The Big Bang

[Guest mscoville]

I know this is off topic, but I was just wondering what you thought of Behe's book "Darwin's Black Box"? I haven't read it yet. I asked in another forum, but I know there are a lot of them and hard to keep straight. Thanks Atheist.

~ martin

[Guest ReflectionsofHim]

The Big Bang Theory...

God is BIG. He said BANG...and it was done!!!

God created everything!!! Indeed!!!

Love through Jesus!

Ref

[Guest Strservant]

Not all star systems were created from the big bang. Our solar system was created from a cloud that collapsed into a star, the remaining dust and gas particles twirled around what was going to be the sun. The rotation of the planets could have derived from the twirl patterns of the cloud.

Osiris,

It's hard to understand how one can believe that this gas and that gas did this and before you know it there are 9 planets with moons and by the way at least one of them is inhabited.

People say my version takes alot of faith WOW!!!!!

[Guest Strservant]

The old ones are always best:

First of all, the Big Bang Theory does not address the question at hand: "Where did everything come from?" Can nothing explode?

No, it doesn't, namely because this isn't a scientific question, it's not a question science can solve.

Questions like "What is the ulitmate cause," or "where did everything come from," are questions for metaphysics and theology, not science.

Creationists assume that the big bang theory is attempting to usurp God in some way, and therefore criticise it because it doesn't replace him fully, by answering questions of ultimate origins. Yet, the big bang theory was never meant to replace God, or usurp him, or answer any ultimate cause questions - so these criticisms are irrelevant and futile.

This is contrary to the 1st Law of Thermodynamics (the Law of Conservation of Matter).

Oops, the 1st law of thermodynamics and the law of conservation of energy/matter are two different laws.

Next, how did this explosion (or "expansion") cause order while every explosion ever observed and documented in recorded history caused only disorder and disarray?

Where has it caused order, and how much? I mean, sure, planets have condensed and started to spin round larger bodies, but that's a bit like the mechanical order of a crystal lattice when salt condenses - it isn't that surprising. If you're talking about life, well, that's a special case, and it involved a special set of conditions to make it happen.

SA,

Still at it I see. The big bang theory and evolution is an attempt to usurp God as it is man's attempt to explain how everything came to be as it is now. This is of course done by natural explanations that in my opinion take more faith than the creation account but it is done so that man does not have to be accountable to a creator. If God created us then we are accountable to the standards He has set forth. However, if man can somehow do away with God then he is accountable to no one but himself and can do as he pleases.

It's also amazing that anytime we bring up points and ask for you to refute them you do one of three things.

1. You completely ignore them as if they were never asked. Example: I believe it was artsylady that asked you to provide one example of one animal species developing into another alike but different species as is said to have been done by ape into man.

2. You brush it off by saying it isn't for science to answer. How conveinant to be able to whip this answer out anytime you get stuck.

3. Rehash the same big worded scientific data that you have used a thousand times already just to make you look superior to us.

Why not stop with your mumbo jumbo for 5 seconds and agree to offer opinion or fact on our questions. I have for the most part quit posting on your posts because all anyone gets is one of the above.

You said you had been kicked off several Christian forums and made it sound like it was because you were to intelligent and they got tired of you showing them up. I believe it was for the reasons stated above. Everyone on here has stated that you have the brains when it comes to science but you won't dare venture from there because that is your security blanket and you know when you do you will be found just as wanting as we are in your field.

I still feel you're being on this board is more harmful than good and if I were the people in charge I would probably do as the other boards have done. It's not my decision to make and so I'll keep ignoring you until you want to play on our field for a while. That means answering our questions without all the scientific mumbo jumbo and the ones you can't answer by that not ignoring or just saying sorry can't answer that.

Strservant

[Bread_of_Life]

StrServant

The big bang theory and evolution is an attempt to usurp God as it is man's attempt to explain how everything came to be as it is now.

This is a bald assertion, given without any evidence or proof. It also fails to deal with the basic points that I posted in my last contribution on this thread - namely that the big bang theory makes no claims as to ultimate origins or first causes, and indeed more fundamentally no scientific theory, big bang included, can possible make any such claims. I also made the point elsewhere on these forums that many Christians and other sorts of theists believe in Big Bang cosmology - which is practical evidence that it does not take the place of God.

It is, needless to say, unfortunate that you have chosen to ignore these points and simply re-state the position that Big Bang theory is an attempt to usurp the place of God, without giving any structured argument to back that statement up.

This is of course done by natural explanations that in my opinion take more faith than the creation account but it is done so that man does not have to be accountable to a creator.

I do not see how Big Bang theory makes us any less or more accountable to a creator, or anyone else, since it is a scientific, not an ethical theory.

1. You completely ignore them as if they were never asked. Example: I believe it was artsylady that asked you to provide one example of one animal species developing into another alike but different species as is said to have been done by ape into man.

Firstly, it will probably be possible for you to find an actual example of a time that I have seemingly "ignored" a point or question on this board - because sometimes I have a lot of questions to answer on different topics, and I miss out the odd question by omission. However, this is not a sign that I do not wish to answer questions, I do attempt to answer every serious question I am asked, even if I am asked impolitely. If anyone has a question that they have raised that I am yet to answer, please to remind me either on the boards or by PM.

Secondly, I do recall answering that question for artstlady - although if she feels that I have not done so yet, she is free to ask me again, or simply PM me the link of where I ought to answer the question.

Lastly, on this particular post I have not ignored any question asked of me - indeed I have tackled them straight on in the most straightforward and easy to understand way I know how. It is a sad reflection on your character that, rather than respond to the substantial scientific points I have made here, you choose rather to attack me.

2. You brush it off by saying it isn't for science to answer. How conveinant to be able to whip this answer out anytime you get stuck.

Firstly, there are very strict criteria of what is and isn't for science to answer - and what science can and can't answer. These criteria arn't made up by me, or arbitrarily chosen - there are just some things that the rational analysis of empirical data cannot do. One of them is ethics - we can analyse empirical data all we like, we'll never find out what we ought to do or how we ought to treat others. Another is metaphysics - we can find out as much as we like about the universe, and what causes what inside it - but we will never find out about ultimate causes, or spirituality, or the existence of a soul - or indeed whether there really is a universe or whether we are just in a world of ideas as Berkeley theorised. Science has it's limits.

Secondly, saying "this isn't a question for science" doesn't get me off the hook - because inevitably it will be a question for something else, like metaphysics, or metaethics, or ethics, or epistemology. For example, on the question of ultimate cause - I have already stated on the boards that this is really a question for philosophy, metaphysics and theology, not for science - and I have further invited people who are interested to start a thread on the cosmological argument to discuss it further. In other words, just because such subjects are unsuitable for a science thread doesn't mean they're unsuitable to discuss at all - and it doesn't mean I cannot discuss them, and am therefore "off the hook" so to speak.

Lastly, in the case of this particular thread, most of the subject matter was a subject for science - like entropy, and the conservation laws - and I did answer these without any sort of evasion. I state again that rather than answering my specific points on these matters, you have instead decided to personally attack me, which is testament not to me using underhand debating tactics, but rather to you using them.

3. Rehash the same big worded scientific data that you have used a thousand times already just to make you look superior to us.

Again, this is heavily ad hominem. It's also untrue. I do try to use example that are simple and easy to understand, not to be condescending, but so that people who arn't as well versed as me in complex subjects like physics can understand my answers. In other words, I don't use "big worded scientific data" at all - or else, I certainly try to avoid using big words or three letter acronyms, or anything else that might confuse the average reader.

Secondly, I have used nothing a thousand times on this forum - in fact, I'd struggle to find any scientific data that I have even used twice as yet. Also, just to make this clear, if I do reuse scientific data or theories in several answers, it is probably because I have been asked several similar questions, rather than me being a one trick pony!

Lastly, I do not wish to look superior to anyone, not least because it is clear and obvious already that I do have superior scientific knowledge to most people on this board. In fact, I have superior scientific knowledge to almost everyone in the world, save the very few people who get educated to degree level or higher in science. Therefore I knew even before I came onto this board that I was unlikely to meet anyone as well educated in science as I was - I do not need to demonstrate this, or obviate it in my posts - I am just not that insecure about it (although, if I may say so, you seem rather insecure about my level of knowledge!!!) The real reason I am here is to try to up the level of scientific knowledge on this board. In other words, rather than exalting myself and my knowledge, I would rather bring you all closer to myself in terms of scientific knowledge, so that you are not decieved by pseudo-science.

Why not stop with your mumbo jumbo for 5 seconds and agree to offer opinion or fact on our questions. I have for the most part quit posting on your posts because all anyone gets is one of the above.

People on the boards are free to tell me that they think I am posting things that are above their heads - or that they cannot understand. People can ask me to go more slowly in my explanations, or ask questions about that which they did not understand when I explain something. I will be happy to tailor explanations to everyone's needs.

If anyone is embarassed about doing so on open forum, I would also be happy to explain things via PM exchange. I do try not to use mumbo jumbo, and looking back on my posts thus far I don't think I have used much, and certainly not on this thread - but if I do slip into it, people are free to tell me.

You said you had been kicked off several Christian forums and made it sound like it was because you were to intelligent and they got tired of you showing them up.

I have never been kicked off any Christian forums, and therefore I have never "made it sound like it was because I was too intelligent and they got tired of me showing them up". I think perhaps you should check your facts before tip-a-tapping your keyboard.

Everyone on here has stated that you have the brains when it comes to science but you won't dare venture from there because that is your security blanket and you know when you do you will be found just as wanting as we are in your field.

Quite the opposite, I have stated on several occasions that I will be more than happy to talk about other areas of philosophy or theology, just don't expect an indepth critique or level of knowledge of the bible from me.

I still feel you're being on this board is more harmful than good and if I were the people in charge I would probably do as the other boards have done.

Again, you've got your facts wrong, as above. Also, perhaps this is the reason that you're not in charge - exactly because of the fact that, in your insecurity and anger at intelligent people who disagree with you, you would simply throw them off the board? Perhaps it will take a reformation in your character to become a leader?

That means answering our questions without all the scientific mumbo jumbo and the ones you can't answer by that not ignoring or just saying sorry can't answer that.

here we go again...

Edited June 7, 2004 by ScientificAtheist

[ted]

Ok, I've heard enough.

I have never been confused with anything resembeling intelligence, but to state that you have superior scientific knowledge to almost everyone in the world.... well, that's all I need to know about you.

t.

[2bba]

Wow! I can

Edited June 8, 2004 by 2bba

[ted]

Sorry, 2bba, you (along with the rest of us) don't have the intellect to discuss such profound theories. Please return to your simple faith at this time.

(Don't worry, most of us will be there with you).

t.

[Guest Strservant]

You said you had been kicked off several Christian forums and made it sound like it was because you were to intelligent and they got tired of you showing them up.

I have never been kicked off any Christian forums, and therefore I have never "made it sound like it was because I was too intelligent and they got tired of me showing them up". I think perhaps you should check your facts before tip-a-tapping your keyboard.

I still feel you're being on this board is more harmful than good and if I were the people in charge I would probably do as the other boards have done.

Again, you've got your facts wrong, as above. Also, perhaps this is the reason that you're not in charge - exactly because of the fact that, in your insecurity and anger at intelligent people who disagree with you, you would simply throw them off the board? Perhaps it will take a reformation in your character to become a leader?

That means answering our questions without all the scientific mumbo jumbo and the ones you can't answer by that not ignoring or just saying sorry can't answer that.

here we go again...

SA,

I have a few comments on this part of your response to me.

1. It was my recollection that one of your first posts had said that you had been kicked off other Christian Forums and you hoped that this one would be different. If this is a misquote then I will humbly apologize. Would you please comment further on if I am mistaking on one of your first posts. If I am then as I have already stated, I will apologize.

2. As for intelligence, I myself have masters degree level education, therefore, I am not insecure or angry at anyone for being intelligent. In most areas I would say I could do very well holding my own against you.

3. You also said you did not see how belief in "Big bang" lessened a person's accountability to God. If someone is uncomfortable with their being a creator that they are accountable to and they can come up with an explanation to explain away a creator then they also explain away the accountability. If there is no creator there is no accountability. Every knee shall bow and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord.

4. Once again, anytime someone plays a little hardball with you you play the personal attack card. I have seen just the same attitude from you and even some name calling. I must admit this is not a norm but every once in a while.

5. As for you being on this board, my concern is for those who might be young in their faith. I cannot speak for those who started this forum but it states that it is for believers to come and discuss things that edify God. Your constant long posts that seem to bring into question the validity of God's word and God himself is harmful and before you say it I already know what you are going to say. You will say that your theories do not bring into question these things. Yet your screen name itself belies the fact that these theories are a replacement for God. Twisting words to try to make your theories appear innocent or somehow fitting in with what God has told us in His word is just semantics and would only work on someone who is not as mature in their faith. That is why you being here is more harmful than good.

Respectfully,

Strservant

[2bba]

Sorry, 2bba, you (along with the rest of us) don't have the intellect to discuss such profound theories. Please return to your simple faith at this time.

(Don't worry, most of us will be there with you).

t.

LOL

Edited June 8, 2004 by 2bba