Science Increasingly Makes the Case for God

That's a stupid (*)(*)(*)(*)ing question. Humanity, in it's study of the universe, has discovered that it had a beginning. The Big Bang. You familiar with it?

 

I am familiar with the Big Bang Theory. It is obvious that you are not, since you think that it is a creation theory.

You do not speak for humanity -- only for those voices that reside within your own mind,

 

Another dodge and non answer. I haven't made a claim about the OP. You did.
Now put up or shut up.

Sixth or seventh dodge or non answer in 3... 2... 1...

 

How are you defining "creation theory"? To the best of our cumulative scientific knowledge there was nothing (not even space or time) before the Big Bang, so I suppose to a certain degree that could be labeled "creation". And while I have my own theories as to what caused it, that is not what's on the table right now.

 

But that is Reality, then, which man can explain, isn't it?

Truth explains Reality,
Truth is the image of Reality.
Truth is born out of Reality.

For mankind, Truth and Reality are the same thing, because one explains the other, and images the other, and men can not tell one from the other.
That is the Trinity.

 

Your truth and my truth is immaterial to what is The Truth.

You and I could both be wrong.
Truth is always exactly what images the Reality that has past.

 

There are plenty of things science cannot explain. Funding? LOL! What a lousy excuse.

Where did I claim to be more qualified to answer such questions? I didn't.....nice try.

 

Do you agree that Gen 1:1 supports the Big Bang idea, that the universe did not always exist as once thought before 1940AD???

 

You are incorrect. To the best of our knowledge, all of the matter and energy that currently exists in the observable Universe existed within an infinitely compact singularity at the moment in time when expansion began. Whatever existed prior to that moment is not observable. The assumption of ex nihilo creation of the Universe is not a scientific hypothesis. That is merely a remnant of ancient creation myths. No aspect of the Big Bang Theory presumes that our Universe was created out of nothing.

 

What specific 'knowledge' is the 'best' that we have? It is strange to see an educated person such as yourself use an ambiguous term such as 'best' when describing "knowledge"

 

Doomsday, science isn't trying to explain pixies and bigfoot. Well, not outside the field of psychiatry. All the funding in the world wouldn't change that, either. Again, the only scientific discipline with an interest would be psychiatry - and even they don't care about the pixies - they're only interested in the person who thinks pixies exist.

nice try what? asking a question you couldn't answer?

 

That either or both of us could both be wrong in our perspectives is a given.

As for Truth "imaging" past reality, considering that said "imaging" is a function of human perception subject to human interpretation, your Truth is necessarily "tainted" by individual subjectivity.

 

Seems there are no scientific calculations centered on the probability of the fundamental forces of our universe being in their specific balance. At least none that I can find.

Wonder how the OP arrived at his numbers? But of course, in your world the burden of proof is not on the one making the original spurious claim that you "support", but on those that can readily identify "nonsense".

Like I said before, the probability of the fundamental forces of our universe being in their particular balance are exactly 100%. A small fact that seems to elude you.

 

Humans are capable of making intelligent inferences of past physical events via observation, but we are not capable of inferring what may exist beyond the event horizon of a singularity. Any other words of mine that you'd like to nitpick? If so, feel free to do so.

 

That "observation" you speak about.... are you suggesting that some people who make inferences about "past physical events via observation" have actually observed that past events? Or are you suggesting that those people are speaking an opinion about those past physical events? How is it possible for someone living today to make an observation regarding an event that happened 2000 years ago or even 14 billion years ago? Wouldn't such observations be better labeled as conjectures as opposed to observations?

 

Look up "inference". Then, perhaps you will gain a better understanding of what I said. You might also want to study up on cause and effect.

 

I have a good understanding of the term 'inference'... no need to look it up. When did we discuss "cause and effect"?

 

I understand that it is difficult for some folks to discern the difference between an educated guess based upon evidence and wild-eyed speculation. That's okay. Humanity gets by just fine with many of it's members being unable to grasp such nuanced concepts.

 

No, Truth is an ideal outside of the human interpretation, and yet available us if we accept it, and see it.
Truth exists whether we exist or do not exist.

 

I also understand that it is difficult for some to understand that when debating/discussing things of this nature, the usual intent is to convince the other party that your ideology is the correct ideology. That attempt at convincing must be accompanied by either evidence or argument that will compel the mind of the second party to accept the assertions or evidence presented as true. You have failed to convince me that either your assertions or any evidence you might have submitted are sufficient to compel my mind to accept them as true.

 

I really couldn't care less what your personal beliefs are. Believe whatever makes you happy.

 

Do you suppose that Energy had to pre-exist the Big Bang in the absence of Matter, that afterwards appeared, in accord with Einstein's E = mC^2?

 

If Truth cannot be interpreted by humans, then how can it be recognized and seen by humans?

Ideals are human constructs to begin with, so an ideal outside of our interpretation or understanding can't be an ideal but could be a fantasy.

 

I have no idea what existed prior to the Big Bang. I suppose that I could suppose anything that pleases me, but I'd have no means by which to justify my supposition.

 

Thank you for that unneeded permission, as I will continue believing what makes me happy with or without your blessings.