endpoint: everything's gone wrong and your tell-tales: skid marks, final resting positions, etc. From that, you trace back what must have happened and you end up with (for example) 3 cars travelling between 40 and 50 mph on the road 2 miles back. Asking "What made the cars be there? What happened before the cars? Was the invisible man responsible for the cars's existence?" now sounds rather silly (pointless) doesn't it.
C) That being said, what happened before Big Bang is rather curious. We may very well find out that all the matter/energy in the universe was riding along the proverbial highway, and then suddenly, the a**hole the left lane overcorrected. You know (are a result of) the rest.
EDIT: If anyone still cares about Black Holes, yes I do find the idea amusing... but I don't subscribe to the "pot of gold at the end of the rainbow" theory.
A) The greeks knew the earth was round (spherical), 'nuff of that sh*t. Aristotle even went as far as to venture a measurement which, considering the equipment available at the time, was surprisingly accurate.
B) Did God create the Big Bang? Short answer: no. Longer answer: the very question is illogical. The Big Bang is a theory which traces back the expanding universe back to it's starting point. To use an analogy, it's a bit like reconstructing an accident. You have your endpoint: everything's gone wrong and your tell-tales: skid marks, final resting positions, etc. From that, you trace back what must have happened and you end up with (for example) 3 cars travelling between 40 and 50 mph on the road 2 miles back. Asking "What made the cars be there? What happened before the cars? Was the invisible man responsible for the cars's existence?" now sounds rather silly (pointless) doesn't it.
C) That being said, what happened before Big Bang is rather curious. We may very well find out that all the matter/energy in the universe was riding along the proverbial highway, and then suddenly, the a**hole the left lane overcorrected. You know (are a result of) the rest.
EDIT: If anyone still cares about Black Holes, yes I do find the idea amusing... but I don't subscribe to the "pot of gold at the end of the rainbow" theory.
Last edited on
I haven't read much beyond the first page of this thread.... but this....
This made my day. Thank you, darkestfright.
EDIT:
darkestfright is my hero in this thread:
I agree completely with this sentiment.
People that adamantly oppose something without even understanding what it is they are opposing make me cry a little inside.
I think everyone is guilty of this sometimes (including myself), but I try really hard not to be.
I personally know little about the big bang, but my vague understanding of it makes it seem plausible considering evidence that has been observed.
Primarily... that fact that space is expanding at an accellerating rate alone suggests that space must have been "contracted" previously in time, which suggests that at one point all matter in the universe may have converged or originated at some point. Though that would explain expansion... it wouldn't explain accelleration which I still find puzzling.
Does the big bang imply that matter was created, though? Couldn't it just be a form of distribution of matter? Maybe all the matter in condensed space was under so much pressure from magnetic/gravitational/whathaveyou forces that it "exploded"? These questions are in earnest.. like I say I know little about the theory... hopefully someone more informed can shed some light for me.
That's already untrue, so I'm not going to bother continuing to read that one.
"Information" is comprised of matter and energy. The examples he used in his "smoke signals to email" scenario all use matter and energy. It's readily apparent.
So this is also untrue. I'm already seeing a pattern with these sites... people making assumptions which are clearly false, then extrapolating on that false premise in an attempt to prove some other point.
I think I'll stop there.
| darkestfright wrote: |
|---|
| foxnews Nothing to see here, move along. |
This made my day. Thank you, darkestfright.
EDIT:
darkestfright is my hero in this thread:
| darkestfright wrote: |
|---|
| Well, of course that doesn't make sense, that's (specifically, what you wrote) is not what the Big Bang Theory states at all. If you're too closed-minded to try to learn something new because you can't be bothered to try to learn something that doesn't seem particularly intuitive at first -- then I won't bother explaining it to you. |
I agree completely with this sentiment.
People that adamantly oppose something without even understanding what it is they are opposing make me cry a little inside.
I think everyone is guilty of this sometimes (including myself), but I try really hard not to be.
I personally know little about the big bang, but my vague understanding of it makes it seem plausible considering evidence that has been observed.
Primarily... that fact that space is expanding at an accellerating rate alone suggests that space must have been "contracted" previously in time, which suggests that at one point all matter in the universe may have converged or originated at some point. Though that would explain expansion... it wouldn't explain accelleration which I still find puzzling.
Does the big bang imply that matter was created, though? Couldn't it just be a form of distribution of matter? Maybe all the matter in condensed space was under so much pressure from magnetic/gravitational/whathaveyou forces that it "exploded"? These questions are in earnest.. like I say I know little about the theory... hopefully someone more informed can shed some light for me.
| Superdudes first link wrote: |
|---|
| There are only two ways of looking at the Universe. Either it just happened or an intelligent being is responsible for it. |
That's already untrue, so I'm not going to bother continuing to read that one.
| Superdudes second link wrote: |
|---|
| This is the good news! Why is this good news? Because the foundation for materialism (atheism, humanism, evolution) is that the universe consists of only two entities3: mass and energy. Therefore, if a third entity can be shown to exist, then materialism and all philosophies based on it must also be false. Information is this third fundamental entity. |
"Information" is comprised of matter and energy. The examples he used in his "smoke signals to email" scenario all use matter and energy. It's readily apparent.
So this is also untrue. I'm already seeing a pattern with these sites... people making assumptions which are clearly false, then extrapolating on that false premise in an attempt to prove some other point.
I think I'll stop there.
Last edited on
Ahh, another false god vs science dichotomy thread...
Can't they both exist?
/yawn
Can't they both exist?
/yawn
closed account (1yR4jE8b)
| answersingenesis.org |
This is the website that was created by the man that also runs the "Creation Museum" in the US. This is the "museum" that claims that dinosaurs lived at the same time as humans. I've been there once...it was fun(ny), weren't it not for my dying a little inside that people actually believe that nonsense.
Did God create the Big Bang? Short answer: no. |
I wouldn't necessarily agree with this. We don't know what caused the big bang yet, HOWEVER that doesn't mean we walk away with our tail between our legs and defer to ancient fairy tales written by barely literate desert sheep herders -- it means we have to come up with better ways to do science, that's all (easier said than done).
Instead I would phrase it as, "Is God necessary for the Big Bang"? We can't necessarily know what happened before the Big Bang (well technically, we can't know what happened before the 1st planck second of the time) but every time we make a new scientific discovery the answer to the question has always been a very definitive "not God".
Many unanswered questions still exist, but I would bet money on that once these questions are finally answered that the answer is most definitely not going to be "god dunnit". There's nothing wrong about admitting "I don't know" to a question, I actually find it exciting because now we have something to work towards. Using God as the answer just seems like a crutch to me, and it opens up way more questions than it answers.
it wouldn't explain accelleration which I still find puzzling. |
Which I believe is what Dark Matter and Dark Energy attempt to solve. We know it exists because we can calculate exactly how much matter is supposed to exist in the Universe, yet we seem to lack quite a bit of it -- about 70-80% of the observable universe is Dark Matter. We've also very recently been able to create technology which may have been able to detect it; so the prospect of being able to finally being able to verifiabley measure dark matter and it's effects on the universe are quite exciting.
| That being said, what happened before Big Bang is rather curious. |
Agreed, especially considering that "before" the big bang, Time did not exist. So the entire concept of "before" the big bang is not coherent, which obviously makes it so intriguing because humans evolved to perceive everything in relation to time.
Can't they both exist? |
Sure, they can both exist. Can they stop being in constant conflict?
Unless religion stops making unfalsifiable claims about the nature of the universe and existence, while also directly contradicting observable, measureable and repeatable scientific models and offering up absolutely 0 evidence for their own claims, then no. I don't believe they can.
Paraphrasing Neil DeGrasseTyson: you can believe in your religion all you want, but keep it out of my science classroom.
Also another good one by the Dalai Llama:
“If scientific analysis were conclusively to demonstrate certain claims in Buddhism to be false, then we must accept the findings of science and abandon those claims.” |
closed account (jwkNwA7f)
| I think everyone is guilty of this sometimes (including myself), but I try really hard not to be. |
I try too, just not on this subject.
closed account (1yR4jE8b)
| I think everyone is guilty of this sometimes (including myself), but I try really hard not to be. |
Including myself. The trick is being able to admit when you are wrong, and be willing to learn something new to correct yourself.
closed account (jwkNwA7f)
| Unless religion stops making unfalsifiable claims about the nature of the universe and existence, while also directly contradicting observable, measureable and repeatable scientific models and offering up absolutely 0 evidence for their own claims, then no. I don't believe they can. |
Who was there when the spec of dust created the universe and everything "evolved"? So, you don't have anymore evidence than we do.
| Who was there when the spec of dust created the universe and everything "evolved"? So, you don't have anymore evidence than we do. |
The difference between science and Christianity is that science says "We don't know... that's worth looking into. Maybe one day we'll understand it!"
Whereas Christianity says "God did it, so stop questioning it and disregard any evidence that contradicts what we say or you'll go to hell".
One inspires motivation by appealing to humanity's curiosity and sense of exploration.
The other encourages ignorance by preying on people's fear of the unknown.
EDIT: removing overly inflammitory remark.
Last edited on
closed account (jwkNwA7f)
| Whereas Christianity says "God did it, so stop questioning it and disregard any evidence that contradicts what we say or you'll go to hell". |
No, we believe what the Bible says on how the universe was created (and, yes, it does say how). We definitely do not force you to believe it.
| One inspires motivation by appealing to humanity's curiosity and sense of exploration. |
We are interested and study how the world was created in the Bible.
| The other encourages ignorance by preying on people's fear of the unknown. |
We don't encourage ignorance. We do not have fear of the unknown. We want to learn more about things like that, based on what is in the Bible. Also, you are acting like we don't want to learn anything about anything science related, which is a bunch of crap. There are many Christian scientists who study many areas of science. No, we don't study about how the universe was created, because we already know. It is in the Bible.
The reason why many people do not believe in God is because the don't want to. Not because it is ridiculous(They think so). Many scientists, now and before, (much smarter than us) believed in a Creator.
http://creationsafaris.com/wgcs_0.htm
Evolution, and everything that comes with it, whether it be the big bang, black hole, etc.
All claims that an orderly universe, which we live in now, was existing for all time and slowly evolved over billions of years into the orderly design that we see now.
Evolutionists expect us to believe that nature, that we see all around us, happened by accident?? Seriously?
It is more plausible to believe that there is an eternal God who created the universe. We don't claim to know everything, but we have faith in God.
The whole world shows evidence of a world wide flood.
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/phenom_apr00.html
@ Disch: That is not accurate at all. We believe the Bible, but not blindly. We don't (like the old Roman Catholic Church) punish people for not believing exactly what we do. We are not perfect, and as many people believed that the earth was flat,(Athiests and Christians alike) we make mistakes.
http://creationsafaris.com/wgcs_0.htm
Evolution, and everything that comes with it, whether it be the big bang, black hole, etc.
All claims that an orderly universe, which we live in now, was existing for all time and slowly evolved over billions of years into the orderly design that we see now.
Evolutionists expect us to believe that nature, that we see all around us, happened by accident?? Seriously?
It is more plausible to believe that there is an eternal God who created the universe. We don't claim to know everything, but we have faith in God.
The whole world shows evidence of a world wide flood.
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/phenom_apr00.html
@ Disch: That is not accurate at all. We believe the Bible, but not blindly. We don't (like the old Roman Catholic Church) punish people for not believing exactly what we do. We are not perfect, and as many people believed that the earth was flat,(Athiests and Christians alike) we make mistakes.
Last edited on
closed account (jwkNwA7f)
I 100% agree with Superdude's unedited post above mine.
Edit: and his edit at Aug 29, 2013 at 10:59am
Edit: and his edit at Aug 29, 2013 at 10:59am
Last edited on
| Evolutionists expect us to believe that nature, that we see all around us, happened by accident?? Seriously? |
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KnJX68ELbAY
closed account (3qX21hU5)
Both beliefs can exist together and no matter what you believe you should never try to push it onto someone else just becaues they believe something else then you do.
Personally I believe in god but that doesn't mean I have the right to go around telling everyone that believes in the big bang theory that they are wrong and try and crush their beliefs because I don't believe in it. The same goes for the other way around.
Each side deserves respect for their beliefs. Just because you don't believe in what the other person believes in doesn't mean you can insult their intelligence or their beliefs.
That is all I really have to say on this subject.
Personally I believe in god but that doesn't mean I have the right to go around telling everyone that believes in the big bang theory that they are wrong and try and crush their beliefs because I don't believe in it. The same goes for the other way around.
Each side deserves respect for their beliefs. Just because you don't believe in what the other person believes in doesn't mean you can insult their intelligence or their beliefs.
That is all I really have to say on this subject.
Last edited on
closed account (jwkNwA7f)
| Both beliefs can exist together and no matter what you believe you should never try to push it onto someone else just becaues they believe something else then you do. |
We don't and I am not trying to. I am just standing up for my side.
| cppprogrammer297 wrote: |
|---|
| (never going to convince me) |
| cppprogrammer297 wrote: |
|---|
| I try [to not be dismissive of ideas I don't fully understand] too, just not on this subject. |
This is my point. You are actively speaking out in opposition of evolutionary and big bang theory without understanding the actual theories you're speaking out against. Before even hearing what they're actually trying to say, you've already made up your mind that they're wrong. And you refuse to even entertain the possibility that they might have some truth to them.
You even go so far as to say you'll never be convinced... implying that you've made your mind up forever and it will never change.
This is the definition of willful ignorance. You are actively fighting back against educating yourself because the subject matter contradicts your personal beliefs. Christianity has programmed your brain to think this way by providing an easy answer that you are unable to question... that you have just accepted.
This is what I was referring to in my previous reply.
| cppprogrammer297 wrote: |
|---|
| We definitely do not force you to believe it. |
Whether or not Christianity imposes its views on non-Christians is another topic. It's very clear that does in the US (or at least, it's clear to anyone who isn't Christian), but I won't get into the many examples of how. At least not right now.
My point was that "damnation and/or death to those who do not believe" is a common scare tactic employed by many western religions (including Christianity). I can pull dozens of examples out of Christian dogma where this is explicitly stated, but I'll spare you as I'm sure you've already read them.
| cppprogrammer wrote: |
|---|
| We don't encourage ignorance. We do not have fear of the unknown. We want to learn more about things like that, based on what is in the Bible. |
Using only one (clearly biased) source for information is encouraging ignorance. If you really were not encouraging ignorance you would encourage people to educate themselves in any and all schools of thought.. including not only scientific study, but also also dogma from other religions.
Now please do not misunderstand.... I'm not saying that all Christians do this. You're right... there are many example of prominent Christian scientists who have made great strides in scientific discovery. I'm saying that the Christian believe structure encourages this.
Even in the examples of Christian scientists throughout history... their faith ultimately became a wall blocking further discovery for them. A prime example of this is Sir Isaac Newton. But Neil Degrasse Tyson goes over many more of those examples and shows just how detrimental they are in this video here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1te01rfEF0g
I strongly encourage you to watch, it is very fascinating.
Unfortunately at this point I have to stop replying because I have to get ready for work. I will come back to the thread later.
EDIT: Though I do have to reply to this because it sums up my point perfectly.
| cppprogrammer297 wrote: |
|---|
| No, we don't study about how the universe was created, because we already know |
EXACTLY. You have an answer that satisfies you, so you stop looking. And you stop entertaining other theories and schools of thought because you've already decided that they're wrong.
THAT is perpetuation of ignorance. THAT is the difference between Christianity and science. Science doesn't do that.
Also... many Christians do study how the universe was created outside of Bible teachings. Watch that Neil Degrasse Tyson video.
Last edited on
closed account (jwkNwA7f)
| This is my point. You are actively speaking out in opposition of evolutionary and big bang theory without understanding the actual theories you're speaking out against. Before even hearing what they're actually trying to say, you've already made up your mind that they're wrong. And you refuse to even entertain the possibility that they might have some truth to them. You even go so far as to say you'll never be convinced... implying that you've made your mind up forever and it will never change. |
I never said that they don''t have truth in them, I am sure they do, but overall they are wrong. And, yes, I have made up my mind. I believe in God, and I believe what the Bible says (which is what God said). I already know what happened. God created the universe. I have faith in him, so, no, I am not going to believe that the universe was created by a "big bang", because God said how it was made and that is not it.
| This is the definition of willful ignorance. You are actively fighting back against educating yourself because the subject matter contradicts your personal beliefs. Christianity has programmed your brain to think this way by providing an easy answer that you are unable to question... that you have just accepted. |
No, it is not that I don't want to learn, I already know; it is in the Bible.
| My point was that "damnation and/or death to those who do not believe" is a common scare tactic employed by many western religions (including Christianity). I can pull dozens of examples out of Christian dogma where this is explicitly stated, but I'll spare you as I'm sure you've already read them. |
That is just plain not true. We do not use it as a scare tactic.
| Now please do not misunderstand.... I'm not saying that all Christians do this. You're right... there are many example of prominent Christian scientists who have made great strides in scientific discovery. I'm saying that the Christian believe structure encourages this. |
Yes, I do agree with most of that. Also, there are many types of Christians with different beliefs. I believe what the Bible says completely, unlike some that just choose what to believe in the Bible (which really doesn't make sense to me).
| I strongly encourage you to watch, it is very fascinating. |
I have not watched it yet because while I am waiting for the next reply I am working on my 2D game engine, so I really don't have much time to watch it.
| Unfortunately at this point I have to stop replying because I have to get ready for work. I will come back to the thread later. |
Yeah, I am going to have to soon too.
| EXACTLY. You have an answer that satisfies you, so you stop looking. And you stop entertaining other theories and schools of thought because you've already decided that they're wrong. THAT is perpetuation of ignorance. THAT is the difference between Christianity and science. Science doesn't do that. Also... many Christians do study how the universe was created outside of Bible teachings. Watch that Neil Degrasse Tyson video. |
We do some, but we already know a lot of it. Like the guy in the video that you mention, but like I said, I have not gotten to watch it yet.