Many if not all human societies have origin myths and they differ greatly.

Several years ago a San Francisco-born-and-raised woman told me she is a materialist.

An hour ago a woman who was raised a Jehovah Witness and has left that faith told me the Big Bang story grew from a human need for a beginning. I agreed.

Can you wholeheartedly accept that the universe had no beginning, that it has always existed?

Views: 1926

Replies are closed for this discussion.

Replies to This Discussion

Spud, I know the Bang Hypothesis is false in about the same way I know the God Hypothesis is false.

America's separation of church and state prevents government spending on one of these hypotheses.

Informed taxpayers will be able to stop government spending on the other.

Government should never stop spending on science.  And even if they do, it won't stop the scientists from thinking and coming up with hypotheses,

Donald, do you care that cosmology as Bangers do it is not science?

Tom, just to make sure we are talking about the same people, I take it that when you say "bangers", you are talking about those who go along with the Big Bang theory.  If so, then No, I do not go along with their thoughts.  But they started out by going backward with the math to determine a starting point.  I don't think the starting point goes back that far.  BUT, they got to their theory with math, which is science.  AND, they do call it a theory, and do not state it as fact.  Again, I do not go along with their theory.

Donald, math is NOT science.

Mathematicians use DEductive methods; scientists use INductive methods. They differ.

That's how the bangers (yes, the Big Bangers) got it wrong.

You didn't study math or science and I did, so I will use a metaphor to explain how the methods differ.

Deductive methods start in the brain, with thinking, with ideas. Inductive methods start with the hands, with measuring weighing or counting things.

Here's another metaphor. Deductive methods differ from inductive methods, and top differs from bottom.
And, Donald, in your post you used the words "theory" and "fact" the ways creationists use them, not the way scientists use them.

You did it accidentally so it's not a big deal. Creationists, the smart ones, do it purposely, to confuse and exploit the not-smart ones.




noun: mathematics; noun: applied mathematics; noun: pure mathematics

the abstract science of number, quantity, and space. Mathematics may be studied in its own right ( pure mathematics ), or as it is applied to other disciplines such as physics and engineering ( applied mathematics ).


1 : the science of numbers and their operations


Mathematics is the science that deals with the logic of shape, quantity and ...

In 1927 they found that the universe was expanding.  By using the "triangulation" method of measuring, they traced the universe back to the "Big Bang".  The problem, in my mind,  is that they don't know if the movement went all the way back to that point, or if it was acted on by a different set of circumstances.  One circumstance could be the "donut" I described earlier, or maybe our section of the universe is  a "wisp"  or eddy  going through a much larger universe than we can imagine.  Whatever it is, I don't believe in the Big Bang theory,

Donald, did you find those definitions in general purpose dictionaries, or in dictionaries of mathematics or science?

Relying less on words and more on the differing methods mathematicians and scientists use will advantage you..

Deductive methods differ RADICALLY from inductive methods. Science fiction writers use imagination and deduction. Big Bang cosmologists do the same.

Mathematicians may use infinities, dimensionless points, one-dimension lines, and two-dimension planes. Physicists do not find them in nature.

You are forgiven for not having studied math or science and not knowing what I'm talking about.

I'm sure lucky I have a scientist here to straighten me out on all of this crap.

Donald, your right to say anything you want about the universe has First Amendment protection. Whether you have studied astronomy or cosmology, or whether what you say makes sense, is not relevant.

My BA, not BS, major was mathematics and minors were economics and electrical engineering. My graduate school studies were math and physics. You're luckier than you know; you have a mathematician to straighten you out. I am a jealous mathematician; thou shalt not confuse the rest of this crap with deduction, conduction or induction.

I'm not a scientist and I don't know about the "big bang." Did it have to "bang" to get the universe started? How would we even know there was a noise?

What I do know is that scientists claim our universe is expanding and travels at an incredible speed. Like firing a bullet from a gun (my example) maybe this is how our scientists claim something so incredibly small became everything. I have no clues but I find awe in the universe.

Neal DeGrass Tyson uses an illustration of a flashlight shining and the projected beam is our universe. To get a good picture of that he first shines the flashlight onto a wall, then widens the beam by shining it across the wall. If that is truly a projection of our universe it makes you wonder what it is projected upon. There are so many unanswered questions.

Could the universe have always existed? That's an interesting idea and a possibility. It makes about as much sense as Christians claiming their god has always existed. Maybe the universe is god. Again, I cannot make claims of certainty but I admit is is OK to accept that we cannot know everything. When I was a Christian I had the answer. Believers have all the answers, but today I really do not know.

Michael, the word "bang" when referring to the universe is shorthand for "Big Bang", a term of ridicule coined shortly after WW2 by an astronomer who didn't believe the expanding universe story. Today's Bangers wisely say they don't know what happened during the first "trillionth of a trillionth of a trillionth" of a second. (That's an approximation.)

As to "...scientists [who] claim our universe is expanding and travels at an incredible speed."
Some people do make that claim. They are mathematicians not scientists. They use deduction, not induction, to THINK their way to conclusions; scientists use induction, or laboratory methods; they observe and then count, measure or weigh.



Update Your Membership :




Nexus on Social Media:


© 2017   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service