God was behind Big Bang, pope says

ATTENTION!

There will be no more debating of other posters. Debate the topic, not each other.

Also, there will be no more improper quote attribution. If the poster didn't type it, don't quote it as if they had.

Further violations will receive harsher consequences.

TheRedneck
ATS Forum Moderator

reply to post by TheRedneck

My apologies, Redneck. I was not aware until just now that you had posted this before I submitted the above post.

reply to post by Vicky32


The funny thing is the pope probably knows more stuff than anyone here. So your operating out of ignorance defying his words.

But for me i believe in god, but i think the big bang theory is rubbish, and is just based on male ejacualtion.

reply to post by MrXYZ


Your video is not there.
"This video is no longer available due to a copyright claim by Viacom International Inc."

I agree with you that things such as the Fibonacci sequence and fractals point to intelligent design as being a possibility. Most religious story's and the big bang kinda run along the same path. With the big bang theory we have there was nothing and then all of a sudden every thing in the universe was just created. Religion basically says the same thing, they just say a deity did it. But then when you start getting into quantum physics saying that every thing is just a possibility until a conscious observer observers something, and we create our reality our self's. Wouldn't that make all of use god?

reply to post by Kailassa




Fixed

It bemuses me that this human titled pope utters such things just to gain credit of somekind. He is unwise and dangerous because he refutes the Goddess. ?Where is his devotion to the Glory of Her. He should spend sometime living with shamans to gain an education.

reply to post by MrXYZ

Thanks
I honestly think he's the funniest man in the world.

But I have to admit Bill Reilly sometimes comes close.
This smiley was made for him.

Tongue goes in; tongue goes out. Tongue goes in; tongue goes out.
Never a miscommunication.

Originally posted by Maslo

Keep in mind that theory of relativity, just like any other scientific theory, is valid only under some defined conditions. You may have mistaken theory of relativity for "theory of everything" that is supposed to be always valid. We dont have such a theory yet.

Theory of relativity cannot accurately describe what happens when dealing with such high densities like in a black hole, or in a big bang singularity. This does not disprove theory of relativity, it just sets limits on where it is accurate and where it is not.

Of cause, but since the SR and later GR was published in the beginning of the last century much of the theoretical physics and cosmology published since is building on that foundation. This does in some cases give rise to some paradoxes in which the singularity is one.

Originally posted by Ben81
The universe is not the result of chance
The universe is not the result of chance
The universe is not the result of chance
The universe is not the result of chance

cant get more clear then that

we dont need to know the how .. what magic or tech was used to created the universe

Follow Destiny's mission

i wish i still could (

reply to post by Condemned0625


Creation argument:
There are really two choices with any real foundation and relevant to the mass of humans on the surface of this planet – A. Creation Theory or B. Evolution Theory.
The evolutionist (by and large) states that there is no proof of an “invisible”, “fictitious character” or “a God” that operates beyond our understanding and has set into motion, structured systems of matter which make up our reality. There’s no proof. It’s a repeated sentiment.
One of the biggest issues that I’ve seen between creationists and evolutionists is simply presentation and representation. I have no doubt that if the creationists of the world could speak with silver tongues and make profound statements within a sentence or two, many “lost” souls would be found and introduced to a new way of viewing faith.
Unfortunately, so many zealots represent faith and God in a blind, argumentative tone without speaking to evolutionists in an organized and scientific way.
Not all evolutionists are organized and scientific, that’s for sure. But when you are trying to go to bat for a concept that requires a life-change, the creationist would pretty much always need to be mirroring the listener and deeply respecting the reasons why they can’t, at this point, wrap their heads around the idea of a Creator.
It would seem that most of the time, one passionate zealot is fit against an atheist / evolutionist of the same educational background. In other words, folks that would bump into each other on the street, in a bar, at a mutual friend’s house and so on. Regardless of what side of the fence you’re on, you get into these discussions with people in the same neighborhood.
To clarify, I’ll be speaking in terms of atheism in its “implicit” sense. The “Positive Atheist” is the type that is “positive that there is no God”. That’s how I remember it. The “Negative Atheist” is basically sure there is no God, but doesn’t worry about it and is the closest to not even caring if they are called an Atheist or not. For these people, it is so insignificant to even mention a “stance” on the subject that they don’t take one and shun any labels.
I have tried very hard to put to words my own experiences and thoughts through my blog and face to face in a way that has never been done before, at least from what I’ve seen.
One side of me understands the “sermon on the mound” mentality and direction given to those that are excited by the message they have received. The natural order is that they would want to tell as many people as they can about this deep, meaningful event. The trouble for me has always been weeding out those that have actually received the message and those that are posing and simply wish they have. Most of these people cling to their churches and Bibles so tightly that it is very difficult for their audience members to relate to them and to keep from snickering. The implications of insecurity for both parties is obvious.
Already, I can anticipate that if any atheist started to read this post, they’ve picked apart enough information to know that I am a believer. Unfortunately, that crowd rests on “Proof! and Facts”! But, they usually don’t stick around long enough for the message…Which arguably is presented by mindless zealots, so I don’t blame them…But receiving the message is the proof.
Part of the issue over all is that a huge number of evolutionists are cut and dried in their approach and nearly every time it’s a dispute with a cut and dried creationist. No wonder it gets so heated and insulting.
The discussion gets heated and insulting and it really all comes down to that dirty word, faith.
Do you know trigonometry? Are you a propulsion scientist? If not, ok. Do you fly on airplanes? If so, great! You have just demonstrated that you are capable of having faith. Of course any scholar would argue that my example is not of “blind faith” which is the real argument, right?
We can trace the parts back that make up the plane and its ability to fly safely through the air. We can see the pieces that were calculated, engineered and assembled according to clear instructions. We don’t have to know trigonometry ourselves or who Bernoulli was in order to take advantage of a little faith in the other folks that do.
So now that we know atheists and evolutionists do operate with at least some faith, on a daily basis, we have to talk about scale and relativity.
If a faithful believer understands mortality, they can easily pray and fall to their knees in fear and in hope and ask for guidance to achieve salvation (in one form or another from religion to religion). That act requires a very deep social mechanism which is seen in daily life - That person’s relationship with their father and authority in general - Plain and simple.
What I’ve seen in these discussions and flat out arguments are insults that really bring out the real issu

Its just a ploy to keep religion on the map.

With the Higgs Boson so near to being found, if they managed to prove the Big Bang Theory correct, then religion can still keep it's hold in the world by saying "God said let there be a Bang"

Of aliens contacted? "God created aliens, its just not in any of the books that were selected to be kept I'm the Bible."

Religion, a very intelligent ploy that can even fool supposedly intelligent people.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

Excuse the odd wrong word, didn't realise my autocorrect was on


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

Originally posted by braydenf
i wish i still could

(

I sure don't. That show ruined the stargate franchise. They turned it into a soap opera that could have taken place in a barn in Nebraska for 3/4 of the series. They should make a movie to wrap it all up or bring back Atlantis. That show had class.

And i say the pope knows nothing...
1) The big bang isn't confirmed..its' still a theory.
2) A while back the church refused to even accept there was a big bang
3) Even more back ..the Earth was the center of the universe
4) Even way way back there was just the Earth which was flat, and a magic canvas with holes which shined at night, which people called start...so the Earth wasn't the center of anything.
5) Even way way way back there was no "Earth object" concept cause nobody sailed too far to even get the concept of "edge of Earth".
What does this tell us ?
That the church will just wing along with whatever it can to get in line with the times and trick people into believing anything they say cause it makes the church popular....end purpose is money and power.