Hijack from Is Atheism Dead? An Interesting Read.

[Strange]

20 minutes ago, coffeesippin said:

If someone says, "I don't believe in the Big Bang," and he is cast out as intellectually limited and not worthy of consideration, then those casting him out are condemning themselves to disbelief in the possibility that perhaps there WAS no big bang.  Same with someone saying, "I don't believe in God"  or for that matter "I believe in God." 

While I would share your concern with an extreme reaction to someone denying the big bang model, there is a difference : there is evidence for the big bang model so belief doesn't come into our ; there is no evidence for gods so that is purely a matter of belief. 

[beecee]

4 minutes ago, coffeesippin said:

I believe in pure science that seeks answers rather than false science which claims to have the answer, 

Some science by necessity is speculative. That is the step before it advances to theory status, the highest rung on the ladder for science. eg:  https://www.astrosociety.org/publication/a-universe-from-nothing/ but this is off topic I think so perhaps if you are inclined, start another thread?

 

[Strange]

30 minutes ago, coffeesippin said:

The evidence for Big Bang became immediately so tenuous that a fabrication had to be thrown in ..

There are no fabrications and a large amount of solid evidence. It is a bit silly to make up objections like this. 

32 minutes ago, coffeesippin said:

have to admit the coincidence was mathematically challenged.

Meteors are common especially at certain times. If you see one, you are quite likely to see another soon after from the same source and on the same course   

[Strange]

36 minutes ago, coffeesippin said:

false science which claims to have the answer,

The only place I see "science" like that is when crackpots post their "theories" on forums like this. 

[beecee]

11 minutes ago, coffeesippin said:

I wasn't attempting to interject scientific discussion, only to clarify my position in this discussion, that my belief in God is not because of an unbelief in science.  All of the sciences though, in my knowledge, act as evidence for God, and increase my fascination with science, and my desire to explore science increases.

But you just said this...."The evidence for Big Bang became immediately so tenuous that a fabrication had to be thrown in .. Expansion, the only evidence for Expansion being the need for it. 

The evidence for the BB rests on four major cosmological pillars;

[1] The observed expansion.[not fabricated] 

[2] The CMBR at 2.7K.

[3] The abundance of the lighter elements.

[4] Galactic formation and large scale structure.

 

The rest is simply coincidence, nothing more, nothing less. If any mythical god would like to prove himself, he would logically do it for the world....not one isolated individual....something like making every person on Earth, suddenly defy gravity and float in the air. If that happened with some voice from the clouds announcing such a momentous event, I would humbly get down on my knees in adoration.

Edited November 17, 2018 by beecee

[coffeesippin]

1 minute ago, Strange said:

The only place I see "science" like that is when crackpots post their "theories" on forums like this. 

I'm disappointed at that statement, Strange.  I hoped you were beyond that kind of pride.  

[beecee]

1 minute ago, coffeesippin said:

I'm disappointed at that statement, Strange.  I hoped you were beyond that kind of pride.  

It's totally true though. Perhaps you need to check out the speculative sections and of course trash. Plus of course many simply like to attempt to trash science or some aspect of it, as a crusade type of endeavour against the sciences in general, because it has pushed the need for any deity back into near oblivion. The fear of the unknown, the fear of the myth of eternal damnation is strong.

[Strange]

10 minutes ago, coffeesippin said:

I'm disappointed at that statement, Strange.  I hoped you were beyond that kind of pride.  

What pride? I said nothing about myself, just the deluded people who post silly ideas on science forums. That is a statement of fact so, again, I don't know where you think pride comes into it. 

[coffeesippin]

3 minutes ago, beecee said:

But you just said this...."The evidence for Big Bang became immediately so tenuous that a fabrication had to be thrown in .. Expansion, the only evidence for Expansion being the need for it. 

The evidence for the BB rests on four major cosmological pillars;

[1] The observed expansion.[not fabricated] 

[2] The CMBR at 2.7K.

[3] The abundance of the lighter elements.

[4] Galactic formation and large scale structure.

 

The rest is simply coincidence, nothing more, nothing less. If any mythical god would like to prove himself, he would logically do it for the world....not one isolated individual....something like making every person on Earth, suddenly defy gravity and float in the air. If that happened with some voice from the clouds announcing such a momentous event, I would humbly get down on my knees in adoration.

     The Expansion I referred to was the period of rapid expansion inserted into the original theory after measurements showed the universe was larger than it should have been, which is why I added the capital 'E' to Expansion (at least I hope I did.)  Yes, the universe appears to be expanding, and at an increasing rate which in one scenario leads to The Big Rip described in the book of Peter, with the 'elements flying apart'  the atomic structure itself exploding as the Rip says it will.  Regarding the Big Bang, if you put a little gasoline on water, you will also see that kind of expansion, with no explosion of Big Bang.  I see that as a possibility after a seeding of quantum fluctuation.  But we are straying from the topic, I hope forgiveness rules the mods.  

2 minutes ago, Strange said:

What pride? I said nothing about myself, just the deluded people who post silly ideas on science forums. That is a statement of fact so, again, I don't know where you think pride comes into it. 

Your pride tells you that you know so much that the other ideas are silly.  

[Strange]

Just now, coffeesippin said:

The Expansion I referred to was the period of rapid expansion inserted into the original theory after measurements showed the universe was larger than it should have been, which is why I added the capital 'E' to Expansion (at least I hope I did.)

There is no such thing. You may be thinking of inflation but that is hypothesised for a completely different reason. 

This is off topic so if you want to discuss it further, start a new thread 

[coffeesippin]

2 minutes ago, beecee said:

All science is speculation until shown otherwise. That is the greatest benefit of science and the scientific method.

Amen!