Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Does the Big Bang breakthrough offer proof of God? [View all]LostOne4Ever
(9,288 posts)76. Those absolute are not as absolute as you think
The medicine might not be what is curing you but the beverage you are taking them with. It could be the combination of an inactive ingredient with something you eat.
There are no absolute certainties in science. None. Every experiment has margins of error and uncertainty calculated within.
The fact that we can not even be 100% of our own reality further proves this.
What we will never be able to conduct an experiment on is how the universe cam into being. We can make theories on things that we think we know, you may think those theories are valid based on what we think we know, but we also know that many theories are proven to be wrong once we are able to conducts experiments on them.
You are stating your opinion as fact here. Just because we can't concoct an experiment on how the universe came into being now does not mean we won't be able to do so in the future. At one time the idea of man flying seemed impossible. Now we fly around the world in less than 24 hours and have landed on the moon.
Also, if it is a THEORY it already has evidence and experiments testing them. A theory is more than a guess. It is a tested and verified explanation of a phenomena that has been replicated and peer reviewed extensively.
Further, of those theories that were shown be incorrect, they were proven incorrect by science itself. Thus the greatest part of science, it is self correcting. Just because the first space shuttle crashed, we didn't stop there.
Again having faith in scientific theory with no way to ever prove that theory is the same as having faith in a higher being.
Both require something that can never be proven, both require believing in something outside our human capacity.
Both require something that can never be proven, both require believing in something outside our human capacity.
Again, you have a faulty understanding of what the word theory means. Theories have been tested. If it was just a guess it would be called a hypothesis. So AGAIN, one is faith in something with no evidence backing it up, and the other (faith in science) is faith based upon evidence and proof.
EDIT:
Also, don't think of the big bang as a literal explosion like you see on TV.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
268 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
As God, I Have To Say That This Is Actually True, But None Of You Will Be Able to Comprehend Why
Skraxx
Mar 2014
#267
While it may be true that Hoyle coined the term "Big Bang" he did so derisively.
CBGLuthier
Mar 2014
#6
Judeo-Christianity hardly possesses a monopoly on 'big-bang' cosmology-as-theology
Cirque du So-What
Mar 2014
#11
Yeah, I just prepended the 'breaking news' in keeping with this weeks CNN-ism n/t
IDemo
Mar 2014
#24
I want to believe that our universe was a being from another universe's equivalent to a...
Humanist_Activist
Mar 2014
#39
If by "God" they mean Alan Guth's theory of hyperinflation, and Andrei Linde's theory of chaotic
Warren DeMontague
Mar 2014
#42
I agree. Basically it's cover, so they can disguise the fact that it's really a fundy Xtian agenda
Warren DeMontague
Mar 2014
#45
People more emotionally invested in getting you to affirm or deny a concept, than defining it
Warren DeMontague
Mar 2014
#46
Did God do it Himself or contract it out? If so, He should fire the contractors.
Tierra_y_Libertad
Mar 2014
#47
After the "black hole ate MH370?" fiasco, I really thought this was going to be satire
muriel_volestrangler
Mar 2014
#55
both god and big bang rely on some sort of faith for they can never be proven beyond doubt
politicman
Mar 2014
#57
science has it immeasurable benefits but it is inacapable of answering the question
politicman
Mar 2014
#147
Does a prosecutor in a murder case have to kill the victim over again to "prove" murder?
Silent3
Mar 2014
#268
isnt that what religion is, believing in something higher than humans and human topics
politicman
Mar 2014
#63
Miracles may be human imgaination, but so is belieing that something just always existed.
politicman
Mar 2014
#93
doesnt matter the age of the universe, where did the original conditions for the universe come from.
politicman
Mar 2014
#107
please dont think I want you to believe or say what you are against, thats your perogative.
politicman
Mar 2014
#127
why is your faith in soemthing you cannot conceptaulize more valid than mine
politicman
Mar 2014
#223
can you have an explosion into nothing? doesnt there have to be something to have the explosion in?
politicman
Mar 2014
#69
gravity yes, something appear out of nowhere with no conditions for it to occur, no i dont believe
politicman
Mar 2014
#149
If you want to insult go ahead, just makes your inability to provide answers
politicman
Mar 2014
#158
exactly, bot ideas require faith, so why is anyone calling out the other for being wrong.
politicman
Mar 2014
#122
"unless you argue that something just always existed with no beginning what so ever."
NuclearDem
Mar 2014
#131
theories can apparently explain alot if they never are able to be tested, dont you think
politicman
Mar 2014
#217
a 'hot and dense entity' is still something, an entity is still something that needed a beginning
politicman
Mar 2014
#100
time and space AS WE KNOW IT started with the universe, are we not to ask what was before that
politicman
Mar 2014
#118
yes i don't believe in evoulition, its too convienient that nothing has evolved since
politicman
Mar 2014
#185
I lose nothing by believing in god, instead I might gain something if I am right
politicman
Mar 2014
#193
you may think reality is more inspiring, but I think a higher being is a lot more inspiring
politicman
Mar 2014
#198
yes we dont live in the dark ages, but we dont have the answers to all the questions either
politicman
Mar 2014
#202
sorry if a cannot accept evolutionw without a proper explanation of why other creatures did not also
politicman
Mar 2014
#206
If life evolves according to habitat, why did Mars not evolve its own life to live in its habitat
politicman
Mar 2014
#225
It's why DU is seriously changing, not necessarily for the better...as results show
TeamPooka
Mar 2014
#258
No. If god caused the big bang, you are still left with the problem of what caused god.
FarCenter
Mar 2014
#59
No. The static model was roundly rejected in the mid-20th century for the reasons I gave you.
NuclearDem
Mar 2014
#263
Of course it does. It also offers the same amount of proof of the non-existence of God. -nt
Liberal Veteran
Mar 2014
#94
The existence or non-existence of God makes not the slightest difference to the practice of science
eridani
Mar 2014
#188
On a recent expedition to the East Coast, I discovered the ancient seaport of Nantucket
Thor_MN
Mar 2014
#214
science does not fully predict what i do. therefore i am divine. nt
La Lioness Priyanka
Mar 2014
#249