13 replies to this topic

[Leptailurus Serval]

Unarguably, within the realm of YouTube Atheists punditry, there was a time where many of them simply admitted honestly that they do not know what caused the Big Bang - a position that was somehow misinterpreted by the Creationists as a direct admission that the former believe the universe simply exploded from nothing. This Creationist attempt to ridicule is of course was vehemently rejected by many Atheists alike.

And yet, strangely enough, through the passage of time, numerous facts pointing out that the ridiculous label is actually supported by scientific evidences started popping out here and there. All these observations and experiments are of course has been well known for quite some time within the scientific community but not to the general public.

It was only when Lawrence Krauss publicized his popular book regarding the matter that the notion of a universe from nothing commenced to become widely known to the outside world. While the Creationists will undoubtedly continue with their - fantasy turn to reality - ridicules, how should we as laymen respond to it? Can such convoluted idea be graspable to the overall population at large?

Edited by Kaze Araki, 08 December 2012 - 08:16 PM.

[Analord]

I believe in Jesus.

[Laurens D]

I think it's more a what if, There is unlimited possibilities. They are trying to recreate a small big bang by smashing protons together they say they've found things but it's never actually confimed or it will take another ... Years for them to find out more about it while there another 'Unlimited' possibilities. Personally I don't care about the past, but more about the future.

Personally, I think there was a big bang, a lot of atom's and a world was created eventually. Life came from bactaria and evolved. and that is how life was created. The end

[Kreian]

jesus is my savior

[101010]

Science needs to be a lot more unfriendly to keep away the atheistic and religious imbeciles.

In three days, Physical Review Letters will publish interesting paper on the subject of the beginning of everything with authors Ivan Agullo, Abhay Ashtekar, and William Nelson, from Penn State University. As you can see, the new fad is Big Bounce. Get on with times, nerd.

[Leptailurus Serval]

Assuming you know what you quoted from:

How is this:

"This paper pushes back the genesis of the cosmic structure of our universe from the inflationary epoch all the way to the Big Bounce, covering some 11 orders of magnitude in the density of matter and the curvature of space-time," Nelson said. "We now have narrowed down the initial conditions that could exist at the Big Bounce, plus we find that the evolution of those initial conditions agrees with observations of the cosmic background radiation."

Disproves any of Krauss' arguments?
If anything:

The new paradigm of loop quantum origins shows, for the first time, that the large-scale structures we now see in the universe evolved from fundamental fluctuations in the essential quantum nature of "space-time," which existed even at the very beginning of the universe over 14 billion years ago.

This support Krauss even more!

Edited by Kaze Araki, 08 December 2012 - 09:26 PM.

[SidL]

"Which one came first the- the chicken or the egg?"

[Mistake]

"Through God my Jesus there is salvation and life forever" Psalms 23:7

[S.C.]

"Which one came first the- the chicken or the egg?"

The egg, duh.

[©®åƒ†¥µåGGø†]

how should we as laymen respond to it? Can such convoluted idea be graspable to the overall population at large?

Glub.

[It is my... personal belief that people are unequivocally irrevocably implacable and incapable of understanding such immaterial conceptions as those you presently put forth. Not because they are stupid, but because life exists beyond atheism and science. Creationist attempts to downplay science are unsurprisingly flawed and foolhardy, as the personification of a banana does not an argument make. In layman's terms, a creationist trying to argue against documented scientific evidence using ignorance of science as their primary weapon is just as funny as a christian trying to argue against norse mythology by quoting from the bible. In other words, it's quite funny.

Regardless, if there is an acceptance that these are merely two competing models of the universe, perhaps people can just leave it well enough alone... get on with science, get on with religion, and get on with their lives. Yea. It won't happen though. People need constant reassurance that they are correct. Such weak and inferior beings... The taste suits them though.]

[Horn]

Oh, great.

Am I the only one who thinks this isn't a particularly good topic to discuss because it pretty much always leads to flame wars?

[pizhhh]

Oh, great.

Am I the only one who thinks this isn't a particularly good topic to discuss because it pretty much always leads to flame wars?

My thoughts exactly. Plus, of all the places you could choose to discuss this matter, why an online manga reader's forum?

[Leptailurus Serval]

Glub.

[It is my... personal belief that people are unequivocally irrevocably implacable and incapable of understanding such immaterial conceptions as those you presently put forth. Not because they are stupid, but because life exists beyond atheism and science. Creationist attempts to downplay science are unsurprisingly flawed and foolhardy, as the personification of a banana does not an argument make. In layman's terms, a creationist trying to argue against documented scientific evidence using ignorance of science as their primary weapon is just as funny as a christian trying to argue against norse mythology by quoting from the bible. In other words, it's quite funny.

Regardless, if there is an acceptance that these are merely two competing models of the universe, perhaps people can just leave it well enough alone... get on with science, get on with religion, and get on with their lives. Yea. It won't happen though. People need constant reassurance that they are correct. Such weak and inferior beings... The taste suits them though.]

While I do not know what you meant by "life exists beyond atheism and science", I can assure you that "People need constant reassurance that they are correct" is a trademark of religion and not science, thus why between the two; only science works.

[Dafortminor]

No offense but I am going to go ahead and lock this, I just feel there is a flame war as Horn mentioned coming between people who are religious and people who believe in Science. I think it could get nasty so I will lock it before getting to that destination. Seeing from the previous comments its leading up to this.

-Daffy