(February 18, 2012 at 7:42 am)Zen Badger Wrote: More a case of we have no way of knowing what was before the big bang.

Okay, makes sense

(February 18, 2012 at 9:16 am)Nebuloso Wrote: I get the impression from the bolded 'theory' that you are suggesting that the big bang theory is just an idea.

Yes. A very good idea that's probably right, but until it has been proven completely, it remains a theory (which is what you're saying).

(February 18, 2012 at 11:11 am)KichigaiNeko Wrote: Again more proof of the scientific illiteracy of theists.

I'm not a theist, thank you very much (see Religious views: next to my avatar ).

Anyway, I was arguing against what the christian was saying. He brought up the big bang theory as if it's some sort of fact, saying how everything supposedly came out of nothing based on this theory, which is obviously nonsense.

As for scientific illiteracy, most people, whether they're theists or not, don't know much about science (including me, because I'm a programmer, and not a scientist).

Quote:I'm not ignorant of evolution nor natural selection, I do not believe they go hand in hand, evolution of species into other species is not a believable process.

Perhaps the problem there, G-C is that you are simply too fucking stupid? Get smarter.

(February 18, 2012 at 9:16 am)Nebuloso Wrote:

(February 18, 2012 at 6:14 am)Thorham Wrote: According to the big bang theory time, space and matter had a beginning, and this is exactly the outdated view point I was talking about.

I get the impression from the bolded 'theory' that you are suggesting that the big bang theory is just an idea. In science nothing ever goes from theory to fact. There is no amount of evidence that we can have that will graduate the big bang theory to the big bang fact. In science we start with a hypothesis. Once evidence is collected that backs up the hypothesis then it is graduated to theory and that is as far as it goes. Electricity is still 'just a theory' but I would say we have a pretty good understanding of what it is and how it works.

The Big Bang Theory, Evolution, Special Relativity, and General Relativity are some of the strongest and unbreakable theories in science. They are as close to facts as science will allow.

Seems like the bolded emphasis on theory is to remind us that it isn't obvious or settled. As you say, the same is true for other theories but on the other hand the beginnings of everything are in a class by themselves when it comes to being speculative and defying testability. Of course I'm far more interested in what science thinks about cosmology than what the bible has to say, but what science can offer in this realm is very thin broth. A caution against too much swagger regarding the beginnings of everything is particularly warranted.

(February 18, 2012 at 1:30 pm)whateverist Wrote: Seems like the bolded emphasis on theory is to remind us that it isn't obvious or settled.

It was to remind the christian that it's not seen as a fact, because he was implying that it is seen as a fact.

(February 18, 2012 at 12:21 pm)Thorham Wrote:

(February 18, 2012 at 9:16 am)Nebuloso Wrote: I get the impression from the bolded 'theory' that you are suggesting that the big bang theory is just an idea.

Yes. A very good idea that's probably right, but until it has been proven completely, it remains a theory (which is what you're saying).

You do realize your own existence by scientific definition is a theory, right? The Big Bang Theory has been proven but nothing in this world can be proven with 100% accuracy. We have pictures of the universe 500,000 years after the big bang that estimate the universe at roughly 13.7 billion years old and that is within 1% precision meaning it is 99% accurate.

WMAP (about 500,000 years after big bang)

(February 18, 2012 at 1:40 pm)Thorham Wrote:

(February 18, 2012 at 1:30 pm)whateverist Wrote: Seems like the bolded emphasis on theory is to remind us that it isn't obvious or settled.

It was to remind the christian that it's not seen as a fact, because he was implying that it is seen as a fact.

Scientific Theory is not the same thing as the colloquial sense of theory, did you know that?

You need to do your homework if that's what you think the evidence of Evolution is, that it's nothing but abstract theories that "aren't proven 100%" or whatever. Just do yourself a favor and learn about it.

I think it was said elsewhere on the forum....

"Go jump of a building... after all Gravity is Only a Theory"

(February 18, 2012 at 9:21 am)Phil Wrote: When christoholics start in with the "only a theory" crap I just ask them to step off a roof because gravity is just a theory also. Usually they drop the "just a theory" argument.

(February 19, 2012 at 12:44 am)KichigaiNeko Wrote: I think it was said elsewhere on the forum....

"Go jump of a building... after all Gravity is Only a Theory"

Yes, it was said on the previous page by some damn newbie poster.

(February 16, 2012 at 6:35 pm)Forsaken Wrote: Some religionist use the incredibly remarkable and flawless work of architecture found in nature, the amazing systematic design and how each and everything is connected to one another as evidence enough for a supreme being. What are your thoughts on this?

My first thoughts are of natural disasters, disease, and generally I find double standards for appreciation of existence simply sick.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPriOQkKd6k

^Should be a core hymnal.

(February 18, 2012 at 5:58 pm)Nebuloso Wrote: You do realize your own existence by scientific definition is a theory, right?

Right, then I ask: What isn't a theory in science?

(February 18, 2012 at 5:58 pm)Nebuloso Wrote: The Big Bang Theory has been proven

That is hard to believe.

(February 19, 2012 at 12:44 am)KichigaiNeko Wrote: I think it was said elsewhere on the forum....

"Go jump of a building... after all Gravity is Only a Theory"

Gravity exists, I see it's effects every day. How can it be a theory?