Big Bang Theory

[Zen Badger]

That answers exactly nothing. Atheism is not scientific. Atheism is just a narrow-minded belief that nobody can justify in reason.

No, Atheism is an absence of belief in something for which there is no evidence. Nothing more.

Thusly it is very scientific.

When you have some evidence for your god boy we'll reconsider.

[fr0d0]

Atheism is an absence of belief in something for which there is no evidence. Nothing more.

Well I lol'd

[jonb]

You missed the qualifier. Absolute PHYSICAL beginning. There can be no absolute beginning. Nothing cannot cause something to exist.
The PHYSICAL Universe BEGAN to exist. It needs a non-physical causal agency.
Got it?

But the big bang is a state, and as seems likely it has a cause that was inngendered by the state that existed, so it cannot even be said to be the beginning, but merely a transition, It seems you are trying to make out the big bang as being the moment of creation, but the big bag does not fit that as there was already a physical existence, and in string theory there are many other universes with physical existence that effect this one, that are not part of the big bang state that this universe went through.

The problem with your position as I understand it is that you are trying to justify your religion, with natural philosophy, but they have very different systems of logic, and as such there are no proven connections, to say this thing in this one, 'creation' could be the same as that state in the other the 'big bang' is a hopeless bit of silliness.

I have not as yet come across, a scientific theory about how primary existence began, although there is some speculation that there is no primal cause.

Science can show, the world is older than six or ten thousand years, so as such we can assert a literal interpretation of the bable is an untenable position within science.

In short you can assert there is a god, but you cannot use science to prove it. As such your series of assertions on this thread are meaningless.

[Ben Davis]

In short you can assert there is a god, but you cannot use science to prove it. As such your series of assertions on this thread are meaningless.

Not to mention that the interpretation of the theories on which TMs position lies has been thoroughly debunked, We covered it all here: http://atheistforums.org/thread-15324.html

To corrupt a meme, "That theory, it does not mean what you think it means"

[Cyberman]

This guy is fstdt material, someone with an acc there, share his 'wisdom'

I'm spoiled for choice. It's the very definition of "an embarrassment of riches".

[Truth Matters]

[quote='Minimalist' pid='360444' dateline='1352434834']

That's what their fucking bible says, Stim.


Apparently their invisible sky-daddy just winked everything into being.

What kind of asshole would fall for such silly shit?

Hey Spanky.
The subject is God, not sky daddy. God is not physically dimensioned or located. Got the concept? Then get honest about it.

What's unbelievable with a real and fully sufficient causal agency?
What's your plausible alternative?


When I say "sky-daddy" it is only because I am still in the polite phase, asshole. ( That phase just ended, btw.) Your fucking god is no more plausible than any of the other gods invented by humanity so get that through your thick jesus-freak skull.

Theists invent a god to give simple solutions to complex problems. You are obviously satisfied with that. But the Big Bang Theory says that "About 15 billion years ago a tremendous explosion started the expansion of the universe. This explosion is known as the Big Bang. At the point of this event all of the matter and energy of space was contained at one point.

Now...I know this is difficult for a mind which is content to have a bearded old man winking everything into existence but the Big Bang is not nothing. It is EVERYTHING. All matter and energy.

So kindly blow jesus out your ass.

Spanky, again nobody believes in a bearded old man located in the sky. God is not physical
Why must you continue lying about what we believe, building a straw-man God to tear down? Can't you honestly engage? Is that beyond your capacities?

Where are your arguments to justify your Atheist belief?
Where is you evidence to justify your Atheist belief?
Where is your sufficient causal agency or the PHYSICAL dimension (Universe) that science has proven began to exist?

Throwing a hissy fit and building straw-men is not an argument

---

That answers exactly nothing. Atheism is not scientific. Atheism is just a narrow-minded belief that nobody can justify in reason.

No, Atheism is an absence of belief in something for which there is no evidence. Nothing more.

Thusly it is very scientific.

When you have some evidence for your god boy we'll reconsider.

Atheism is not a belief position? Really?

Do Atheists not hold a belief position on whether or not God exists? Really? Answer the question.

Badger, those phony Atheist definitions won't work with me. Atheists need to justify their beliefs as beliefs.
Atheists don't 'lack a belief'. Rocks lack a belief. Humans hold beliefs. Atheists believe no God exists.

[Tnmusicman]

Hey Spanky.
The subject is God, not sky daddy. God is not physically dimensioned or located. Got the concept? Then get honest about it.

What's unbelievable with a real and fully sufficient causal agency?
What's your plausible alternative?


When I say "sky-daddy" it is only because I am still in the polite phase, asshole. ( That phase just ended, btw.) Your fucking god is no more plausible than any of the other gods invented by humanity so get that through your thick jesus-freak skull.

Theists invent a god to give simple solutions to complex problems. You are obviously satisfied with that. But the Big Bang Theory says that "About 15 billion years ago a tremendous explosion started the expansion of the universe. This explosion is known as the Big Bang. At the point of this event all of the matter and energy of space was contained at one point.

Now...I know this is difficult for a mind which is content to have a bearded old man winking everything into existence but the Big Bang is not nothing. It is EVERYTHING. All matter and energy.

So kindly blow jesus out your ass.

Spanky, again nobody believes in a bearded old man located in the sky. God is not physical
Why must you continue lying about what we believe, building a straw-man God to tear down? Can't you honestly engage? Is that beyond your capacities?

Where are your arguments to justify your Atheist belief?
Where is you evidence to justify your Atheist belief?
Where is your sufficient causal agency or the PHYSICAL dimension (Universe) that science has proven began to exist?

Throwing a hissy fit and building straw-men is not an argument

---

No, Atheism is an absence of belief in something for which there is no evidence. Nothing more.

Thusly it is very scientific.

When you have some evidence for your god boy we'll reconsider.

Atheism is not a belief position? Really?

Do Atheists not hold a belief position on whether or not God exists? Really? Answer the question.

Badger, those phony Atheist definitions won't work with me. Atheists need to justify their beliefs as beliefs.
Atheists don't 'lack a belief'. Rocks lack a belief. Humans hold beliefs. Atheists believe no God exists.

Truth, I don't believe our boy Spanky has much to say. It's funny how certain members of this forum (when they enter non-polite mode) just up the amount of swearing at you and calling God the cleverest darn things ( or in some cases "what we can DO with our God"). Do they really think its an effective insult? Hah, you just have to laugh because they don't know how much they are helping you ( and me ). I expect,favorable to us or not, the "favors" will continue to be heaved in our direction (and its okay, idnit?).

[Truth Matters]

You missed the qualifier. Absolute PHYSICAL beginning. There can be no absolute beginning. Nothing cannot cause something to exist.
The PHYSICAL Universe BEGAN to exist. It needs a non-physical causal agency.
Got it?

But the big bang is a state, and as seems likely it has a cause that was inngendered by the state that existed, so it cannot even be said to be the beginning, but merely a transition, It seems you are trying to make out the big bang as being the moment of creation, but the big bag does not fit that as there was already a physical existence, and in string theory there are many other universes with physical existence that effect this one, that are not part of the big bang state that this universe went through.

The problem with your position as I understand it is that you are trying to justify your religion, with natural philosophy, but they have very different systems of logic, and as such there are no proven connections, to say this thing in this one, 'creation' could be the same as that state in the other the 'big bang' is a hopeless bit of silliness.

I have not as yet come across, a scientific theory about how primary existence began, although there is some speculation that there is no primal cause.

Science can show, the world is older than six or ten thousand years, so as such we can assert a literal interpretation of the bable is an untenable position within science.

In short you can assert there is a god, but you cannot use science to prove it. As such your series of assertions on this thread are meaningless.

Jonb,
The 'Big Bang' is the absolute physical beginning. This is simply unavoidable. That's exactly what the models predict and fully confirm. The fact that many committed philosophical Naturalists (Atheists) in science desperately want to obscure the absolute physical beginning has no bearing on the fact.

These wild metaphysical speculations offered by committed Atheists in science such as String, M, quantum loop, oscillation, no boundaries models all have failed to avoid the absolute physical beginning of our Universe. None have any empirical evidence or have enjoyed any verification success. They exist exclusively in the minds of theoretical physicists committed to Atheism / Naturalism. Ironically, M-Theory multiverse models exist as a last line of defense against the Design Inference from Fine Tuning confirmations of the 1970's (another extremely potent line of evidence for Design)

There is no scientific theory of the causal conditions of the physical dimensions because it's fundamentally beyond the scope of science. It's simply inaccessible to the scientific endeavor. Physical Science stops cold at the beginning of physical existence - the beginning of our physical dimension. This does not mean reason needs to stop. We know a rational order (an property of mind btw) is imposed on the Universe. Ironically, this is the philosophical assumption upon which Christians rested their development of the Empirical method (Francis Bacon, etc).

The Bible does not present us with a 6000 year old earth. That is simply a modern construct based on a wooden literal interpretation on what is obviously allegory. It's a shame that so many hold to this notion. Heck, we are still in the seventh day - it never ended. It's obviously a reference to era's.

---

[quote='Minimalist' pid='360444' dateline='1352434834']

That's what their fucking bible says, Stim.



Theists invent a god to give simple solutions to complex problems. You are obviously satisfied with that. But the Big Bang Theory says that "About 15 billion years ago a tremendous explosion started the expansion of the universe. This explosion is known as the Big Bang. At the point of this event all of the matter and energy of space was contained at one point.

Now...I know this is difficult for a mind which is content to have a bearded old man winking everything into existence but the Big Bang is not nothing. It is EVERYTHING. All matter and energy.

So kindly blow jesus out your ass.

Actually, the Big Bang event was around 13.7 - 13.8 B years ago.
The physical science of Big Bang ends at the singularity - when all matter and energy come into existence.

Spanky, I realize you have been duped by those you trust, but there was no 'single point' in space where some infinitely dense - zero sized 'pellet' existed and exploded. THERE WAS NO SPACE!. Physical space, time and matter began at the physical boundary we call the singularity.

You need to embrace reality. Science matters. Wild metaphysical stories told by committed Atheists in science don't matter.

---

[quote='jonb' pid='360571' dateline='1352465161']
In short you can assert there is a god, but you cannot use science to prove it. As such your series of assertions on this thread are meaningless.

Not to mention that the interpretation of the theories on which TMs position lies has been thoroughly debunked, We covered it all here: http://atheistforums.org/thread-15324.html

To corrupt a meme, "That theory, it does not mean what you think it means"

Then actually debunk me - don't just claim it happened somewhere with some link. Tell me exactly where I am wrong on the science?
Try to debunk my arguments and watch how badly things end for you. I guarantee it.

[Annik]

Bitches don't know about my agnostic atheism. Lol

[Truth Matters]

[quote='Truth Matters' pid='360604' dateline='1352474626']

Truth, I don't believe our boy Spanky has much to say. It's funny how certain members of this forum (when they enter non-polite mode) just up the amount of swearing at you and calling God the cleverest darn things ( or in some cases "what we can DO with our God"). Do they really think its an effective insult? Hah, you just have to laugh because they don't know how much they are helping you ( and me ). I expect,favorable to us or not, the "favors" will continue to be heaved in our direction (and its okay, idnit?).

Yeah, Spanky sure is disappointing. That vile mouth doesn't have any teeth. There's no bite to that boy. He can't seem to get up off the floor and muster a defense.

Minimalist mind?

---

Bitches don't know about my agnostic atheism. Lol

We understand your excuses perfectly. You are Atheist until you are asked for evidence and arguments to defend your belief position, then you hide behind Agnosticism, trying to exempt yourself from any burden to justify your Atheist belief position.

You really think this is my first rodeo with Atheism? You really think I'm naive to the sophistry and phony definitions Atheists employ?