Big Bang, Deflated? Universe May Have Had No Beginning

[shrewsbury]

That is the only reason to make such a foolish claim by equating the two.

perhaps that is the other way around. you are limiting yourself by not trying to equate the two.

I do not mean you should try to prove fable by science or science by fable, but rather using science to understand human side of fables and fables to understand humans.

[Star_Cards]

Sorry to hear that y'all don't believe in a Supreme Being/Creator/God. By the way you post, it seems you BELIEVE that NOTHING can CREATE something. That CANNOT happen.

The CREATOR didn't need a CREATOR, HE was and is the CREATOR (God). If you're "anyone with a brain...", you should know NOTHING can create NOTHING. So you're saying NOTHING can create SOMETHING, and that definitely cannot happen. Think about it. Hopefully, you'll some day admit, and understand, that there was and is the God (Creator/Supreme Being). I'm not "...can't just make it up...". What I've said definitely makes more sense than what you say. NOTHING making NOTHING, you've got to be kidding. For your benefit, PLEASE think, and reconsider about believing in God. Have a good day.

NOTE: I'll not reply to this thread anymore. I've explained as much as I needed. Now it's up to y'all non-believers in GOD/CREATOR/SUPREME BEING to think and consider honestly, and make your FINAL DECISION. Hopefully, you'll make the right one. Again, have a good day.

I'm not sure why you aren't willing to continue the conversation on this topic, but to each their own. As far as your statement... Even in your scenario something (the creator) was created from nothing. Even once we have this creator wouldn't he be creating things from nothing as well?

[duane1969]

Really Duane, you think I don't know the actual definition of ignorance? You want to base YOUR INSULT on that?

You are IGNORANT, if you equate a fable to a scientific theory. Plain and simple. You either lack the knowledge (ignorant) of what is behind the scientific theory, or you cannot understand the methodology (stupid). That is the only reason to make such a foolish claim by equating the two.

Keep trying Duane. That attempt was weak.

It takes a truly small and pathetic person to take so much pleasure from being so rude, condescending and arrogant. I won't bother discussing anything with you anymore. You have shown yourself to be way too much of a egomaniac for me to waste anymore of my time on.

[shrewsbury]

As far as your statement... Even in your scenario something (the creator) was created from nothing. Even once we have this creator wouldn't he be creating things from nothing as well?

I will take this up.
The beginning is the beginning, something had to come first and everything else derived from it, I think you, I, science, and religion can agree with that.

[habsheaven]

It takes a truly small and pathetic person to take so much pleasure from being so rude, condescending and arrogant. I won't bother discussing anything with you anymore. You have shown yourself to be way too much of a egomaniac for me to waste anymore of my time on.

That's fine by me.

You guys are quite the case.

One ends a post with "thanks for giving me a laugh" regarding a statement in my post, and then whines because I reply with an insult.

Now you make a feeble attempt at insulting me over a statement not meant to be an actual definition, and whine when I reply in an equally rude manner.

Truly laughable.

[habsheaven]

I will take this up.
The beginning is the beginning, something had to come first and everything else derived from it, I think you, I, science, and religion can agree with that.

Jay, I think the disagreement comes when we start discussing the timing of that beginning, and our perceived level of knowledge regarding that beginning.

[shrewsbury]

Habs, for some the timing is an issue, but certainly the knowledge regarding it is the main issue for nearly all on both sides.

My thoughts on the religious side of it are that it does not matter and is not an important part of it. No one will ever know, we can theorize about it (which is fun) but the knowledge of it will never exist.
Science has the upperhand when it comes to this subject just because it is not limited, whereas most religious people are limited by their religion and religious beliefs.

[bryanATX]

I hate to think we'll never know. If I was alive in 1900 I would never in a million years think we could walk on the moon. Science will always ask questions, and continue to actively seek real factual truth. I just dont see how reading a bunch of 2000+ year old stories over and over does anything positive for the future of our existence. Maybe we are just some magical being's sea monkeys, but only one side of this is actually doing anything to find out.

[duane1969]

I hate to think we'll never know. If I was alive in 1900 I would never in a million years think we could walk on the moon. Science will always ask questions, and continue to actively seek real factual truth. I just dont see how reading a bunch of 2000+ year old stories over and over does anything positive for the future of our existence. Maybe we are just some magical being's sea monkeys, but only one side of this is actually doing anything to find out.

Question. If in 2000 years there are a group of people who believe that the current scientific theories are still fact even though new science argues that the current theories are not, would that be a discredit of the current scientific theory to the point that those people deserve ridicule or would they be simply choosing to believe a long held and accepted belief rather than cling to the new, still unproven idea?

My point? These current theories are no more proven than creationism from 200+ years ago. Choosing to believe one or the other is tantamount to believing that there are or are not aliens. We have no definitive proof either way.

[shrewsbury]

I hate to think we'll never know. If I was alive in 1900 I would never in a million years think we could walk on the moon.

You are talking about the tangible, whereas the beginning is intangible. You cannot go back to the beginning to know it, you can just guess at it. Even the best theory cannot prove it, it is just an educated guess.

I just dont see how reading a bunch of 2000+ year old stories over and over does anything positive for the future of our existence

Maybe we are just some magical being's sea monkeys, but only one side of this is actually doing anything to find out.

understanding humans and understanding why people act like they do will help the present and the future. Understanding human behavior does way more for us than guessing on where we all came from. But there is room for both.
where we came from is not nearly as important as who we are.