Luca
Master Statesman
Posts: 1,317
|
Post by Luca on Aug 3, 2020 11:10:21 GMT -8
Even if you were, it doesn't mean you were wrong.
Your best guess is as defensible as anybody else's right now.
|
|
|
|
Post by vilepagan on Aug 3, 2020 12:41:20 GMT -8
If you don’t like the word "guessing", we could substitute the word "theorizing". There is no proof for a multiverse, multiple dimensions, big bangs followed by big crashes, etc. These are theories based on available evidence but are not demonstrable. Possibly true, possibly not. The difference being that Cosmology has theories that follow the available evidence while Theism doesn't have any available evidence, just faith. Faith can be a noble thing but as a way of looking at the universe I think it leaves a bit to be desired. I trust the method based on evidence as a way of determining how the universe works. |
|
Credo
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,242
|
Post by Credo on Aug 3, 2020 13:27:01 GMT -8
Since the Hydroxy thread took a turn in this direction, it deserves its own thread.
To the fine points previously made by Luca, I will post these two videos I have used in my classes, which address the classical First (or uncaused) Cause argument, Big Bang cosmology, and the more recent Multiverse theories of origins.
Those who believe God created the universe are intellectually honest enough to admit that they do so on the basis of faith. But those who believe in the multiverse are also keeping the faith. They just don’t admit it.
- Brian Keating, Professor of Physics at the University of California, San Diego
|
|
|
|
Post by ProfessorFate on Aug 3, 2020 14:49:46 GMT -8
If you don’t like the word "guessing", we could substitute the word "theorizing". There is no proof for a multiverse, multiple dimensions, big bangs followed by big crashes, etc. These are theories based on available evidence but are not demonstrable. Possibly true, possibly not. The difference being that Cosmology has theories that follow the available evidence while Theism doesn't have any available evidence, just faith. Faith can be a noble thing but as a way of looking at the universe I think it leaves a bit to be desired. There IS no "available evidence" about where the fuel for the "Big Bang" came from. You make the common mistake that most atheists make...you haven't gone back far enough. We are searching for the original building block of all existence here. If your original building block wasn't created, and didn't evolve from anything else, then where did it come from? But if it did evolve from, or was created by something else, then by definition it can't BE the original building block of all existence, so you have to go further back until you find it. Once you have finally piloted your time machine back to the real original building block of all existence you will find one of two possibilities: #1. That original building block, or #2. God At that point , the question is - where did what you found (#1 or #2) come from? If you found #1, the only answer is...It always was. If you found #2, the only answer is...He always was. Now you tell me how either one of those answers is "more scientific" than the other. |
|
|
|
Post by ProfessorFate on Aug 3, 2020 15:00:13 GMT -8
As I just posted in another thread (before I saw this one)
This was answering a Vile Pagan post.
|
|
thefrog
Eminence Grise
Posts: 1,819
|
Post by thefrog on Aug 3, 2020 15:51:26 GMT -8
I've thought about this quite often and have debated it with my significant other (whom is a Cathlolic; I was raised Episcopalian) and I often wonder, do we even have the ability to contemplate the moment before the Big Bang?
|
|
Bick
Administrator 
Posts: 6,903
|
Post by Bick on Aug 3, 2020 17:46:32 GMT -8
Frog... You need to look at the thread Luca started about this topic.
I forgot the name of the thread,but it will make your head spin
|
|
MDDad
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,816
|
Post by MDDad on Aug 3, 2020 17:51:52 GMT -8
I just always assumed that the 20 minutes before the Big Bang were called the Big Foreplay.
|
|
thefrog
Eminence Grise
Posts: 1,819
|
Post by thefrog on Aug 3, 2020 17:54:49 GMT -8
Frog... You need to look at the thread Luca started about this topic. I forgot the name of the thread,but it will make your head spin I’ll try and find it. However, the law already makes my head spin... |
|
RSM789
Eminence Grise
Posts: 2,287
|
Post by RSM789 on Aug 3, 2020 19:15:56 GMT -8
I trust the method based on evidence as a way of determining how the universe works. The conversation is not about how the universe works, but rather about how the universe started, whether by a supreme being or not. How the universe works does not tell us how the process was originally put into motion. The big bang is not proof no God, nor is it proof of God. You could make an argument for either, but both rely on faith. |
|
davidsf
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 5,252
|
Post by davidsf on Aug 3, 2020 20:17:46 GMT -8
The difference being that Cosmology has theories that follow the available evidence while Theism doesn't have any available evidence, just faith. Faith can be a noble thing but as a way of looking at the universe I think it leaves a bit to be desired. There IS no "available evidence" about where the fuel for the "Big Bang" came from. You make the common mistake that most athiests make...you haven't gone back far enough. We are searching for the original building block of all existence here. If your original building block wasn't created, and didn't evolve from anything else, then where did it come from? But if it did evolve from, or was created by something else, then by definition it can't BE the original building block of all existence, so you have to go further back until you find it. Once you have finally piloted your time machine back to the real original building block of all existence you will find one of two possibilities: #1. That original building block, or #2. God At that point , the question is - where did what you found (#1 or #2) come from? If you found #1, the only answer is...It always was. If you found #2, the only answer is...He always was. Now you tell me how either one of those answers is "more scientific" than the other. This is a nearly exact re-do of an argument Ford ama and I had roughly a decade ago in which he steadfastly refused to acknowledge his faith in those things science cannot know (or prove). Good to see he has taught lunkhead well without him having learned at all. |
|
davidsf
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 5,252
|
Post by davidsf on Aug 3, 2020 20:33:06 GMT -8
I won’t get into it now, but I would like you to consider Hubble’s theory of the expanding universe.
There has been some work, recently, that suggests it is not all expanding at the same rate, but still expanding nonetheless.
Someone might have to help my memory here, but there has also been work that postulates that we can regress the expanding universe back to A singularity: One (call it a black hole, although not exactly).
If accurate, that would support a Big Bang, but give no answer to what preceded it.
|
|
|
|
Post by vilepagan on Aug 4, 2020 2:03:36 GMT -8
I've thought about this quite often and have debated it with my significant other (whom is a Cathlolic; I was raised Episcopalian) and I often wonder, do we even have the ability to contemplate the moment before the Big Bang? If the big bang created time as well as space, the question of what happened "before" the big bang is invalid. |
|
|
|
Post by vilepagan on Aug 4, 2020 2:07:01 GMT -8
As I just posted in another thread (before I saw this one) This was answering a Vile Pagan post. Again, if you pilot your time machine back far enough you run out of time. If you're in a timeless environment the word "always' loses some of its meaning. I think one of the major hurdles for humans to overcome is the limits of our language in discussing things so far removed from our daily experience of reality. |
|
|
|
Post by vilepagan on Aug 4, 2020 2:09:52 GMT -8
There IS no "available evidence" about where the fuel for the "Big Bang" came from. You make the common mistake that most athiests make...you haven't gone back far enough. We are searching for the original building block of all existence here. If your original building block wasn't created, and didn't evolve from anything else, then where did it come from? But if it did evolve from, or was created by something else, then by definition it can't BE the original building block of all existence, so you have to go further back until you find it. Once you have finally piloted your time machine back to the real original building block of all existence you will find one of two possibilities: #1. That original building block, or #2. God At that point , the question is - where did what you found (#1 or #2) come from? If you found #1, the only answer is...It always was. If you found #2, the only answer is...He always was. Now you tell me how either one of those answers is "more scientific" than the other. This is a nearly exact re-do of an argument Ford ama and I had roughly a decade ago in which he steadfastly refused to acknowledge his faith in those things science cannot know (or prove). Good to see he has taught lunkhead well without him having learned at all. You're repeating the same thing you said ten years ago and I'm the one who hasn't learned anything? Too funny. |
|
