It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Big Bang Proves Creationism

page: 1
2
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 5 2011 @ 01:01 PM
link   

  1. Everything that exists must have a cause.
  2. The universe exists.
  3. The universe must have a cause.


Often the argument against Creationism is based in Evolutionary theories. I would like to go back a wee bit further into the origin of our species; The Big Bang.

It is quite simple. The big bang created all that we now know and see. One could argue that this was not a creation as all that came from the big bang exploded from a singularity and hence was not created from nothing. Were that the case, however, how did the singularity come to be?

Also, the universe we know is expanding. Where is it expanding to? New space must be being constantly created in order to accommodate this expansion.

I know the word creationism sticks in the craw of the anti-religious crowd. But, tell me, how can we hope of an explanation of the origin of our universe without considering Creationism? Science, while useful, can only take us so far.




posted on Aug, 5 2011 @ 01:10 PM
link   
Agreed.
Something had to have created the Big Bang, and I believe that was God, the creator of the universe.
edit on 8/5/2011 by DivineIntervention because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 5 2011 @ 01:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by kalunom


  1. Everything that exists must have a cause.
  2. The universe exists.
  3. The universe must have a cause.


Often the argument against Creationism is based in Evolutionary theories. I would like to go back a wee bit further into the origin of our species; The Big Bang.

It is quite simple. The big bang created all that we now know and see. One could argue that this was not a creation as all that came from the big bang exploded from a singularity and hence was not created from nothing. Were that the case, however, how did the singularity come to be?


Relevant bit starts at about 1 minute in



Also, the universe we know is expanding. Where is it expanding to? New space must be being constantly created in order to accommodate this expansion.

I know the word creationism sticks in the craw of the anti-religious crowd. But, tell me, how can we hope of an explanation of the origin of our universe without considering Creationism? Science, while useful, can only take us so far.


Erm, Science is forever changing to incorporate the latest proof. Before, creationism wasn't considered, it was enforced as the truth...typically by force.

So, lets stop tossing god in every question we still have. A person of science is not arrogant enough to think we know it all, how about the other side stop demanding that because there are still some unknowns, there must be deitys.



posted on Aug, 5 2011 @ 01:30 PM
link   
reply to post by kalunom
 


To quote Pierre Simon Laplace (1749-1827) with approval; Je n'avais pas besoin de cette hypothèse-là. For the non-Francophiles; "I have no need of that hypothesis."
When someone reaches the limit of their comprehension or is so simple-minded that they have no comprehension, they take the fall back position of "A god did it." Even Newton, upon being unable to solve a three-body problem, fell back and excused his lack of comprehension by saying that three body mechanics were governed by a god. Later, that cop-out became unnecessary as a result of the work of Delauney, and more importantly, Poincaré , who developed perturbation theory.
We should all demand, as a fundamental human right, the right to be smarter, as a species, tomorrow than we are today.



posted on Aug, 5 2011 @ 01:30 PM
link   
reply to post by kalunom
 


Is the big bang proven? Or just a theory.



posted on Aug, 5 2011 @ 01:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by DivineIntervention
Agreed.
Something had to have created the Big Bang, and I believe that was God, the creator of the universe.
edit on 8/5/2011 by DivineIntervention because: (no reason given)


I believe it was a giant unicorn
Not like giant by earth standards, but we are talking, the entire milky way can fit into a single freckle on its nose...huge.

So, the mighty giant unicorn reared up and nay'ed, sending forth the vibrations of its unicorniness and out of its mouth came the many planets and galaxies we know today.

I have no proof of this, but it just makes sense, wouldn't you agree?

Also, the evidence goes back since the dawning of history.
Source

Though written accounts of Unicorns date only from only two-and-a-half millennia ago, depictions of the one-horned animal can be found as far back as the dawn of humankind's history. This lovely and elegant creature was known and worshipped by the ancient Babylonians in 3,500 B.C., when Babylon was the cradle of civilization. Two of the guiding powers in such times were the Sun and the Moon, represented by the Lion and the Unicorn respectively. The golden-yellow Lion ruled through strength and total domination, constantly chasing the silver-white Unicorn, who ruled through harmony of cooperation. Seldom did the Lion ever catch his prey yet, when he did, it was the Sun and not the Moon which became obscured.


I don't know why Science doesn't also teach the great unicornitarian moment of creation...

I think they need to teach it in school, and scientists should stop what they are doing and admit it may have all come from a unicorn!

Is this post Sarcasm? nope...this is my firm belief and to suggest (or even think) I am not being sensible makes you an intolerant person.

At this exact moment in time, the great unicorn religion is mine and I am fully on board! (as me again in a minute..could just be a phase)



posted on Aug, 5 2011 @ 01:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by dl2one
reply to post by kalunom
 


Is the big bang proven? Or just a theory.


Is gravity proven, or just a theory?

What is the difference between scientific theory and laymens theory?



posted on Aug, 5 2011 @ 01:42 PM
link   
The big bang THEORY is nonsense. It is simply a way to try to reconcile creationism and "science".

First, there was nothing. Then nothing exploded. Come on, this is nonsense.

Big bang THEORY is based on the "redshift equals distance" THEORY. OK, one THEORY "proves" another THEORY? This is ridiculous. That is what is called circular logic.

Redshift equals distance has been PROVEN to be WRONG. There are cosmic objects whose redshift seems to indicate they are further away than objects they are definitely IN FRONT OF. Furthermore, since according to the nonsense THEORIES, nothing can exceed the speed of light, how can light have any kind of Doppler shift? Answer, it can't. Or, maybe your THEORY of the speed of light as an ultimate limit is what is WRONG.

Another thing: according to this expanding universe theory with redshift equaling distance, it would appear that EVERYTHING is rushing away from US. So, we are the exact center of the universe? This would seem like nonsense as well. How come there is nothing with BLUESHIFT? HUH? Answer me that one, 'scientists'?

I know, I'm rude because I do not believe ANYTHING anymore. Whoops.



posted on Aug, 5 2011 @ 01:44 PM
link   


I have no proof of this, but it just makes sense, wouldn't you agree?
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


So far you only have one believer in your rhino religion. I don't even see it becoming popular if you are martyred.



posted on Aug, 5 2011 @ 01:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by randyvs



I have no proof of this, but it just makes sense, wouldn't you agree?
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


So far you only have one believer in your rhino religion. I don't even see it becoming popular if you are martyred.




So a religion's popularity affects its validity? By this logic Justin Bieber is one of the greatest musicians ever to walk the Earth.



posted on Aug, 5 2011 @ 01:57 PM
link   
reply to post by kalunom
 





Were that the case, however, how did the singularity come to be?


We don't know yet.



New space must be being constantly created in order to accommodate this expansion.


Not sure why you're making this assumption. It may be that the space stretches on forever, or much farther than the Universe has currently expanded. There's no reason to assume that new space is actually being created. However even if this is true I fail to see its relevance in discussions of God.



But, tell me, how can we hope of an explanation of the origin of our universe without considering Creationism?


Creationism is a supernatural explanation for the origin of life. You've expanded that to include the entire Universe. Supernatural explanations have no explanation power. Saying that a God created the Universe answers nothing just like saying Zeus creates lightning doesn't actually answer where lightning comes from. While the origins of the Universe before the Big Bang remains a mystery that's no reason to insert the supernatural. Please note that doesn't mean we completely rule out the supernatural as a possibility, merely that it can't be a useful explanation to the mystery until we discover and study this "God". Thus far we've seen no evidence for a deity and thus have no reason to believe in one or use one to fill in the gaps in our knowledge.

As to your opening statements. This argument for God typically ends with God being the UNCAUSED CAUSE, the issue with this claim is that it contradicts the first premises of the argument. If everything that exists must have a cause than God would need one too, just like how you say the Big Bang would have needed a cause too. This leads to infinite causal regress.



posted on Aug, 5 2011 @ 01:57 PM
link   
reply to post by CaptChaos
 


The red shift is exposing things not directly in front of us, but things on the other side of the universe moving away from a point, things to the side

Things directly in front or back of us are generally going about the same speed away, so then it measures only the movements in the local area

No, it doesn't show us to be the center...I recommend you take some basic astronomy classes
Here is a fun video...watch in the later part, you will note a slight red hue from one side of our mapping, and a light or light blue hue from the other side (generally)...its a good basic visual representation.

I suspect you don't believe in anything, because your not fully aware of what it is to begin with...hard to believe in something your not educated on..it is up to you however to educate yourself or not..but I recommend if you can't be bothered to educate yourself, then don't hold any strong opinions on it overall, else you may look foolish (like me not believing in japan because I never bothered looking at a map)



posted on Aug, 5 2011 @ 01:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by randyvs



I have no proof of this, but it just makes sense, wouldn't you agree?
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


So far you only have one believer in your rhino religion. I don't even see it becoming popular if you are martyred.




One? Pah! I have many believers...sadly they all died some thousand years ago and reincarnated into rainbows.

And ya...since when does popularity = truth?



posted on Aug, 5 2011 @ 02:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Nosred
 





So a religion's popularity affects its validity? By this logic Justin Bieber is one of the greatest musicians ever to walk the Earth.


Your words.

I was simply calling attention to the difficulties involved with getting Saturns monocornious rhinoceros religion a
chance to take hold and become a world wide belief. i suppose you're right tho. He dosn't even have any pamphlets.



posted on Aug, 5 2011 @ 02:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Titen-Sxull
Saying that a God created the Universe answers nothing just like saying Zeus creates lightning doesn't actually answer where lightning comes from.


Aha, but wouldn't you admit that the unicorn hypothesis does answer those questions...

checkmate...so, will you join?

(lightning bolts incidently came from Brontes, one of the three elder Cyclopes whom forged them for Zeus)
-shows his inner nerd-



posted on Aug, 5 2011 @ 02:08 PM
link   
Using your logic:

1. Everything that exists must have a cause.
2. God exists.
3. God must have a cause.



posted on Aug, 5 2011 @ 02:13 PM
link   
reply to post by kalunom
 


your way off because the argument is in the bible man came from clay and from woman a rib of man. the world was made in 6six days i'm sure theres more but this is enough to safely say we know its wrong people just have a hard time letting go

i think of the bible as a book that represents many areas knowledge of the time(entertainment, moral, spiritual, health,) crammed in to one book and shuffled. so its wrong to take whats in it as fact but it still has useful knowledge in there so can not be dismissed entirely ether

intelligent destine maybe but not creationism



posted on Aug, 5 2011 @ 02:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by BigBrotherBear
Using your logic:

1. Everything that exists must have a cause.
2. God exists.
3. God must have a cause.


Jesus is the answer.

ok, so...what is a deity I guess is the overall arching question

Is it a creator of life (advanced alien), the creator of this universe (dimensional advanced life), or the creator of absolute everything, all dimensions, all things ever in existance ever period...

To me, the only thing that qualifies as a deity is the last bit...I am not fully logically opposed to a "seed experiment" by a different advanced race (ancient astronauts type theory), yet the evidence is generally lacking to support it...doesn't mean the logic is bad though

The second..the universe creation...well, that also doesn't really turn me off...hell, Michau Kaku did a episode on how a universe -could- be created through technology...

The final option though is the "god", yet, the concept is illogical when you meld it to religion
This thing created the universe some what...15+ billion years ago (exceptionally conservative number), yet it did all of this only to let mankind rule some backwoods planet in some fairly unremarkable galaxy for a few thousand years...what an incredibly inefficient deity...and not just that, this deity, that did all of that (not even bothering discussing the other dimensions, or even the sextillion other full giant galaxys)...it also actually cares if your thinking naughty thoughts, and his minions became so enraged at this dinky planet that they rebelled and became a super enemy of God, and came to this not even truckstop qualified planet to play out a giant war.


personally, I think if you understand the full scope of what is proposed as a hypothesis, you have to be almost retarded or in full denial of any logical thinking in order to adopt that type of religion...now, the first version (alien seed project)...sure, there could be all sorts of drama like that, but the second and last, no..sorry, just the concept insults my intelligence..like being told the tooth fairy exists by grown adults...



posted on Aug, 5 2011 @ 02:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aceofclubs
reply to post by kalunom
 


your way off because the argument is in the bible man came from clay and from woman a rib of man. the world was made in 6six days i'm sure theres more but this is enough to safely say we know its wrong people just have a hard time letting go

i think of the bible as a book that represents many areas knowledge of the time(entertainment, moral, spiritual, health,) crammed in to one book and shuffled. so its wrong to take whats in it as fact but it still has useful knowledge in there so can not be dismissed entirely ether

intelligent destine maybe but not creationism




For your entertainment.

6000 year old universe...nice

edit on 5-8-2011 by SaturnFX because: nothing to see here



posted on Aug, 5 2011 @ 02:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Aceofclubs
 





people just have a hard time letting go


Of course you are right about this. I think people, especially have a hard time letting go, when there is no reason to.




top topics



 
2
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join