No Big Bang Does what to Atheism?

A spot no larger than the period at the end of a sentence isn't nothing.
So you now know, this didn't come from nothing.

 

You got that right. With you they are equally childish and why most just ignore much of your posts.

But it is not childish for many people who like to debate in an intelligent manner.
Intelligent = not childlike behavior.

 

Those are the hypothesis (fairy tales) held by your side of the argument. Where did it come from?

 

The Big Bang assumes nothing about the time before the Big Bang because we have exactly zero evidence of anything from that period. Science does not in any way claim nothing ever existed.

 

Matter must have always existed given that it can be neither created nor destroyed.

 

But gee, just yesterday or the day before you commented that I am playing the role real well. Now you complain about me playing the role.. make up your mind. Besides, you also commented that we all must do exactly like the Lord has planned for us and that there is nothing that we can do to alter any of those things that are planned by the Good Lord. Try being a little more consistent.

 

Atheism is a lack of belief in a deity.

Nothing more.

Nothing less.

Atheism does not address cosmological arguments. You cite one paper and treat it like a consensus, which is deliberately false. The Cylic Model of the universe has existed for quite some time. So what is your point?

 

The point is that Atheists do address cosmological arguments. If not, then they would never speak about cosmological arguments on this forum.

 

Dictators also have mustaches, so mustaches must have something to do with genocide.

If not, then they would simply shave their mustaches. So obviously correlation = causation!

 

The "we" is our civilization in its collective knowledge.

As to evidence, considering the enormous volume of cosmological evidence including thousands of pages of mathematics, the volumes of observational evidence supporting that math, the accuracy of prediction of the theory, AND most of its availability on the internet, I suggest you do your own research into the evidence. Of course, only going to creation science sources will not give you an accurate basis for assessment, but it will suffice to support your lack of belief in the science.

But no matter comes from nothing. Yet another bit of unscientific nonsense. heard of a guy called Einstein?

Matter comes from energy. Energy in the case of the big bang is theorized to come from infinitesimally small singularity. The math supports this. OTOH, if one is a proponent of the M-theory (actually an hypothesis since it cannot be tested as yet) then it came from two branes colliding.

 

I agree that something merely unknown is not necessarily supernatural.

OTOH, once you get to a condition where the foundations of our reality no longer apply, that is supernatural.

No space, time, or matter is beyond the natural universe.

 

Please do your own research. Oh wait, of course you won't.

I have no idea how the event came about, and science offers up only hypotheses, none of which are as yet testable.
Demanding such is yet another indication of your lack of real understanding of the subject.

Of course, theists seize upon what is not yet known, while ignoring what is known, to reconcile their perceptions of god with both reality and knowledge.

You persist in this ultimate "god of the gaps" argument, demanding evidence, while blissfully content in the inability to provide ANY direct scientific evidence of the existence of a mythical invisible creator.

 

If that is what you want to believe, then I am not going to argue with you about it.

 

Yes, a singularity is beyond the current scope of human knowledge. Still, it is not merely a concept that was made up from whole cloth in someone's imagination, as are magical myths of Gods who bend the laws of nature to their whims.

 

Nothing would happen. I'm not an atheist, but the Big Bang Theory is not a requirement for atheism. All the above is is people just playing with equations.

 

Ya, it was pointed out at the beginning of the thread that atheists have nothing to do with the Big Bang theory but yet 9 pages of blather followed.....and atheism still has nothing to do with the BB...

 

It has nothing to do with my understanding. It has to do with hypotheses and an inability to test those hypotheses. According to some scientists, if it can not be tested then it is not scientific and is invalid. See here: http://www.nature.com/news/scientific-method-defend-the-integrity-of-physics-1.16535 This so-called "mythical invisible creator" might well fall within the concepts brought on by string theory wherein things of the invisible nature are considered as holding a grain of truth.

 

If one had that answer they'd be almost infinitely famous.
So I don't have a side, because I can not say which side(s), perhaps there is more than 2 options, is the correct one.

- - - Updated - - -

All thoughts/therories are, fairy tales. (your words).

 

No inconsistencies what so ever. You are good at the role of childish posts. I am not complaining about that role, just how many won't play along.

Yes, according to the christian belief, no one can do anything God doesn't know. Now you claiming your actions are a result of God telling you to do this, not likely. So the voices you hear aren't coming from God. You may need to ask your voices more specific questions to get the real identity.
Now will you change? Only God knows at this point, according to the belief. If God has chosen you as a spokesperson, you will change. If God hasn't chosen you, you will continue making a mockery of what it is you think he is instructing you to do.

 

Yes, untestable "theories" are actually hypotheses. The confusion is in the indiscriminant use of the word theory to apply to such hypotheses.

However, your demand of evidence of what came before is most definitely an indication of your lack of understanding.

I agree with the article. "elegance will suffice" is nothing more than a philosophical rationale that runs counter to the scientific method.

Which is why string theory, the multi-verse et.al. are nothing more than hypotheses at best.

Of course the argument that there might be a grain of truth to be found, is consistent with the "elegance" of the mathematical constructs required to define such hypotheses, but even that is nothing more than deductive reasoning.

 

Truer words may have never been spoken.

 

Most Catholics still cling to the notion of Jesus living at about the same time as Fred Flintstone and Dino. The new pope has obviously shaken them up a bit.

 

Ahh you mean like what is found in 1 john 4: 1 - 3. Got it. I do that quite frequently, and am satisfied with the resulting information that I receive. You might also want to try it sometime.

 

I wasn't the one who made the remark about books not being able to talk. I'm not sure how that's ME making the red herring and not YOU, but okay.

What do you mean they betray the position? And I'm glad you finally understand the difference between "nothing" and "everything". Because the singularity that the Big Bang started from contained ALL the matter in the Universe, it literally was everything. So, it'd be kind of silly to call it "nothing".

 

In effect then you are denouncing string theory.. Got it.