(June 20, 2014 at 4:34 am)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote: I'm not buying the Big Bang Theory because it's silly. The quantum foam theory is most likely closer to the truth. That's because we are almost certain that once hydrogen forms it clumps together into giant balls and goes nuclear to create stars. And then the stars cook up the heavier elements. That process wouldn't have happened under the Big Bang.

Skepticism is fine, but in this case, most of the really smart people out there who know what they're talking about agree with the Big Bang, and your reason for rejecting it (merely because it's silly) is not a good reason at all.

(June 20, 2014 at 7:08 am)Irrational Wrote: Skepticism is fine, but in this case, most of the really smart people out there who know what they're talking about agree with the Big Bang, and your reason for rejecting it (merely because it's silly) is not a good reason at all.

That's not strictly true.....being objective about it the Big Bang is a bit of an outdated model from what I have read....some observable phenomena don't add up like not enough mass and the uniformity of the background radiation , which should differ by location. The BB model explains most things but it's only a "best fit" at the moment with current knowledge....but brave scientists are shoulder to the wheel.
It's good to be skeptical about everything...even the Big Bang . Skeptism is the sign of an enquiring mind and is the basis for science itself

(June 20, 2014 at 7:25 am)vodkafan Wrote:

(June 20, 2014 at 7:08 am)Irrational Wrote: Skepticism is fine, but in this case, most of the really smart people out there who know what they're talking about agree with the Big Bang, and your reason for rejecting it (merely because it's silly) is not a good reason at all.

That's not strictly true.....being objective about it the Big Bang is a bit of an outdated model from what I have read....some observable phenomena don't add up like not enough mass and the uniformity of the background radiation , which should differ by location. The BB model explains most things but it's only a "best fit" at the moment with current knowledge....but brave scientists are shoulder to the wheel.
It's good to be skeptical about everything...even the Big Bang . Skeptism is the sign of an enquiring mind and is the basis for science itself

Either way, rejecting it because it sounds silly is not a sign of skepticism.

(June 19, 2014 at 10:58 am)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote: Well why don't you just go with God did it through magic? It makes as much sense as the Big Bang and it makes for a better story.

Tell me what part of "God did it through magic" is comparable to a rapid inflation of spacetime which has been mathematically modelled to a high degree of accuracy (given the time scales), exclusively supported through multiple lines of independent evidence (expansion of spacetime as evidenced by the universal recession of all galaxies (barring galactic clusters) and the cosmic background radiation)?

Quote:Maybe you can give a synopsis of what was in the ball that went "bang". Catholic theories are fascinating.

You are a moron. No one says it was a "ball". The only thing I can see where you got that from is from those CGI renderings of the Big Bang which are supposed to be taken as an artists impression to try and convey a non-intuitive concept.
Anyway, what you're talking about is what is called a "singularity". You clearly don't realize physicists and cosmologists don't really take seriously the singularity result of some of their current math. The reasons are 2-fold:

-Precedence: Previous instances where singularities cropped up in our models all turned out to be because of the misapplication of some theory at some scale.

-Relativity: We know that the reason this particular singularity shows up because General Relativity doesn't work with Quantum Mechanics at the moment. Hence why we need a working theory of quantum gravity.

We're not coming at this blind, you are just a moron.

(June 19, 2014 at 6:59 pm)Lek Wrote: If I know God, and a billion other people know God, I consider that pretty good evidence for God. If God is supernatural, and you look for proof only by natural means you won't find him. I can understand why you consider the existence of God to be illogical, but it's hard to convince someone who knows God that he really doesn't know him.

I guess those Romans had good evidence for their gods, given how many people were worshipping them at one point.

(June 19, 2014 at 6:59 pm)Lek Wrote: If I know God, and a billion other people know God, I consider that pretty good evidence for God.

Lek , you had to be taught that you know God by other people with the same belief. If you had been born in Somalia or somewhere your parents would have made you believe in Allah. If you had been born in Israel you would not be a Christian either. Born in India you might believe in the Hindu pantheon of gods. What makes you so sure that your belief is true? All these religions strongly believe they are the true religion and all others are false.

options:
All religions are equally true
All religions are equally false
Only my religion is true


I gues where I am going with this is you cant trust belief or faith

What an argument for God consists of:

Watching a glass of water pour over the table after you knock it over... realizing it would have never moved had you not knocked it... and that you would have not knocked it had you not been distracted thinking about Jesus being the most well behaved child ever... and you wouldn't have been distracted thinking about that had you not stumbled on "Aliens in the ancient world" or something of another on the "History" channel an hour ago... and what would have never happened if... but that needed _____ to cause it to happen, and that needed... and all way back to the Big Bang... what caused that???? GOD?? End of argument.

---

Another argument:

Humans design things. Humans look well equipped with mechanical functions. Since I don't understand how evolutionary theory concisely explains all that but can see that my Legos don't move themselves, and needed an Unmoved Lego Builder, and since humans are....so that means... GOD??? End of argument.

(June 20, 2014 at 7:08 am)Irrational Wrote:

(June 20, 2014 at 4:34 am)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote: I'm not buying the Big Bang Theory because it's silly. The quantum foam theory is most likely closer to the truth. That's because we are almost certain that once hydrogen forms it clumps together into giant balls and goes nuclear to create stars. And then the stars cook up the heavier elements. That process wouldn't have happened under the Big Bang.

Skepticism is fine, but in this case, most of the really smart people out there who know what they're talking about agree with the Big Bang, and your reason for rejecting it (merely because it's silly) is not a good reason at all.

Countless people believe in Noah's flood but it's not true. Based on the evidence Americans aren't very smart about a lot of things so claiming that the Big Bang is true because a lot of people believe it isn't a wise thing to do. Hell, most of them don't even know which country they live in or where it is.

Chances are I can get you to admit that the Big Bang is silly by asking you a series of questions.

That there are alot of them doesn't matter, that they are intelligent and well informed does. Bonus points if they can communicate the justifications for their conclusions adequetely. If you're going to try and wield that hammer at least hold it right ffs.

Well, I don't know about anyone else but I'd love to see these questions.

Besides which, even if we admitted the BB is silly, what then? We get to vote on reality now?