Where did the universe come from? Atheistic origin science has no answer.

[Cyberman]

Again with the "Atheistic Origin Science"? Here's a fun fact:

The Big Bang model was initially proposed by Georges Lemaître - Belgian astronomer, professor of physics and ... Catholic priest!

[daandaan]

OK, pray tell, what scientific laws and principles does the Big Bang theory violate?

cause and effect
conservation of mass-energy

at the time this universe came into existance , there where no physical laws in it ...u never red that ??

so the strawman of trying to apply the 2 nd law of td to the universe coming into existance is bollux.

if i apply the 2 nd law of td to ur god, he is shurely long gone ...died of enthropy

[Anomalocaris]

I'm starting to wonder how you tie your shoes in the morning.

With Velcro . . . and help.

Not sure about his shoes, but his power of retention can certainly use some help from glued on strips of velcro.

[ManMachine]

Where did the universe come from? Atheistic origin science has no answer.

The current “theory” is that the universe came into being from some explosion called the Big Bang. The standard Big Bang theory does not match smoothness of the cosmic background radiation. So the theory of Inflation was added to the standard Big Bang. That is the latest conjecture of modern science.

Now there are many problems with this “answer” to the origin of the universe. If nothing existed before the Big Bang, then the Big Bang violates a number of principle and laws of science. It violates conservation of mass-energy. The energy went from nothing to all the energy of the universe. It violates cause and effect. Nothing never just explodes and becomes something. It violates all observations, since nothing never just explodes into something. It also does not explain the origin of the laws of nature or why there is even order in the universe.

If something existed before the Big Bang, then the origin question is not answered at all. If the universe always existed, then the 2nd law of thermodynamics says that all order disappeared an infinite time ago. But that is not the case. Also there is still no explanation of the origin of the laws of nature or why there is even order in the universe.

You clearly do not understand the theory you are spouting on about.

Try reading up on the actual theory and not basing your thoughts on second hand misrepresentation. Your 'god' gave you a brain, I presume in the vain hope that one day you might use it. That day is now. Stupidity is not a solid Theological starting point, although it does seem to be a popular one.


MM

[Doubting Thomas]

E(initial) = 0
E(final) = all energy of the universe
change in E does not equal 0.

Nothing is the cause of the Big Bang.

You are aware that this also disproves your idea of God creating the universe from nothing, don't you?

[Kayenneh]

daandaan, your posts might have decent content, but frankly your style of writing is so atrocious that I can't read them.

Spelling/Grammar

It's very common for people to start using chatspeak on the internet, as it provides a way to communicate faster by typing less characters. Ex. How r u? The problem with chatspeak is it's meant for simple dialog and this is a discussion forum. So to put it plainly, when you're getting into a debate/discussion here and you use chatspeak, you 'sound' dumb. Obviously we can't hear you, but in our heads you come off as an uneducated idiot. It would be like a professor speaking with ghetto slang words. It doesn't necessarily mean that you are dumb, but you're not giving a good impression. Most people will ignore or laugh at someone who can't use simple spelling or grammar.

Therefore, when you are getting into an discussion, type out all your words and use spell-check. Almost every browser has them built in now, but if you don't have it, open word and check it there. Then, once you've finished typing, read what you wrote. Look for spelling mistakes, typos, missing periods, etc... No one is perfect and people make mistakes all the time. (I'm sure there's a mistake in here somewhere. :/ ) However, if you make the effort to write complete words and complete sentences, people will notice and take you more seriously.

This rule also applies to l33tsp34k, which is the method of using other numbers/characters that look similar to the alphabet in order to chat. However, chat abbreviations like "lol" and "btw" are often acceptable as long as they are not overused and avoided in more formal discussions.

So, work on the spelling, please?

[Jackalope]

E(initial) = 0
E(final) = all energy of the universe
change in E does not equal 0.

Nothing is the cause of the Big Bang.

You are aware that this also disproves your idea of God creating the universe from nothing, don't you?

It also fallaciously assumes that the initial state was zero, and that the net present state is not zero.

[Jackalope]

I'm only new to this forum.

---

The origin of time is an observation. Rejecting it, makes no sense.

---

It's cute that you're trying to use my tactics against me though.

It violates conservation of mass-energy, cause and effect, and other laws and principles of science.

That will come as a complete surprise to the field of cosmology.

I believe you've got a lock on a Nobel Prize.

[Ryantology]

The typical answer to get around the fact that the singularity-big bang model violates the laws of nature is that the laws of nature only came into being a fraction of a second after the big bang.

Of course, that makes the singularity-big bang a supernatural explanation for the universe.

We've already got one Christian retard who doesn't understand how science works. We'll call you if we have another opening.

[Fidel_Castronaut]

Again with the "Atheistic Origin Science"? Here's a fun fact:

The Big Bang model was initially proposed by Georges Lemaître - Belgian astronomer, professor of physics and ... Catholic priest!

Not a true Christian, though, naturally.