What caused the Big Bang?

Jimenezj
Theist
Posts: 344
Joined: 2011-12-16
User is offlineOffline
What caused the Big Bang?

Who pulled the trigger that caused the bang ?


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10717
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Jimenezj wrote:Who pulled

Jimenezj wrote:
Who pulled the trigger that caused the bang ?

Your question presupposes there was a trigger and an entity to pull it, invalidating the question.

Beyond that, the cause for the big bang is unknown. And since the big bang itself erased any evidence of anything prior to the big bang (if there was something), we will likely never know, unless we gain sufficient knowledge to recreate it in a predictable fashion. But even then we'll only be guessing.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Beyond Saving
Silver Member
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 4668
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
 There was a trigger to

 There was a trigger to pull? Huh, I always thought the trigger was invented sometime around the 6th century BCE and the first trigger to ever make a bang would be the matchlock musket invented in the early 1400s. I could be wrong, Prozac might know if there were any weapons with triggers before that but regardless the trigger was invented billions of years after the big bang.

   

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


Jimenezj
Theist
Posts: 344
Joined: 2011-12-16
User is offlineOffline
Vastet

I would not say that it is unknown . After all
We have the bible that states that in the bigining
God created the heavens and the earth. Pointing
To a universal bigining just like what scientist and
The huble Law predicted.

appeal to ignorance is an argument for or against a proposition on the basis of a lack of evidence against or for it. If there is positive evidence for the conclusion, then of course we have other reasons for accepting it, but a lack of evidence by itself is no evidence for a no God. 


Jeffrick
High Level DonorRational VIP!SuperfanGold Member
Jeffrick's picture
Posts: 2406
Joined: 2008-03-25
User is offlineOffline
hyuh!

Jimenezj wrote:
I would not say that it is unknown . After all We have the bible that states that in the bigining God created the heavens and the earth. Pointing To a universal bigining just like what scientist and The huble Law predicted.

 

 

                 The bible clearly states there was light then dark then light then dark then light then dark then light; THEN god created the sun the moon the stars. Would you mind explaining where all that light came from on the first four days and where did it go to afterwards?

"Very funny Scotty; now beam down our clothes."

VEGETARIAN: Ancient Hindu word for "lousy hunter"

If man was formed from dirt, why is there still dirt?


tonyjeffers
tonyjeffers's picture
Posts: 482
Joined: 2012-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Jimenezj wrote:I would not

Jimenezj wrote:
I would not say that it is unknown . After all We have the bible that states that in the bigining God created the heavens and the earth. Pointing To a universal bigining just like what scientist and The huble Law predicted.

You clearly already have in your bible all the answers you require and are quite satisfied with them. Tell me, what stories do you think you would  have accepted as fact had you lived in the time before the story of the god of Abraham was circulated?

"...but truth is a point of view, and so it is changeable. And to rule by fettering the mind through fear of punishment in another world is just as base as to use force." -Hypatia


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10717
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Jimenezj wrote:I would not

Jimenezj wrote:
I would not say that it is unknown . After all
We have the bible that states that in the bigining
God created the heavens and the earth. Pointing
To a universal bigining just like what scientist and
The huble Law predicted.

The bible was written by primitives who believed in magic and curses, and thought the Earth was both flat and the centre of the universe. And that's just the tip of the iceberg.

They didn't know squat, and the bible itself is a joke as a result.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13823
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is onlineOnline
Jimenezj wrote:Who pulled

Jimenezj wrote:
Who pulled the trigger that caused the bang ?

 

OH MY THOR HE GOT US!......Oh wait, oops, need to recalibrate my BULLSHIT DETECTOR!

 

Thor pulled the trigger that caused the first bolt of lightening.

Oh wait you say, that doesn't work for you?

 

THEN WHAT THE FUCK makes you think a "who" by any label is required? Does a volcano need a volcano god to erupt? Does a hurricane need the ocean god Posiden to be "triggered".

Is Allah needed to start the big bang?

Is Vishnu needed to start the big bang?

 

How about this, no one knows what caused the big bang. SCIENCE has some ideas, such in quantum mechanics. Some scientists lean to it starting from nothing, while others see it as a product of the death of prior events, much like rotting leaves become fuel for other plants.

Your stupid book of ancient myth explains nothing except that humans are gullible and love fiction.

Otherwise Santa and Allah and Thor would fit in the gap just as well as your pet deity claim.

If hurricanes don't need a god to start, why the fuck would the universe need one?

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Jimenezj
Theist
Posts: 344
Joined: 2011-12-16
User is offlineOffline
Brian

Quantum mechanics? Can you explain?

The universe came from nothing?
Does not make sense. Just look around you.
Everything comes from something.

A dying universe becomes fuel for other planets?
It would still need a starting point , which
Leads us back into the question.
What is the origin of the created universe?
Who pulled the trigger that caused the big Bang?

appeal to ignorance is an argument for or against a proposition on the basis of a lack of evidence against or for it. If there is positive evidence for the conclusion, then of course we have other reasons for accepting it, but a lack of evidence by itself is no evidence for a no God. 


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10717
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Theist ignores responses,

Theist ignores responses, asks answered question again, everyone facepalms.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3312
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
I don't know why

 I don't know why you asked this question. Like, Tony Jeffers has already pointed out, you rely on the Bible for answers anyway and do not even believe in the Big Bang. (How people can continue to persist in the denial of the Big Bang in today's world is frankly astonishing to me). 

Why not open up a science book and read all about the history and study of the universe itself ? 

Oh that's right, you don't read anything but the Bible. 

Scientists : Read and study hundreds of books in their lifetime and claim to not have all the answers

Religious people : Barely read even one book (The Bible) pick and choose what to believe from that book and claim to know everything. 

Sounds rather ironic doesn't it ? 

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13823
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is onlineOnline
Jimenezj wrote:Quantum

Jimenezj wrote:
Quantum mechanics? Can you explain? The universe came from nothing? Does not make sense. Just look around you. Everything comes from something. A dying universe becomes fuel for other planets? It would still need a starting point , which Leads us back into the question. What is the origin of the created universe? Who pulled the trigger that caused the big Bang?

Time is effected by gravity, SCIENTIFICALLY PROVEN FACT. Does that freak me out? YES, does it make sense to me? Yes in the sense that science has proven this. But no, just like the video of the guy in the hallway where it seems normal until he backs up and the hallway shrinks. But IN BOTH cases it doesn't matter, my emotional reaction to a real event doesn't change scientific facts.

AND you display the depth of reading comprehension of a flea. I said SCIENTISTS  are working on the solution of BOTH. Some lean to "nothing" some lean to something prior. WHERE THEY AGREE WHICH YOU ARE TOO FUCKING DENSE TO ACCEPT, is that a "WHO" in either case is NOT REQUIRED. But I guess Stephen Hawkins doesn't no shit.

 

And FYI if you drive a car, does that mean because you can drive it, you must know how to build it? Do you assume when you are in a car, because you cant build one, that it is run on pixy sperm and assembled by Santa?

Scientists currently have not solved EITHER way if the universe came from nothing, or dead fuel prior. What they do know ON BOTH SIDES, is that a stupid myth written by ignorant goat herders OF ANY LABEL, not just yours, none of those fictional beings will fill the gap. And on top of that ON BOTH SIDES, they BOTH see the solution as being non cognitive, non thinking, non magical.

You have nothing. You are merely projecting human qualities and human desires on a non human world. You merely want a super hero to be the cause. But the truth isn't sexy enough for  gullible people like you. The truth is that we are merely a result of unthinking and non human processes, much like a snowstorm isn't capable of thinking of where it strikes or how many exact snowflakes it produces.

 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


BobSpence
High Level DonorRational VIP!ScientistWebsite Admin
BobSpence's picture
Posts: 5904
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Here is a response to the

Here is a response to the basic question by someone who has studio this and related questions for a long time.

http://youtu.be/7ImvlS8PLIo;

He (Laurence Krauss) has  book out on it:

     A Universe from Nothing: Why There Is Something Rather than Nothing.

Quantum Mechanics says there does not need to be an identifiable 'cause', any more than we can see what 'causes' a particular atom of an unstable radio-active element to decay at any particular instant.

If there was a 'trigger', it need be nothing more than a random quantum 'twitch'  of the same order. Assuming it needed a conscious being is completely unjustified. If you assume such a being has always been around, you have something much harder to explain - why would reality require such an entity to be part of existence? Quite unnecessary, raises more questions than it answers.

So we don't know just how it all happened, but 'God did it' doesn't really explain anything in any ultimate sense.

Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality

"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris

The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me

From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology


Jimenezj
Theist
Posts: 344
Joined: 2011-12-16
User is offlineOffline
Bob

So , you are saying that quantum mechanics
Breaks the laws of causality. Is this correct,
Correct me if I am wrong.

appeal to ignorance is an argument for or against a proposition on the basis of a lack of evidence against or for it. If there is positive evidence for the conclusion, then of course we have other reasons for accepting it, but a lack of evidence by itself is no evidence for a no God. 


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

Jimenezj wrote:
I would not say that it is unknown . After all We have the bible that states that in the bigining God created the heavens and the earth. Pointing To a universal bigining just like what scientist and The huble Law predicted.

It also says rabbit chew their cud. That is why it shares with many animals the magical property of uncleanness. Do you believe everything you read?

 

 

 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

Jimenezj wrote:
Quantum mechanics? Can you explain? The universe came from nothing? Does not make sense. Just look around you. Everything comes from something. A dying universe becomes fuel for other planets? It would still need a starting point , which Leads us back into the question. What is the origin of the created universe? Who pulled the trigger that caused the big Bang?

What conceivably gave you the idea that making sense to you matters in the least? What idiot gave you the idea that something from nothing is not the normal occurance when there is only nothing? Why did you believe them? What evidence did they provide?

 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

Jimenezj wrote:
So , you are saying that quantum mechanics Breaks the laws of causality. Is this correct, Correct me if I am wrong.

Of course it does. Technically things violate causality and quantum mechanics describes the characteristics of the violation. Don't you know anything? Is that not a rhetorical question?

Something from nothing happens every place all the time.

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


Jean Chauvin
Theistard
Jean Chauvin's picture
Posts: 1211
Joined: 2010-11-19
User is offlineOffline
Hello

Helllo,

Quantum Mechanics has been shown as absurd via Einstein's theory of relativity. Because of this somebody decidied to start a religion to blend the 2 together. This religion is called String Theory.

The religion of string theory has absolutely no basis in "science." It is a game, a religion. It is blind faith.

Since Bob used a position that has already been show as absurd and refuted by general relativity, then we have an ape that's wants a banana in the middle of an ocean don't we?

As far as the light in Genesis 1 before the sun was created. Naturally this would be the stars. "Evidence" shows that the speed of light actually traveled faster in the past then it does in the present. This would be an ad hominem for your position both in retrospect to Genesis 1 and the Big Bang.

Respectfully,

Jean Chauvin (Jude 3).

A Rational Christian of Intelligence (rare)with a valid and sound justification for my epistemology and a logical refutation for those with logical fallacies and false worldviews upon their normative of thinking in retrospect to objective normative(s). This is only understood via the imago dei in which we all are.

Respectfully,

Jean Chauvin (Jude 3).


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

Jean Chauvin wrote:

Helllo,

Quantum Mechanics has been shown as absurd via Einstein's theory of relativity. Because of this somebody decidied to start a religion to blend the 2 together. This religion is called String Theory. ...

Ever willing to publicly demonstrate you know nothing about the material you post.

 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13823
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is onlineOnline
Jean Chauvin

Jean Chauvin wrote:

Helllo,

Quantum Mechanics has been shown as absurd via Einstein's theory of relativity. Because of this somebody decidied to start a religion to blend the 2 together. This religion is called String Theory.

The religion of string theory has absolutely no basis in "science." It is a game, a religion. It is blind faith.

Since Bob used a position that has already been show as absurd and refuted by general relativity, then we have an ape that's wants a banana in the middle of an ocean don't we?

As far as the light in Genesis 1 before the sun was created. Naturally this would be the stars. "Evidence" shows that the speed of light actually traveled faster in the past then it does in the present. This would be an ad hominem for your position both in retrospect to Genesis 1 and the Big Bang.

Respectfully,

Jean Chauvin (Jude 3).

Listen to you. A book full of magic in talking donkeys, talking snakes, talking bushes. Oh and lets not forget that you claimed your invisible friend allowed the Japanese Tsunami that killed 13,000 people, not as a warning to them, but as a third party hostage to warn America to kiss your god's ass.

For someone who needs an electron microscope to find their penis, you are one to talk.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10717
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Jimenezj wrote:So , you are

Jimenezj wrote:
So , you are saying that quantum mechanics
Breaks the laws of causality. Is this correct,
Correct me if I am wrong.

There is no law of causality.

Jean Chauvin wrote:
Quantum Mechanics has been shown as absurd via Einstein's theory of relativity.

Ignorance is bliss.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13823
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is onlineOnline
Vastet wrote:Jimenezj

Vastet wrote:
Jimenezj wrote:
So , you are saying that quantum mechanics Breaks the laws of causality. Is this correct, Correct me if I am wrong.
There is no law of causality.
Jean Chauvin wrote:
Quantum Mechanics has been shown as absurd via Einstein's theory of relativity.
Ignorance is bliss.

I have a theory about Jean's relativity. He is proof that evolution isn't about smarts, he is what happens when the credulous fuck.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10717
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
The funniest thing about his

The funniest thing about his claim is that Einstein's theory of relativity doesn't work much better than Newton's theory of gravity, and that quantum mechanics came to be to try and fill in the missing equations.

He literally proves he doesn't know anything about relativity or quantum mechanics in his post.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Jeffrick
High Level DonorRational VIP!SuperfanGold Member
Jeffrick's picture
Posts: 2406
Joined: 2008-03-25
User is offlineOffline
JIMENEZJ!!!!!!!!!!

Jeffrick wrote:

Jimenezj wrote:
I would not say that it is unknown . After all We have the bible that states that in the bigining God created the heavens and the earth. Pointing To a universal bigining just like what scientist and The huble Law predicted.

 

 

                 The bible clearly states there was light then dark then light then dark then light then dark then light; THEN god created the sun the moon the stars. Would you mind explaining where all that light came from on the first four days and where did it go to afterwards?

 

 

                    You haven't answered my question yet. Where did this light come from and where did it go to?

 

 

 

"Very funny Scotty; now beam down our clothes."

VEGETARIAN: Ancient Hindu word for "lousy hunter"

If man was formed from dirt, why is there still dirt?


Jimenezj
Theist
Posts: 344
Joined: 2011-12-16
User is offlineOffline
Mouse

Your statement is absurd.
Science is impossible to perform
Without causality principles.
You cannot break the laws of physics in the
Natural world .

Now if you are speaking of the unnatural world,
A world not governed by physics then yes it is
Possible. But this unnatural world is what the bible calls,
The Spiritual world.

Science is natural .

appeal to ignorance is an argument for or against a proposition on the basis of a lack of evidence against or for it. If there is positive evidence for the conclusion, then of course we have other reasons for accepting it, but a lack of evidence by itself is no evidence for a no God. 


Marty Hamrick
atheist
Marty Hamrick's picture
Posts: 227
Joined: 2010-12-31
User is offlineOffline
Jean Chauvin wrote: Since

Jean Chauvin wrote:

 

Since Bob used a position that has already been show as absurd and refuted by general relativity, then we have an ape that's wants a banana in the middle of an ocean don't we?

 

 

I have now met three Christian apologists online and my opinion of them has dropped considerably and consistently since I met the first one, who was actually a nice guy. Too bad its been downhill ever since.

I have a good friend who is a quantum information theory physicist and also a Christian lay leader in the Episcopal church. I wonder how he would react to one of his brethren trashing the field.

Anyway, Stephen Hawking confirmed what was said earlier about causation and went further to say that asking what went on before the Big Bang was like asking to find the edge of a sphere because prior to the BB, time did not exist. Therefore, there was no time for this God to create the universe.

One of the biggest differences I've seen in the majority of educated atheists and educated Christian apologists is that the former do not come across as smug, self righteous egomaniacs.I don't even see such in Dawkins and Hawking has said that he would be the last person in the world to "tell anyone what to believe". What's up with the theistic variety?

 

"Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings."


Teralek
Theist
Teralek's picture
Posts: 614
Joined: 2010-07-15
User is offlineOffline
Marty Hamrick wrote:Jean

Marty Hamrick wrote:

Jean Chauvin wrote:

 

Since Bob used a position that has already been show as absurd and refuted by general relativity, then we have an ape that's wants a banana in the middle of an ocean don't we?

 


 

I have now met three Christian apologists online and my opinion of them has dropped considerably and consistently since I met the first one, who was actually a nice guy. Too bad its been downhill ever since.

I have a good friend who is a quantum information theory physicist and also a Christian lay leader in the Episcopal church. I wonder how he would react to one of his brethren trashing the field.

Anyway, Stephen Hawking confirmed what was said earlier about causation and went further to say that asking what went on before the Big Bang was like asking to find the edge of a sphere because prior to the BB, time did not exist. Therefore, there was no time for this God to create the universe.

One of the biggest differences I've seen in the majority of educated atheists and educated Christian apologists is that the former do not come across as smug, self righteous egomaniacs.I don't even see such in Dawkins and Hawking has said that he would be the last person in the world to "tell anyone what to believe". What's up with the theistic variety?
 

My friend. There are honest and dishonest people everywhere and spread equally throughout religions and ideologies. That's what my direct contact with people tells me.

The internet is very miss guiding, that's what my 15 years extensive experience as an internet user tells me. On "real life" the only statistical correlation I noticed is between honesty and wealth/power.

If what Hawking says about the BB is true, so true that deserves little questioning, then all people researching M-Theory must be insane.

Science is not a closed subject. Some people here forget this much too often when it serves their purposes and beliefs.

But I agree with you, many Christians tend to be self righteous. However I noticed a growing tendency of a similar sin from anti religion/atheist movement. 

The actual scientists have a completely different discourse.

______________________________________________________________
"I once prayed to god for a bike, but quickly found out he didnt work that way...so I stole a bike and prayed for his forgiveness"

"All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force... We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent Mind. This Mind is the matrix of all matter." (Max Planck)

"the existence of mind in some organism on some planet in the universe is surely a fact of fundamental significance. Through conscious beings the universe has generated self-awareness. This can be no trivial detail, no minor byproduct of mindless, purposeless forces. We are truly meant to be here." Paul Davies


Joker
atheist
Joker's picture
Posts: 180
Joined: 2010-07-23
User is offlineOffline
The real question about what

The real question about what started the big bang is a good one, right now there isn't a clear idea but there are several possibilities. One is that in effect we're seeing what could be an endless series of big bang big crunch cycles and ours is just the latest.  This is plausible as from what we understand matter and energy can neither be created nor destroyed. There are some ideas from string theorists as well, and I'll even say that maybe some sort of being did cause it, the problem is that there's no reason to assume that a supernatural being did such a thing. It would be like assuming that gravity worked by means of invisible beings holding you to the planet.


Marty Hamrick
atheist
Marty Hamrick's picture
Posts: 227
Joined: 2010-12-31
User is offlineOffline
Teralek wrote:Marty Hamrick

Teralek wrote:

Marty Hamrick wrote:

Jean Chauvin wrote:

 

Since Bob used a position that has already been show as absurd and refuted by general relativity, then we have an ape that's wants a banana in the middle of an ocean don't we?

 


 

I have now met three Christian apologists online and my opinion of them has dropped considerably and consistently since I met the first one, who was actually a nice guy. Too bad its been downhill ever since.

I have a good friend who is a quantum information theory physicist and also a Christian lay leader in the Episcopal church. I wonder how he would react to one of his brethren trashing the field.

Anyway, Stephen Hawking confirmed what was said earlier about causation and went further to say that asking what went on before the Big Bang was like asking to find the edge of a sphere because prior to the BB, time did not exist. Therefore, there was no time for this God to create the universe.

One of the biggest differences I've seen in the majority of educated atheists and educated Christian apologists is that the former do not come across as smug, self righteous egomaniacs.I don't even see such in Dawkins and Hawking has said that he would be the last person in the world to "tell anyone what to believe". What's up with the theistic variety?
 

My friend. There are honest and dishonest people everywhere and spread equally throughout religions and ideologies. That's what my direct contact with people tells me.

The internet is very miss guiding, that's what my 15 years extensive experience as an internet user tells me. On "real life" the only statistical correlation I noticed is between honesty and wealth/power.

If what Hawking says about the BB is true, so true that deserves little questioning, then all people researching M-Theory must be insane.

Science is not a closed subject. Some people here forget this much too often when it serves their purposes and beliefs.

But I agree with you, many Christians tend to be self righteous. However I noticed a growing tendency of a similar sin from anti religion/atheist movement. 

The actual scientists have a completely different discourse.

The first Christian apologist I met online was on a Satanic site many years ago. He was writing his thesis on Satanism and was actually a fun, nice guy that I still talk to from time time. After reading his thesis, I found it refreshingly objective for the work of a pastor/apologists. The next one I met was Metacrock, who can be a nice guy, but seems to suffer from outbursts that look similar to bouts of Tourette's Syndrome. Now I meet Jean, who,is well, Jean.

You're right about narrow,dogmatic thinking from both sides that have no place in science which is and always will and should be an open field, subject to change with every new discovery.

Thanks for a nice discourse.

"Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings."


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10717
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Jimenezj wrote: Your

Jimenezj wrote:

Your statement is absurd.
Science is impossible to perform
Without causality principles.
You cannot break the laws of physics in the
Natural world

Lies. Once again: There is no "law" of causality.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


zarathustra
atheist
zarathustra's picture
Posts: 1263
Joined: 2006-11-16
User is onlineOnline
Yes, god pulled the

Yes, god pulled the trigger.

He was aiming for the brain, but the idiot missed. 


Jimenezj
Theist
Posts: 344
Joined: 2011-12-16
User is offlineOffline
Marty

You said,

Stephen Hawking confirmed what was said earlier about causation and went further to say that asking what went on before the Big Bang was like asking to find the edge of a sphere because prior to the BB, time did not exist. Therefore, there was no time for this God to create the universe.

The problem with this theory is that The bible states
That God is not governed by time, he is eternal and therefore,
Is outside of time.

If God created the heavens and the earth during the BB as the bible says,
Then time would be the outcome of the BB as Hawking stated.

So if no time existed before the BB then it would be
Logical to say that God created the universe because
He is the eternal one who exist outside of time as stated
By the bible.

If God exist outside of time, then the laws of physics
Do not apply to him.

Would you agree?

appeal to ignorance is an argument for or against a proposition on the basis of a lack of evidence against or for it. If there is positive evidence for the conclusion, then of course we have other reasons for accepting it, but a lack of evidence by itself is no evidence for a no God. 


Marty Hamrick
atheist
Marty Hamrick's picture
Posts: 227
Joined: 2010-12-31
User is offlineOffline
Jimenezj wrote:You said,

Jimenezj wrote:
You said, Stephen Hawking confirmed what was said earlier about causation and went further to say that asking what went on before the Big Bang was like asking to find the edge of a sphere because prior to the BB, time did not exist. Therefore, there was no time for this God to create the universe. The problem with this theory is that The bible states That God is not governed by time, he is eternal and therefore, Is outside of time. If God created the heavens and the earth during the BB as the bible says, Then time would be the outcome of the BB as Hawking stated. So if no time existed before the BB then it would be Logical to say that God created the universe because He is the eternal one who exist outside of time as stated By the bible. If God exist outside of time, then the laws of physics Do not apply to him. Would you agree?

No.

"Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings."


zarathustra
atheist
zarathustra's picture
Posts: 1263
Joined: 2006-11-16
User is onlineOnline
Jimenezj wrote:If God exist

Jimenezj wrote:
If God exist outside of time, then the laws of physics Do not apply to him. Would you agree?
 

Yes.  Nonexistent things also exist outside of time, and the laws of physics do not apply to them.  Would you agree?

There are no theists on operating tables.

πππ†
π†††


ThunderJones
atheist
ThunderJones's picture
Posts: 433
Joined: 2012-04-23
User is offlineOffline
Jimenezj wrote:You said,

Jimenezj wrote:
You said, Stephen Hawking confirmed what was said earlier about causation and went further to say that asking what went on before the Big Bang was like asking to find the edge of a sphere because prior to the BB, time did not exist. Therefore, there was no time for this God to create the universe. The problem with this theory is that The bible states That God is not governed by time, he is eternal and therefore, Is outside of time. If God created the heavens and the earth during the BB as the bible says, Then time would be the outcome of the BB as Hawking stated. So if no time existed before the BB then it would be Logical to say that God created the universe because He is the eternal one who exist outside of time as stated By the bible. If God exist outside of time, then the laws of physics Do not apply to him. Would you agree?

*facepalm*

 

Just because the bible says it doesn't make it true.

The issue is not whether or not God can ignore the laws of physics, the issue is that people believe he does even though there is no reason to.

Why do you believe God gets to ignore all the laws he supposedly created, or that he even exists, without referring to The Bible? Is there any reason to think that, besides what a book tells you? Where is the reason behind your arguments?

 

Secularist, Atheist, Skeptic, Freethinker


Jimenezj
Theist
Posts: 344
Joined: 2011-12-16
User is offlineOffline
Marty

Why did you say No?
Would you elaborate your answer?


Jimenezj
Theist
Posts: 344
Joined: 2011-12-16
User is offlineOffline
Thunder

I Just explained it in my thread you posted.
Read the reason in the argument again.
It explains your first question.

appeal to ignorance is an argument for or against a proposition on the basis of a lack of evidence against or for it. If there is positive evidence for the conclusion, then of course we have other reasons for accepting it, but a lack of evidence by itself is no evidence for a no God. 


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5102
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
I think we all agree that

 

Jimenezj wrote:

The bible states That God is not governed by time, he is eternal and therefore, Is outside of time. If God created the heavens and the earth during the BB as the bible says, Then time would be the outcome of the BB as Hawking stated. So if no time existed before the BB then it would be Logical to say that God created the universe because He is the eternal one who exist outside of time as stated By the bible. 

 

this discussion with the lord of the circular fallacy is going to be fruitless. Look, Jim. If it's in the bible, it's true. Even if it can't be proved empirically and even if none of its assertions are definable. It's still true. Because it says so. In the bible. 

 

 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


Jimenezj
Theist
Posts: 344
Joined: 2011-12-16
User is offlineOffline
AE

Read thread #3

Genesis 1:1 was proven.


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5102
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
Oh, the pain of it all...

 

Jimenezj wrote:

Read thread #3 Genesis 1:1 was proven.

 

Ok, Jim...I'll look at Post 3

 

Jimenezj wrote:

 

We have the bible that states that in the bigining God created the heavens and the earth.

 

Post 3 seems to reinforce my sense you are employing fallacious circular reasoning - to wit, bald assertions written in the bible must be true because they are written in the bible. The bald assertions of the Genesis account cannot be compared in any way to the process of expansion from a singularity. The mythical Genesis account of creation is incoherent and the author was either plagiarizing multiple translations of the complete works of Berosus or fell victim to an intoxicated continuity editor. 

 

 

 

 

 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


Marty Hamrick
atheist
Marty Hamrick's picture
Posts: 227
Joined: 2010-12-31
User is offlineOffline
 Sure. Sorry about that, I

 Sure. Sorry about that, I got called away when I was posting. Anything outside of spacetime, that is outside of the universe, what the Buddhists call All There Is and Is Not, would end up being Nowhere.

"Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings."


Jimenezj
Theist
Posts: 344
Joined: 2011-12-16
User is offlineOffline
Marty

The Christians call it heaven.
The Buddhist call it nowhere.
The Atheist call it nothing.

Are you a buddhist?

appeal to ignorance is an argument for or against a proposition on the basis of a lack of evidence against or for it. If there is positive evidence for the conclusion, then of course we have other reasons for accepting it, but a lack of evidence by itself is no evidence for a no God. 


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5102
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
Bollocks

Jimenezj wrote:

The Christians call it heaven. The Buddhist call it nowhere. The Atheist call it nothing. Are you a buddhist?

 

The atheists say show us some actual evidence. So far you have dished up nothing but silly assertions and zero proof. What is heaven? Where is heaven? Prove it exists.  

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


Ktulu
atheist
Posts: 1830
Joined: 2010-12-21
User is offlineOffline
Jimenezj wrote:You said,

Jimenezj wrote:
You said, Stephen Hawking confirmed what was said earlier about causation and went further to say that asking what went on before the Big Bang was like asking to find the edge of a sphere because prior to the BB, time did not exist. Therefore, there was no time for this God to create the universe. The problem with this theory is that The bible states That God is not governed by time, he is eternal and therefore, Is outside of time. If God created the heavens and the earth during the BB as the bible says, Then time would be the outcome of the BB as Hawking stated. So if no time existed before the BB then it would be Logical to say that God created the universe because He is the eternal one who exist outside of time as stated By the bible. If God exist outside of time, then the laws of physics Do not apply to him. Would you agree?

This was likely covered by some poster or other, but causation is a temporal phenomenon.  Meaning that you have matter in state A, you have the CAUSE and in a temporal vector you arrive at state B.  Since time is a property of the universe, you cannot use it to explain how the universe was created.  

The bible says a lot of idiotic things, this is simply one of those idiotic things.  

Here's what I consider a very good article on first cause. (I think Zaq gets the point across nicely in this one)

http://silverskeptic.blogspot.ca/2012/04/first-cause-part-ii.html

"So we have to ask what precisely is meant by “begins to exist.”  I’m going to introduce two new terms, to help keep things strait.  “Forms” is the word I’ll use to refer to pre-existing matter taking a new shape.  If we claim “everything that forms has a cause,” then it seems we are saying that whenever matter takes a new shape, it must have had a previous shape and some general rules governing how it got from the old shape to the new shape.  And the previous shape plus the rules is what we call the cause of the forming.  For the other interpretation, I’ll use the word “appears.”  When matter appears, it goes from not existing to existing.  In other words, there has to be some net gain in total energy of the universe in order for matter to be appearing."

Now, I don't expect you to actually read, or understand those articles.  But if you have a bit of time, do try and give it a good read.  Speaking of which, how long do you think it would take god to read those articles, since he's outside time and all.  Would you say it would take him 0 time? as in NO time.  Wouldn't that equate with the reading not happening at all? If not, what is the difference between something taking ZERO time, and something not happening?  

Now if you want to dwell deeper into physics and how time plays an important role, we'll play that game.

"Don't seek these laws to understand. Only the mad can comprehend..." -- George Cosbuc


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5102
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
Thanks Ktu...

 

Ktulu wrote:

Causation is a temporal phenomenon.  Meaning that you have matter in state A, you have the CAUSE and in a temporal vector you arrive at state B.  Since time is a property of the universe, you cannot use it to explain how the universe was created.  

 

I've tried to say something like this elsewhere a few times in relation to the possibility of the human idea of 'probability' existing outside or before the universe in the absence of 'time-based causality', and I never got close to making it this clear. 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


BobSpence
High Level DonorRational VIP!ScientistWebsite Admin
BobSpence's picture
Posts: 5904
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Jimenezj wrote:So , you are

Jimenezj wrote:
So , you are saying that quantum mechanics Breaks the laws of causality. Is this correct, Correct me if I am wrong.

What 'laws of causality'??

There are things which have no clear identifiable cause, and/or  only 'need' an infinitesimal 'initial cause'.

Quantum Mechanics says that if the energy involved is small enough, there is a finite probability that an event can occur spontaneously. Since the nett energy of our universe is zero, it can initiate with no external 'cause'.

Even without Quantum Mechanics, Complex systems with feedback can display chaotic behaviour, where an infinitesimal change in starting conditions can 'cause' an entirely different outcome.

It certainly doesn't resolve anything to propose something which can override all physical laws, i.e. 'God', which also has no cause.

Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality

"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris

The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me

From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5102
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
This is an

 

Jimenezj wrote:

God is not governed by time, he is eternal and therefore, Is outside of time.

 

objective claim and it needs to be supported objectively. This objective claim cannot be supported by assertions of subjective faith or repetition of objective claims made by others. Support this objective claim with objective proof or your argument fails. 

 

 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5102
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
Nice to see you again, Bob.

BobSpence wrote:

Jimenezj wrote:
So , you are saying that quantum mechanics Breaks the laws of causality. Is this correct, Correct me if I am wrong.

What 'laws of causality'??

There are things which have no clear identifiable cause, and/or  only 'need' an infinitesimal 'initial cause'.

Quantum Mechanics says that if the energy involved is small enough, there is a finite probability that an event can occur spontaneously. Since the nett energy of our universe is zero, it can initiate with no external 'cause'.

Even without Quantum Mechanics, Complex systems with feedback can display chaotic behaviour, where an infinitesimal change in starting conditions can 'cause' an entirely different outcome.

It certainly doesn't resolve anything to propose something which can override all physical laws, i.e. 'God', which also has no cause.

 

Hope all's well at your end. 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


BobSpence
High Level DonorRational VIP!ScientistWebsite Admin
BobSpence's picture
Posts: 5904
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Jimenezj wrote:You said,

Jimenezj wrote:
You said, Stephen Hawking confirmed what was said earlier about causation and went further to say that asking what went on before the Big Bang was like asking to find the edge of a sphere because prior to the BB, time did not exist. Therefore, there was no time for this God to create the universe. The problem with this theory is that The bible states That God is not governed by time, he is eternal and therefore, Is outside of time. If God created the heavens and the earth during the BB as the bible says, Then time would be the outcome of the BB as Hawking stated. So if no time existed before the BB then it would be Logical to say that God created the universe because He is the eternal one who exist outside of time as stated By the bible. If God exist outside of time, then the laws of physics Do not apply to him. Would you agree?

If God is "outside of time", he cannot meaningfully take any decisions or really "do"anything. Doesn't explain why such an entity should exist in the first place. There is no logical requirement that whatever triggered the Big Bang, or set the conditions that made it a finite possibility, need have any of the attributes of a 'God'.

'Eternal' does not logically imply 'outside of time'.

Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality

"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris

The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me

From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

Jimenezj wrote:
Your statement is absurd. Science is impossible to perform Without causality principles. You cannot break the laws of physics in the Natural world . Now if you are speaking of the unnatural world, A world not governed by physics then yes it is Possible. But this unnatural world is what the bible calls, The Spiritual world. Science is natural .

You know nothing about physics yet you tell me, a degreed physicist, about the subject. Is baptism really a brain enema? You asked about quantum mechnics and were given the correct answer. You demonstrated your ignorance of the subject with the form of the question.

 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

Jimenezj wrote:
You said, Stephen Hawking confirmed what was said earlier about causation and went further to say that asking what went on before the Big Bang was like asking to find the edge of a sphere because prior to the BB, time did not exist. Therefore, there was no time for this God to create the universe.

The problem with this theory is that The bible states That God is not governed by time, he is eternal and therefore, Is outside of time.

Why do you think reciting something you think is in the bible is going to make a bit of difference in this discussion?

No one knows who, by name, wrote whatever you think inspires your nonsense statement. Why do you think you should be taken seriously?

Please feel free to quote chapter and verse as to this not governed by time invention of yours.

Quote:
If God created the heavens and the earth during the BB as the bible says,

Another lie. There are no such words in the bible. Why do you feel you have to tell such obvious lies?

Quote:
Then time would be the outcome of the BB as Hawking stated. So if no time existed before the BB then it would be Logical to say that God created the universe because He is the eternal one who exist outside of time as stated By the bible. If God exist outside of time, then the laws of physics Do not apply to him. Would you agree?

Have you not noticed eternal has no meaning without time?

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml