(May 21, 2015 at 7:53 am)whateverist Wrote:It's about following the data wherever it might lead - Historical sciences such as astronomy, paleontology, geology oftentimes make inferences to the best explanation of the observed data. For instance cosmology states this: "one second after the Big Bang the mass density of the universe must have been equal, to an accuracy of 15 decimal places, to the critical density where it counterbalanced the expansion rate to produce a flat universe" * - which means if there were any less mass, gravity wouldn’t coalesce the primordial elements to form stars and planets; and if just a smidgen more mass, gravitational collapse would result in a stellar remnant, aka, neutron star.(May 21, 2015 at 2:39 am)snowtracks Wrote: Millenniums before big bang cosmology, scripture stated that the universe had a beginning. Even Einstein put a fudge factor in his relativity mathematics to adhere to the steady-state no beginning model, and later acknowledge it was a mistake due to his philosophical worldview. This is not just and isolated case, science discoveries are validating scripture and that will be continued into the future.
Science will seem to keep validating scripture so long as you insist on viewing the world through scripture validating lenses.
Based on the precision of this cosmological event, it’s a better inference to concluded that this was ’planned’ rather than unplanned. No need to get all nervous about now, even atheist astrophysicist can believe in creation - http://www.worldscientific.com/worldscib....1142/0602
And even Lawrence Krauss (who knew?) acknowledges that when logic is used, creation is viable. https://books.google.com/books?id=gnthuP...re&f=false
* https://edge.org/conversation/the-inflationary-universe
Atheist Credo: A universe by chance that also just happened to admit the observer by chance.