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

[Wyrd of Gawd]

Well to really know I have to consult the pope. Because the pope is Christ's representative on earth. And the pope has a Vatican astronomer who says:

http://www.vaticanobservatory.org/

Seems legit.

[snowtracks]

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.

Wrong. All it means is we don't have a good answer at this time. Making up a god to fill the gap in our knowledge is a proven failed option. I do realize ambiguity tolerance, and the NEED for cognitive closure can be strong. It's about psychology, not science, or religion.

the U. came into existence, therefore it has a cause. there is only two possibilities as to the cause's nature: non-personal, or personal. the U. is an effect, get used to it.

[Esquilax]

the U. came into existence, therefore it has a cause. there is only two possibilities as to the cause's nature: non-personal, or personal. the U. is an effect, get used to it.

Look up "fallacy of composition."

[Mudhammam]

Wrong. All it means is we don't have a good answer at this time. Making up a god to fill the gap in our knowledge is a proven failed option. I do realize ambiguity tolerance, and the NEED for cognitive closure can be strong. It's about psychology, not science, or religion.

the U. came into existence, therefore it has a cause. there is only two possibilities as to the cause's nature: non-personal, or personal. the U. is an effect, get used to it.

And obviously, like everything else in nature, including the currently unknown species that human beings evolved from, it was a non-personal mechanism.

[snowtracks]

---

---

Wrong. All it means is we don't have a good answer at this time. Making up a god to fill the gap in our knowledge is a proven failed option.

---

I do realize ambiguity tolerance, and the NEED for cognitive closure can be strong. It's about psychology, not science, or religion.

This might be the most profound observation of the last ten pages. We're evolved to make best fit hypotheses, the caveman who decided that the twitching orange and black thing could be a creeper or a tigers tail but that without enough evidence he couldn't say did not live as long as the one who hypothesised a tiger and ran away.

One reason science can be so counter intuitive.

---

[My imaginary friend is GOD]

For the love of... whatever the fuck you love...

WHY is there still activity on this thread? WHY is it 85 pages long? I just do not understand.

[Rahul]

atheist use the God-gap argument, not theist. a presuppositional belief that God doesn't exist assumes that science will eventually explain what is not yet understood. there doesn't exist any empirically testable observation that science will eventually fill in the gap.

Bppht. Weak. You're trying to turn the tables on your own failing concepts. Sounds like a last ditch, desperate effort to delay the inevitable.

Science continues to fill gaps in our knowledge every year without fail. It's well documented and easily proven.

[Rampant.A.I.]

This might be the most profound observation of the last ten pages. We're evolved to make best fit hypotheses, the caveman who decided that the twitching orange and black thing could be a creeper or a tigers tail but that without enough evidence he couldn't say did not live as long as the one who hypothesised a tiger and ran away.

One reason science can be so counter intuitive.[/hide]

atheist use the God-gap argument, not theist. a presuppositional belief that God doesn't exist assumes that science will eventually explain what is not yet understood. there doesn't exist any empirically testable observation that science will eventually fill in the gap.

I think you need to look up the word "presuppositional"

Specifically the type your arguments are based on:

"Presuppositionalism is a school of Christian apologetics that believes the Christian faith is the only basis for rational thought. It presupposes that the Bible is divine revelation and attempts to expose flaws in other worldviews. It claims that apart from presuppositions, one could not make sense of any human experience, and there can be no set of neutral assumptions from which to reason with a non-Christian.[1]"

"Critics of presuppositional apologetics claim that it is logically invalid because it begs the question of the "truth" of Christianity and the non-"truth" of other worldviews."

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presuppos...pologetics

[Revelation777]

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.

Looks like a logical post. Why was this person banned?

[tor]

Yes why? We demand justice. Isn't that right Revelation?