Dark Matter Blob Confounds Experts

Status
Not open for further replies.

chockomonkey

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 11, 2003
Messages
8,298
You're still misunderstanding so let me say this in the most straightforward way I can: The Big Bang Theory says nothing about the origin of our universe, period. You're faulting the theory for not answering a question it is not intended to answer.

After reading this it is clear to me now that many people who support the Big Bang Theory do not understand it either (which is where i got most of my understanding about it). I'd edit my first paragraph above, if i could.
 

dadman

n00b
Joined
Jan 12, 2005
Messages
42
The finite can never comprehend the infinite, and since God is infinite, we cannot possibly understand His being. God never had a beginning, He was ALWAYS there. If that doesn't blow your mind, nothing will. Just try to grasp that I dare you.:)
 

nOrVow

Gawd
Joined
Jan 10, 2011
Messages
693
The finite can never comprehend the infinite, and since God is infinite, we cannot possibly understand His being. God never had a beginning, He was ALWAYS there. If that doesn't blow your mind, nothing will. Just try to grasp that I dare you.:)

Here, let me provided you with similar scenarios.

The finite can never comprehend the infinite, and since Mario is infinite, we cannot possibly understand His being. Mario never had a beginning, He was ALWAYS there. If that doesn't blow your mind, nothing will.

or

The finite can never comprehend the infinite, and since the leprechaun is infinite, we cannot possibly understand His being. the leprechaun never had a beginning, He was ALWAYS there. If that doesn't blow your mind, nothing will.

Now tell me... does that make ANY fucking sense?


Same shit, different story.
 

LeninGHOLA

Vladimir Hayt
Joined
Aug 26, 2009
Messages
18,416
Dunno what circular, self fulfilling logic has to do with darkmatter at this point.
 

doz

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jun 16, 2009
Messages
6,156
The finite can never comprehend the infinite, and since God is infinite, we cannot possibly understand His being. God never had a beginning, He was ALWAYS there. If that doesn't blow your mind, nothing will. Just try to grasp that I dare you.:)

Try and grasp anything about who we are or where we came from. You can use the logic you just provided on a scientific theory. Think about whats really out there, millions of light years away for just a second.

How do you know we werent put here at one time by "aliens" (and by aliens I mean humans, as I dont fully believe in the triangular head with bug eyes alien yet) from another planet who wanted the bad seed gone?

Theres so many theories (and yes, god is a THEORY just as the big bang THEORY) thats its nearly impossible to grasp.
 

Aluisious

2[H]4U
Joined
Mar 6, 2009
Messages
2,189
In essense, the pro-Big Bang Theory people are basing their belief on faith, no? There isn't any factual evidence to prove otherwise

Other than cosmic expansion, background radiation, and nucleosynthesis, yeah there's no evidence :rolleyes:
 

dadman

n00b
Joined
Jan 12, 2005
Messages
42
Other than cosmic expansion, background radiation, and nucleosynthesis, yeah there's no evidence :rolleyes:

So how does cosmic expansion, background radiation, and nucleosynthesis prove that there was a big bang? It proves nothing. I theorize that reverse gravity is pushing the galaxies apart, while at the same time maintaining normal gravitational effects. You can't disprove it either, and it is just as credible as any other theory out there.

Background radiation? There should be that, but it doesn't prove the big bang. Just because the radiation lessens the further out the universe goes doesn't prove there was a big bang.
In fact, it proves that my theory of reverse gravity is more likely due to the almost uniform distribution of the radiation.

Nucleosynthesis? It only lasted for seventeen minutes? Ok, who timed that, and what kind of watch did they use?

Not trying to be an a** about this, but if you read the explanations on these things the usual comment is "scientists believe". That simply means they don't know, but have to put something out there. Faith is on both sides.
 

wabbitseason

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 16, 2010
Messages
1,511
Big Bang is just a theory. A logical postulation based on observable evidence and the powers of human deduction. There isn't a single scientist that will say that the Big Bang theory has been proven.

You people present "god" as a fact. That is the difference. That is why you are ridiculed. It used to seem that reason and logic could be found in those that are truly faithful; that possibility becomes more remote by the day.
 

Wixard

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 14, 2002
Messages
2,119
It's a bit ironic that a theory first proposed by a priest is used in an attempt to disprove God.

I'm unsure why believing in God evokes so much disdain and anger. The belief on its face isn't silly, and it isn't the same as believing in fairies.

The traits associated with God such as self perpetuation are not equal to the traits associated with the universe, as the traits of the universe do not include creation as it exists in current form.

Since the speculation involves the creation of the universe, it has equal weight to say "God did it" or "The multiverse" as the traits applied to God are equal enough to create it, while various theories are also able to come to the same conclusion.

The distinction between "God did it" and purple unicorns should be obvious to anyone with average intelligence. The distinction however between "God did it" and "The multiverse/bubble" has a smaller deficit in being credible.

I should add believing in a supreme intelligence isn't the same as claiming to know his or her nature. Or that such a being spawned a religion, or even cares about our inconsequential planet.
 

Outamyhead

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jan 3, 2008
Messages
4,259
Just remember, God created the sun on the 4th day. So how did the first 3 days pass without a sun. Hrmm...

Blasphemer, you should know that the earth is the center of the universe and everything revolves around our flat planet.:rolleyes:
 

wabbitseason

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 16, 2010
Messages
1,511
I should add believing in a supreme intelligence isn't the same as claiming to know his or her nature. Or that such a being spawned a religion, or even cares about our inconsequential planet.

The rest of your post is nonsense but this point is credible and often overlooked.
 

Wixard

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 14, 2002
Messages
2,119
because this imaginary friend of yours is a SEXIST RACIST HOMOPHOBIC VIOLENT SPITEFUL asshole and people "listen" to him.

You should have actually read my post, especially the last line. I'll make it more clear:

Believing in God is not the same as believing in any religion, devil, messiah, or that God even cares about our planet or morality.
 

Wixard

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 14, 2002
Messages
2,119
The rest of your post is nonsense but this point is credible and often overlooked.

I'm not sure you read it either.

People say "If you say god, I say pink elephants"

However, what we think of god as being (all powerful, omnipotent, able to create universes) is not the same as what we think of pink elephants (Pink skin, 4 legs, an animal, not able to create universes).


However, theories that suppose a multi-verse, are equal in logic to believing a super intelligent being did it. As multi-verse theories (such as when universes collide and make big bangs) do explain a valid way events can lead to creation.
 

Wixard

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 14, 2002
Messages
2,119
I am. It is because people do not want to face their sin.

You mean to then repent and be "born again" so your local church can bilk you of money while the preacher lives well?

I think you put to much faith in the words of men.

If christians spent their time doing charity instead of spreading the bible the world would be better off.
 
Joined
Oct 26, 2005
Messages
2,340
It's a bit ironic that a theory first proposed by a priest is used in an attempt to disprove God.
The only people who view scientific theories as attempts to disprove God are the religious zealots. They assume, because they're working so hard to oppose science, that scientists are working equally hard to oppose God.

In reality, we're just ignoring him.
 

fattypants

2[H]4U
Joined
Mar 3, 2010
Messages
3,284
That cartoon for "religious logic" describes people on both sides of the fence in this thread.
Not at all.

The comic demonstrates only this: religion demands that science provide proof that they are wrong, rather than simply providing evidence that they are right.

All religion has to do to is to provide incontrovertible evidence that they are correct and science will accept it. That isn't too much to ask. Until that evidence is provided, there is no point arguing feelings against people who search for facts.
 

Wixard

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 14, 2002
Messages
2,119
One last thing before I go, people often forget the message of the main theme of the new testament:
Do good things for other people, live in peace and make the world a better place, THAT is how christianity was meant to be spread.


Not bible thumping behind a podium wishing for war with other countries.
 

LeninGHOLA

Vladimir Hayt
Joined
Aug 26, 2009
Messages
18,416
One last thing before I go, people often forget the message of the main theme of the new testament:
Do good things for other people, live in peace and make the world a better place, THAT is how christianity was meant to be spread.


Not bible thumping behind a podium wishing for war with other countries.

I know plent of religious people who live life just like you're asking.

Somehow, this debate got polarized early on.
 

chockomonkey

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 11, 2003
Messages
8,298
The only people who view scientific theories as attempts to disprove God are the religious zealots. They assume, because they're working so hard to oppose science, that scientists are working equally hard to oppose God.

In reality, we're just ignoring him.

Ehh, i'd completely disagree. Sure there are these retarded zealots you're talking about, but im my experience it's the scientists who act as if science was the conduit which disproved god's existance.

All the religious people I know tend to see how science and religion do not have to fight eachother
 

fattypants

2[H]4U
Joined
Mar 3, 2010
Messages
3,284
One last thing before I go, people often forget the message of the main theme of the new testament:
Do good things for other people, live in peace and make the world a better place, THAT is how christianity was meant to be spread.
I don't disagree, but that line of thinking is far older than any religion. Jesus was a great guy and I admire his philosophy, but his ideas weren't original by any means.
 

dadman

n00b
Joined
Jan 12, 2005
Messages
42
Like I said re your pet theories on genetics, come back when it's peer-reviewed and published.

You mean like a million scientists all agreeing on evolution makes it so? When they all present their like minded peer revues, and they all agree, that that makes it so? I don't need peer reviews, because the post you are refering to is more sarcasm than anything else.
 

chockomonkey

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 11, 2003
Messages
8,298
You mean like a million scientists all agreeing on evolution makes it so? When they all present their like minded peer revues, and they all agree, that that makes it so? I don't need peer reviews, because the post you are refering to is more sarcasm than anything else.

Not to mention, they don't all agree =P
 
Joined
May 15, 2006
Messages
2,062
After reading this it is clear to me now that many people who support the Big Bang Theory do not understand it either (which is where i got most of my understanding about it). I'd edit my first paragraph above, if i could.

Explain this comment, because I understand the Big Bang Theory very well.

The original cause and conditions of existence are unknowable to science and all indications say that will probably always be the case. The Big Bang theory offers no explanation about what was "before" and it makes no attempt to answer the "why". That much is outside the scope of what the theory puts forth. It only offers an explanation and timeline of the universe immediately after it was already here because that is observable and can be tested. There may be speculation about the things that may have been "before" (and I have my own) but no one can claim to have any real answers or insight. We quite literally can't know, and no scientific theory has ever claimed any different.
 

Aluisious

2[H]4U
Joined
Mar 6, 2009
Messages
2,189
Explain this comment, because I understand the Big Bang Theory very well.

The original cause and conditions of existence are unknowable to science and all indications say that will probably always be the case. The Big Bang theory offers no explanation about what was "before" and it makes no attempt to answer the "why". That much is outside the scope of what the theory puts forth. It only offers an explanation and timeline of the universe immediately after it was already here because that is observable and can be tested. There may be speculation about the things that may have been "before" (and I have my own) but no one can claim to have any real answers or insight. We quite literally can't know, and no scientific theory has ever claimed any different.

You don't know that they are unknowable. We only do not know now. Deciding in advance what is impossible to know is foolish.
 

Lebowski

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 12, 2000
Messages
3,603
Science= open and willing to hear new ideas and question existing ones (except global warming supporters)
Religion= close minded unwilling to accept any answer that requires logic instead of faith.
 

Unknown-One

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Mar 5, 2005
Messages
8,906
If I may summarize what I got out of that long-winded PDF: This person dismisses evolution entirely because they don't see enough facts to back it.

By the same token, may I not dismiss the existence of a god entirely because I don't see enough facts to back his existence?

That point aside, evolution and a god can co-exist. Couldn't it be that a god crafted the universe to form complex structures that would lead to advanced forms of life evolving from base compounds?
 

Sly

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 17, 2004
Messages
5,747
Yep, and no one has said otherwise. This is how science works. And those who toot the horn of the big bang theory DO INDEED have faith that that's what happened. For this reason i don't understand why people have such issues with faith.

Wow, your interpretation of the word faith is waaay out there. Get a dictionary.

Read it again. The bigbang theory is easier to believe because the components that make it up are things that are proven every day. It's based on observation, ergo, what we see and test every day.

Creationism has ABOSLUTELY NO BASIS WHATSOEVER!!!


I don't know any religious person who believes this. However, for whatever reason people who do not have religious beliefs often project this onto those with religious beliefs.

I do. I'm starting to believe that there really are 'arm-chair catholics', i live in a country of Catholics where nailing themselves to crosses is an annual tradition!!!

Do you even know what 'blind faith' actually means? I see it every day.

Wouldn't it make more sense, certainly due to the vast similarities between the religions on earth (and the fact that they were all written by human beings), that they are all the same one religion simply interpreted differently (and thus written differently) by different humans?

The thing is, Zeus, Yahweh, Ra, Otletsatu... (whatever) are completely different religions. To say that Zeus and his stories as cannon, that would pretty much negate everything you believe in as a Christian.
 
Joined
Feb 6, 2008
Messages
789
Answer this question, is the Big Bang Theory a fact or not? It's not. The bottom line is this, you are putting "Faith" into a thoretical conclusion based on a set of facts that still have not proven it true. And that, my friend, is the only fact pertaining the "big bang theory.

It's an unjustice and typical of the scientific community to say things like they are facts when they are not. Instead of saying, "we believe based on yada yada yada" we hear, "this is how the universe was created yada yada yada" when the fact is, it's hasn't been proven. By doing so, you ARE putting Faith in your belief that the underlying culmination of facts tell the complete story and that is the only thing dihonest here.

The "theory" is flawed by one simple fact, it can't explain the absolute begining meaning, if "something" started the process, then where did that "something" come from?
It is sad that you don't understand how science works. Science seeks to explain things in chunks. It would be nice to explain everything but scientists realize that you have to explain it in chunks. Also, The Big Bang Theory, no need for quotation marks, is exactly as it is titled, a theory. Scientists acknowledge that it is a theory and may change. They feel it is the most probable explanation given the evidence. Religious people claim that 100% there is a god. They are too closed minded to even acknowledge that there is a possibility that there isn't one. A good scientist will never completely discredit the possibility a god exists. Therein lies your flaw.
 

fattypants

2[H]4U
Joined
Mar 3, 2010
Messages
3,284
I appreciate this post very much.

Deeply religious people who don't understand science see science the same way they see other religions. Science, to them, is something that is competing with their beliefs or attacking their beliefs.

The big bang theory and evolution are merely accepted models based on observable evidence. Religious people think that science holds these theories to be incontrovertible and unchangeable, much like their own religious beliefs. It's completely the opposite of how science works, but that's how they think science works anyway--like it's a religion.

Science is not anti-religion; it's pro-evidence. Religion has set itself up to be anti-evidence, choosing instead to pursue faith. Religion misinterprets science's pursuit of and desire for evidence as an attack on their faith.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top