The Big Bang....

[rocky_923]

I'm not new to these boards i just don't post very often. I have recently started my own search for truth and was hoping this board could assist. This may have been addressed in another thread, but I was unable to find a match in my search...

While the big bang is just a theory, it is a widely accepted theory. It is a theory with convincing evidence to support it. The big bang implies a beginning of the universe and time-space it's self. If we go past this beginning we have nothingness.

So, in order to create the big bang does this not require some sort of intelligent mind outside of time-space to create something out of nothing?

[axeplayer]

Axe, could you elaborate on what Evolution has to do with the origin of the universe?

evolution and the big bang theory go hand in hand. its like peanut butter and jelly. if it was conceded that the universe was created by God, then Genesis would be correct. If Genesis was correct, then evolution would be incorrect. So by creating the big bang myth, evo scientists have "covered" the possibility of God creating the universe, thus protecting evolution. but there is no evidence for the big bang, plus the big bang goes against several universal laws.

And could you elaborate on what actual evidence there is FOR ID? Just give us a few specific examples, please.

if you want evidence for intelligent design, simply walk outside of your home, and do a 180 degree turn with your eyes open, and you will see about a thousand pieces of evidence for ID. or, if you would like more specific examples, theres the human eye, the bird wing, and the bacterium flagellum, just to name a few.

[steen]

Axe, could you elaborate on what Evolution has to do with the origin of the universe?

evolution and the big bang theory go hand in hand. its like peanut butter and jelly.

Nope. The SToE is independent of the Big Bang Model.

if it was conceded that the universe was created by God, then Genesis would be correct.

Why?

If Genesis was correct, then evolution would be incorrect.

And genesis is not "correct," is in accurate and specific. That's already documented through scientific research.

So by creating the big bang myth, evo scientists have "covered" the possibility of God creating the universe, thus protecting evolution.

Evolutionary biologists did not "create" the Big Bang. It was hypothesised and researched by astronomers and physicists. Your claim is wrong and shows astonishing ignorance of science.

but there is no evidence for the big bang, plus the big bang goes against several universal laws.

Both claims are false, and of course have still nothing to do with the Scientific Theory of Evolution. Your "becasue I say so" postulations about connecting Evolution and the Big Bang are flat out incorrect.

And could you elaborate on what actual evidence there is FOR ID? Just give us a few specific examples, please.

if you want evidence for intelligent design, simply walk outside of your home, and do a 180 degree turn with your eyes open, and you will see about a thousand pieces of evidence for ID.

Sorry, but I didn't. There was no evidence of ID anywhere that I could see.

or, if you would like more specific examples, theres the human eye, the bird wing, and the bacterium flagellum, just to name a few.

Really? Because you say so? What is the evidence you are talking about. I have seen all of the above structures and never seen any actual evidence for ID.

Yes, I am aware that you BELIEVE that they must have been created by a creator because you are unable to imagine how they could have evolved on their own (the usual sing-song by the ID crowd), but your inability to "imagine" this doesn't mean that there is avidence FOR ID either.

So to me, it seems that your "evidence" consists of "I can't believe that it evolved."

That, of course, is not evidence, so I hope you have something more specific than that?

[Curious]

evolution and the big bang theory go hand in hand. its like peanut butter and jelly. if it was conceded that the universe was created by God, then Genesis would be correct. If Genesis was correct, then evolution would be incorrect. So by creating the big bang myth, evo scientists have "covered" the possibility of God creating the universe, thus protecting evolution. but there is no evidence for the big bang, plus the big bang goes against several universal laws.

The big bang theory has a large amount of evidence supporting it. This does not mean that it is complete however or that they even pretend to know the complete answer. The ID movement make this claim that it goes against several universal laws but this is either a plain lie or those espousing it really are as stupid as they sound and actually believe it to be true.

if you want evidence for intelligent design, simply walk outside of your home, and do a 180 degree turn with your eyes open, and you will see about a thousand pieces of evidence for ID. or, if you would like more specific examples, theres the human eye, the bird wing, and the bacterium flagellum, just to name a few.

These examples can easily be explained by evolution. Irreducible complexity is yet another ridiculous argument that shows the depth of the ID theorists ignorance of science and lack of common sense.

[The Happy Humanist]

Evolutionary biologists did not "create" the Big Bang. It was hypothesised and researched by astronomers and physicists. Your claim is wrong and shows astonishing ignorance of science.

Could someone please post a link or two explaining the evidence for the Big Bang, for Axeplayer's edification? He might have been asking out of genuine curiosity, and it would be a shame to waste an opportunity to educate someone on this important issue, especially a young man with some intelligence. Let's not get bogged down in crying "ignorance" when we can do something about it.

[Curious]

Let's not get bogged down in crying "ignorance" when we can do something about it.

I hope you didn't think I was calling Axeplayer ignorant. The Ignorance I refer to is that of the idiot who originally formulated the idea of irreducible complexity as evidence of ID.
BTW just do a websearch with keywords big bang evidence. Take care, a number of sites are actually creationist sites misrepresenting the facts.

[The Happy Humanist]

===

I hope you didn't think I was calling Axeplayer ignorant.

Not you, someone else. Not that there's anything inherently wrong with calling someone ignorant, you're actually doing them a favor in pointing out that there is knowledge available to them that they seem to have missed; it just blunts the sting of the word when you then offer to show them where they can obtain said knowledge.

BTW just do a websearch with keywords big bang evidence. Take care, a number of sites are actually creationist sites misrepresenting the facts.

This is exactly what I'm worried about. I've run into that myself when trying to educate myself on evolution - "stealth" Creationist sites. I don't mind reading Answers in Genesis, they at least show some responsibility...it's the ones that aren't properly labeled that flummox me.

[steen]

There is a little bit on Talk.Origin, although it really is outside their scope:
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CE/CE420.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CE/CE441.html

[rocky_923]

Before we make any such statement we should try to understand what "outside" would mean in this case. As we understand things at this point "outside" is a place that doesn't exist. There is not nothing there because nothing is what is inside the universe, away from collections of matter.

I'm saying that we should stop the supernaturalists right there. Don't let them talk about their imaginary space pixies, living outside time, until they show good reason to beleive "outside time" is a viable concept. It isn't.

DanZ

But couldn't the "outside time" be the realm of god christians always talk about? If the afterlife is eternal would't "outside time" be the perfect place for it to exist?

[The Happy Humanist]

But couldn't the "outside time" be the realm of god christians always talk about? If the afterlife is eternal would't "outside time" be the perfect place for it to exist?

Rocky:

No doubt about it, it's a tough concept to get your mind around. But under the scenario JulioD is describing, where time started at the moment of the Big Bang, nothing can exist outside time, not even God. Think of a timeline. Its origin, its starting point, is at the moment of the Big Bang. Each event that happens after that can be plotted on the timeline. There is plenty of "space" on the time line in which events can happen - whether they are billions of years apart or nanoseconds apart, each will have its own little mark on the timeline.

Now, God creating the universe is an event - a series of events, actually. He has to formulate the plan, develop the will to execute it, and then actually put it into action. Notice the "and then." These things have to happen one after another. The question is, where on the timeline do you plot them? There IS no timeline! There is no "space of time" in which they can happen! Even if planning and execution can somehow happen at the same time, they have to precede the existence of the universe. The universe is where time happens. No universe, no time. No time, no events. No events.....no Creation.

Capice?

Now, under MY scenario (which is completely unscientific and speculative), there is another realm, outside the universe, which has its own timeline. Yes, God could exist in this realm....but as I have shown, he isn't necessary. Something else, something that doesn't think, could also exist in this realm, and could be responsible for creating the universe.

But when in doubt, listen to the scientists.

[juliod]

its like peanut butter and jelly.

Evolution without the Big Bang is like a fish without a bicycle.

Or, to put it more formally: If god created the universe, humans and apes still evolved from a common ancestor.

DanZ