posted on Aug, 15 2013 @ 11:50 AM
Originally posted by rhinoceros
1. None-the-less, many observations point to the Big Bang theory being correct
2. It's possible to falsify the Big Bang theory
3. Belief in omnipotent God is not a theory, it's just a childish non-testable idea
So all things considered, the Big Bang theory and belief of an omnipotent God are in no way equal. You know, the Christian God was actually tested
scientifically. Maybe you've heard of the great prayer experiment? Conclusion? It appears that praying to the Christian God has no effect whatsoever.
Note, there's more than likely some placebo effect, but the experimental setting didn't allow it..
You stated, "...many observations point to the Big Bang theory being correct", and I agree. However, there are those that would also argue that
there are many observations of the Bible being correct (the Bible being one of the documents making the claim for an omnipotent God). I personally do
not follow that, but there are those that do follow it, and who am I to be so arrogant as to claim they are wrong when my beliefs are just as valid,
which your statement "Belief in omnipotent God is not a theory, it's just a childish non-testable idea" is a derogatory accusation based upon your
You can't read? Omnipotent God is based solely on belief. The Big Bang theory on the other hand is based on cold hard facts. Omnipotent God is not
testable. Omnipotent God can't be falsified. The Big Bang theory is testable. The Big Bang theory can be falsified. Omnipotent God is a worthless
idea. We might just as well say that a purple 3.21m high elm tree farted the Universe into existence. This idea has exactly as much support as
omnipotent God, i.e., NONE
edit on 15-8-2013 by rhinoceros because: (no reason given)
You stated, " The Big Bang theory on the other hand is based on cold hard facts". Yes, but it is not complete, and there is no cold hard facts
proving the existence of a singularity being the origin is there? There are indicators, and mathematical models, but no "cold hard facts" as proof.
Again, it's still based upon a belief that the theory is correct, not a proven fact.
You stated, "Omnipotent God is not testable", again I agree, it isn't, However, I posit neither is String Theory, or M-Theory, which are the
leading areas of research on the origin of all things. So, they are equivalently not testable....yet.
You stated, "Omnipotent God is a worthless idea. We might just as well say that a purple 3.21m high elm tree farted the Universe into existence". I
wouldn't say worthless, more like not MY belief (or yours it seems). But that opinion is just that, an opinion. What makes your opinion (or mine)
worth any more since we also cannot PROVE or TEST the underlying belief in a singularity.....yet. I do not believe in an omnipotent God at all, I
believe in M-Theory and the Ekpyrotic Theory. I'm sure "true believers" in an omnipotent God could also make the same claim as you, that what I
believe is a "worthless idea".