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

[comet]

something started it. Unless you are in the nothing camp.

"Science" uses every solution to rule out "smarts" or "universe making a choice". The theists could use this knowledge. But then again, "science" doesn't do a thing does it? The easiest thing to rule out is "nothing" doing it. I think.

Something started what? That means absolutely nothing to me. Stuff was here yesterday and the day before and on back as far as we know. Before there was stuff there was a big bang. Before that we just don't know but I personally can't imagine there isn't another mega scale of things from which singularities are common place. On some level of description, universes probably reside one packed cheek to jowl with its neighbors on all sides. From within any one universe you'll never be able to detect the others for a number of good reasons.

Want to ask what started the multiple universes popping in and out of existence? Why bother, we are in no position to answer the question. Likewise with the question of origins. It is beyond our ken. From the fact that origins are beyond our comprehension, no assumptions follow.

If you don't like pondering the question that's cool. But no need to tell me I can't or worse, shouldn't. The best minds in the world are looking so it must fine for a chump like me. Some people think about sports all day others about their lawn. They are as meaningless to me as space may be to you. Nothing wrong with liking any of them.

But in a way I do agree with you. I really do not go much past "something". I do not know what happened, but "something" is better than "nothing" to me. NO, there is no reason we can't detect other universes from within side this one yet. Saying we can't implies more knowledge than we have today.

[snowtracks]

something started it. Unless you are in the nothing camp.

"Science" uses every solution to rule out "smarts" or "universe making a choice". The theists could use this knowledge. But then again, "science" doesn't do a thing does it? The easiest thing to rule out is "nothing" doing it. I think.

Something started what? That means absolutely nothing to me. Stuff was here yesterday and the day before and on back as far as we know. Before there was stuff there was a big bang. Before that we just don't know but I personally can't imagine there isn't another mega scale of things from which singularities are common place. On some level of description, universes probably reside one packed cheek to jowl with its neighbors on all sides. From within any one universe you'll never be able to detect the others for a number of good reasons.

Want to ask what started the multiple universes popping in and out of existence? Why bother, we are in no position to answer the question. Likewise with the question of origins. It is beyond our ken. From the fact that origins are beyond our comprehension, no assumptions follow.

God has revealed himself through general revelation (nature), science interprets nature; and scripture - scholars, theologians, etc interpret scripture. Below is the belgic confessions that defines the subject. If nature and scripture are correctly and fully interpreted, they will be without contradiction.
Article 2 - How God Makes Himself Known to Us
We know Him by two means: First, by the creation, preservation, and government of the universe; which is before our eyes as a most beautiful book, wherein all creatures, great and small, are as so many letters leading us to perceive clearly the invisible things of God, namely, His eternal power and deity, as the apostle Paul says (Rom 1:20). All these things are sufficient to convict men and leave them without excuse. Second, He makes Himself more clearly and fully known to us by His holy and divine Word as far as is necessary for us in this life, to His glory and our salvation.
http://wscal.edu/about-wsc/welcome-to-ws...onfession/

scripture give information about eschatology. for instance, the present universe: “will pass away with a roar and the elements will be destroyed with intense heat, and the earth and its works will be burned up”, so without this additional revelation, we wouldn’t know that. Science just simply projects the known facts that the 2’nd law of thermo. and dark energy is stretching the fabric of space to the point where the universe goes to near absolute zero (same amount of heat, in more area) when not even the protons are spinning around the atom in around 1 trillion years.

[The Grand Nudger]

the present universe: “will pass away with a roar and the elements will be destroyed with intense heat, and the earth and its works will be burned up”, so without this additional revelation, we wouldn’t know that.

-and with this additional "revelation", we still don't. Yawn. In any case, if there -is- some point at which a correct interpretation of scripture will remove any contradiction to nature then I suggest you get to work fixing your interpretations of scripture. Maybe you should bring that interpretation, or at least wait until you have it - rather than what you've been offering on these boards?

[Cato]

...when not even the protons are spinning around the atom in around 1 trillion years.

When the fuck did protons start spinning around atoms?

[Esquilax]

Article 2 - How God Makes Himself Known to Us
We know Him by two means: First, by the creation, preservation, and government of the universe; which is before our eyes as a most beautiful book, wherein all creatures, great and small, are as so many letters leading us to perceive clearly the invisible things of God, namely, His eternal power and deity, as the apostle Paul says (Rom 1:20). All these things are sufficient to convict men and leave them without excuse. Second, He makes Himself more clearly and fully known to us by His holy and divine Word as far as is necessary for us in this life, to His glory and our salvation.
http://wscal.edu/about-wsc/welcome-to-ws...onfession/

So basically, "everything is proof of god, because I said so." Sorry, you don't get to define evidence into existence by fiat assertion. We know natural methods are sufficient to cause everything in the world to come into existence, there is no trace of divine interference in anything that you can readily point us to (and no, "look at all these things!" is not you pointing at divine interference, it's you being gobsmacked by mundane things. But your incredulity is not evidence for god ) and quoting a bible passage to us does effectively nothing. It all reeks of self reinforcing delusion.

scripture give information about eschatology. for instance, the present universe: “will pass away with a roar and the elements will be destroyed with intense heat, and the earth and its works will be burned up”, so without this additional revelation, we wouldn’t know that. Science just simply projects the known facts that the 2’nd law of thermo. and dark energy is stretching the fabric of space to the point where the universe goes to near absolute zero (same amount of heat, in more area) when not even the protons are spinning around the atom in around 1 trillion years.

But none of what scripture says there is true. The universe is headed toward heat death, which isn't actually a literal name. Your knowledge of physics is fucking terrible, and you think you can tell us what's going to happen?

[snowtracks]

Article 2 - How God Makes Himself Known to Us
We know Him by two means: First, by the creation, preservation, and government of the universe; which is before our eyes as a most beautiful book, wherein all creatures, great and small, are as so many letters leading us to perceive clearly the invisible things of God, namely, His eternal power and deity, as the apostle Paul says (Rom 1:20). All these things are sufficient to convict men and leave them without excuse. Second, He makes Himself more clearly and fully known to us by His holy and divine Word as far as is necessary for us in this life, to His glory and our salvation.
http://wscal.edu/about-wsc/welcome-to-ws...onfession/

So basically, "everything is proof of god, because I said so." Sorry, you don't get to define evidence into existence by fiat assertion. We know natural methods are sufficient to cause everything in the world to come into existence, there is no trace of divine interference in anything that you can readily point us to (and no, "look at all these things!" is not you pointing at divine interference, it's you being gobsmacked by mundane things. But your incredulity is not evidence for god ) and quoting a bible passage to us does effectively nothing. It all reeks of self reinforcing delusion.

scripture give information about eschatology. for instance, the present universe: “will pass away with a roar and the elements will be destroyed with intense heat, and the earth and its works will be burned up”, so without this additional revelation, we wouldn’t know that. Science just simply projects the known facts that the 2’nd law of thermo. and dark energy is stretching the fabric of space to the point where the universe goes to near absolute zero (same amount of heat, in more area) when not even the protons are spinning around the atom in around 1 trillion years.

But none of what scripture says there is true. The universe is headed toward heat death, which isn't actually a literal name. Your knowledge of physics is fucking terrible, and you think you can tell us what's going to happen?

poor esq, needs to be led by the hand again. stated is science's version of heat death but he became confused.

[Alex K]

...when not even the protons are spinning around the atom in around 1 trillion years.

When the fuck did protons start spinning around atoms?

Oh cool, the geocentric version of atomic physics is finally here!

[Surgenator]

poor esq, needs to be led by the hand again. stated is science's version of heat death but he became confused.

Heat death means everything has reached equlibrium and no exchange of energy is possible. It doesn't mean some burning.

[Esquilax]

poor esq, needs to be led by the hand again. stated is science's version of heat death but he became confused.

So, you think that a heat death involves things becoming really hot?

[snowtracks]

poor esq, needs to be led by the hand again. stated is science's version of heat death but he became confused.

So, you think that a heat death involves things becoming really hot?

not exactly, "science.....goes to near absolute zero".