No Big Bang Does what to Atheism?

I agree. That is why creation theories amount to nothing more than simple-minded nonsense.

 

Neither Creation nor big bang can be scientifically knowable. Therefore, by your definition, both are simple-minded nonsense.

 

The 'Big Bang' was originally a theory proposed by a Belguim Jesuit Priest named Georges Lemaitre. His theory of an expanding universe was originally rejected by Einstein and then confirmed by the discoveries of Hubble, ect. It's not embraced by atheists in order support atheism as you suggest so why make this ridiculous claim?

 

Nah, the Big Bang is clearly knowable considering it's considered a scientific theory, and has been for decades and decades. I already listed the evidence for the Big Bang theory for you. You concentrated on one part of the evidence, remember? The red shifting of galaxies. Remember how you called it red shifting an opinion? And then seemingly dropped the line of argument all together when you realized how dumb, and flat out false, your argument was?

- - - Updated - - -

Which has nothing to do with the Big Bang theory since it never states that the Universe came from nothing. See how you have to lie to be even slightly relevant? Also the first law of thermodynamics only applies to things IN the Universe. Outside of the Universe, the laws could be totally different.

 

The 'red shift' speculates the object is moving. It can also be because of a natural filter between the viewer and the object.

I doubt anyone disagrees the stars are moving. Even in Scripture it says God stretches out the heavens. So what? That does not decisively show all the stars originated from a single point in space. In fact there is volumes of scientific evidence showing that is not possible. But that does not matter, does it?

What is your opinion of where the universe originated then?

 

A natural filter? The hell does that mean?

And nobody says that it does decisively show this. This is another strawman argument. Red shifts, the CMB, and the amounts of nuclei in the Universe TOGETHER give the Big Bang theory its support. Hell, the Big Bang theory may still be wrong, but with these pieces of evidence it is the MOST supported out of the alternatives.

Not really, because I bet you pull this "evidence" from the ICR or some other non-scientific site creationist site.

I have no idea, honestly. I don't feel the requirement to lean towards one suggestion or the next until we actually have evidence to help us decide.

 

Since there NEVER will be any concrete evidence for natural origins for the universe, then what remains is an un (or super) natural origin. Wouldn't you agree?

As far as a filter, you do understand there are fine dust particles and electromagnetism throughout the universe which can cause a filtering effect on distant starlight.

In fact, red shift and CMB also proved evidence for a young universe and against a single point of origin. You need to stop getting all YOUR information from the anti-science evolution websites.

 

Nope. I don't know the capability limits of man or our technology.

And you think that some light hitting a random particle or two would have what effect on the light spectrum and why?

Then lay out how it did this.

 

A single random particle? Are you serious. You think it is only possible for a single random particle to be located between a telescope on Earth and a star you believe to be billions of light years away? Did you really make that claim?

 

God has existed long before atheists.

 

Atheists existed long before any gods showed up.

 

It's says right there in Psalms

Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever you had formed the earth and the world, from everlasting to everlasting you are God (Psalm 90:2).

How about the New Testament.

Now to the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only God, be honor and glory for ever and ever. Amen (1 Timothy 1:17).

Now science is revealing there has never been nothing, something may have always existed.

God is eternal, as prophesized...science is revealing an eternal process.

 

I'm sure most people also at one point believed they would NEVER understand the inside of the human body, or what makes is different from chimps, or what causes the Sun to glow.

 

Do you understand how spectometry works? We are measuring the wavelength of light that actually reaches us, not light that doesn't reach us. It matters not if some light is blocked by particles. And yes, while I may have been using hyperbole, space is pretty damned empty. Not perfectly empty, but pretty close to it. Now are you going to answer my questions/ concerns for your claims?

- - - Updated - - -

Yes, something may have always existed and that thing might be the Universe. Considering your holy book says that God created the Universe from nothing, I don't see how that could possibly be supportive of your case.

 

Jesus mentions the “Alpha and Omega." He was at the beginning of all things and will be at the close. It is equivalent to saying He always existed and always will exist.

It is we who are temporal beings...God is eternal.

We exist as finite contained within the infinite, the Biblical allegory is clear as day.

 

In the beginning God created the heavens and the Earth. This is certainly a supernatural event.

 

Well, that's what you claim happened. And now you are dropping even responding to anything I said at all. Do you give up and accept that there is evidence for the Big Bang now?

 

Are you admitting that the big bang ​ is a supernatural event?

 

No, it's not, since it has nothing to do with the Universe starting from nothing, or always existing. The Big Bang theory describes what happened to the Universe AFTER it's creation, or non-creation.

 

Since your side is constantly moving the goal posts by redefining terms, what do you now call the origin of the universe and how did it originate?

 

Nobody is redefining terms. The Big Bang has NEVER had anything to do with how the singularity began to exist or not. And again, I already told you that we don't know how it originated, or that it even did.

 

It is mentioned in textbooks and evolutionary websites as the beginning of all space, time and matter. "From a point no larger than the period at the end of this sentence, or even from nothing, nothing at all." That is pretty fairy tale-ish.

 

No, it's mentioned as the beginning of space and time, NOT matter. Nobody knows where the matter came from.

 

Then what is this all about?
View attachment 33486 View attachment 33487 View attachment 33488

 

LOL. Now that is comedy. Does it matter that physicists have accepted the BB as a working model for quite some time? Are they idiots? Are they not intelligent?

Of course the BB replaced the Steady State, and now a couple physicists have moved away from the BB in favor of infinity. No beginning, its eternal, always was. Which only shows that the physicists really don't have a clue, that indeed they do not know, unlike the atheists who claim to know something, with certainty, which of course they do not and cannot know, given the limitation of knowledge. Yet they will continue to be liars, lacking integrity, and will continue on with their claims of certainty, where certainty simply doesn't exist. So they are lacking integrity and they are damned liars. Which some of us already knew, the agnostics. Now, put that in your pipe and smoke it.