Creationist Explains How Humans Could Have Hunted The Tyrannosaurus Rex

[NeonSamurai]

I have to say, the big bang theory is one theory that I think is utter rubbish and am extremely skeptical of. Sheldon is ok though (figured I would preempt you all).

Seriously though, bang and the universe was flung into existence? Before there wasn't even nothing, as the big bang even created the vacuum of space and space itself. Otherwise the universe couldn't be "expanding". There are so many gigantic flaws in the theory it isn't funny. Ironically I think it is just another creationist "theory".

[MH]

Originally Posted by NeonSamurai

I have to say, the big bang theory is one theory that I think is utter rubbish and am extremely skeptical of. Sheldon is ok though (figured I would preempt you all).

Seriously though, bang and the universe was flung into existence? Before there wasn't even nothing, as the big bang even created the vacuum of space and space itself. Otherwise the universe couldn't be "expanding". There are so many gigantic flaws in the theory it isn't funny. Ironically I think it is just another creationist "theory".

Do you have any scientific data to back it up or this is just how you feel/believe?
Yep , someone should come up with something less creationist lol

[NeonSamurai]

Originally Posted by MH

Do you have any scientific data to back it up or this is just how you feel/believe?
Yep , someone should come up with something less creationist lol

The evidence backing up the big bang theory is pretty scant at best (and can be explained in other ways). Most of it seems to be a lot of postulation. There are also huge problems with it and our other theories, like for example how did the galaxies spread out as far as they did in the time frame that the universe was supposed to come into existence.

As for the existing evidence, my suspicion is that they are measuring signals from the birth of galaxies, not the universe. I really do not think that the universe truly exists in our linear perspective of time. I am also not sure that it has a beginning or an end, in time, or space, or anything.

Plus the theory to me logically does not make sense. In the beginning, there was nothing (not even time or space or anything), then there was some universe creating explosion and the universe went expanding out in all directions from one point, the end.

I am also skeptical of the entropy theory as well, though the logic is more sound at least. I suspect though, that the universe has mechanisms to deal with this, and that the formation of galaxies is cyclical.

But this is pure wild theorizing.

[Cybermat47]

Originally Posted by NeonSamurai

But this is pure wild theorizing.

Hypothesizing, actually. A theory requires some proof.

Sorry for being pedantic...

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by NeonSamurai

Plus the theory to me logically does not make sense. In the beginning, there was nothing (not even time or space or anything), then there was some universe creating explosion and the universe went expanding out in all directions from one point, the end.

I don't think the Big Bang theory assumes what came before the Bang. The Bang itself is theorized on the concept that the universe is expanding, and seems to have been doing so for as long as it has existed. If that is true then it likely had to start somewhere. What came before can only be guessed at.

[Bilge_Rat]

Originally Posted by NeonSamurai

The evidence backing up the big bang theory is pretty scant at best (and can be explained in other ways). Most of it seems to be a lot of postulation. There are also huge problems with it and our other theories, like for example how did the galaxies spread out as far as they did in the time frame that the universe was supposed to come into existence.

As for the existing evidence, my suspicion is that they are measuring signals from the birth of galaxies, not the universe. I really do not think that the universe truly exists in our linear perspective of time. I am also not sure that it has a beginning or an end, in time, or space, or anything.

Plus the theory to me logically does not make sense. In the beginning, there was nothing (not even time or space or anything), then there was some universe creating explosion and the universe went expanding out in all directions from one point, the end.

I am also skeptical of the entropy theory as well, though the logic is more sound at least. I suspect though, that the universe has mechanisms to deal with this, and that the formation of galaxies is cyclical.

But this is pure wild theorizing.

You have to realize that human knowledge is always evolving. Religions were early attempts by man to explain his environment.

The Big Bang Theory is the most logical explanation based on our current scientific knowledge, but we could easily be in a situation 50-100 years from now where a better explanation is found.

[Sammi79]

Originally Posted by NeonSamurai

I have to say, the big bang theory is one theory that I think is utter rubbish and am extremely skeptical of. Sheldon is ok though (figured I would preempt you all).

Seriously though, bang and the universe was flung into existence? Before there wasn't even nothing, as the big bang even created the vacuum of space and space itself. Otherwise the universe couldn't be "expanding". There are so many gigantic flaws in the theory it isn't funny. Ironically I think it is just another creationist "theory".

There is however a rather large amount of compelling evidence that supports the big bang, and a growing amount that supports that the big bang was not the beginning, and that a vastly different state of physical reality existed before it, and gave rise to it.

But it is important to remain sceptical about these things to a degree. Sometimes big ideas get overturned. With something like the big bang it is reasonable to suggest that under further analysis it may yet prove to be a big crunch, or a big bounce, or something else entirely.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by NeonSamurai

I have to say, the big bang theory is one theory that I think is utter rubbish and am extremely skeptical of. Sheldon is ok though (figured I would preempt you all).

Seriously though, bang and the universe was flung into existence? Before there wasn't even nothing, as the big bang even created the vacuum of space and space itself. Otherwise the universe couldn't be "expanding". There are so many gigantic flaws in the theory it isn't funny. Ironically I think it is just another creationist "theory".

It is probably the best theory so far to explain HOW things unfolded SINCE there has been the Bang!. It does not explain WHY there was a Bang!. That does not mean that it will not see corrections, attachments, deletions, and maybe finally complete replacement.

Attempts like the pulsating/expanding-contracting universe that state that after a Bang! the universe grows, collapses again, and when it collapses into just one single point, it Bangs! again, just try to eternally delay the need to explain the Why by moving the point of time when the WHY became an important variable towards an infinite past. "It has always gone like this. Bang!-Grow-Collapse. Bang!-Grow-Collapse. It's just how it is."

WHY there are things, in the end is an object of philosophical speculation. We call it metaphysics, and we better never forget that metaphysics are always speculation for sure. We cannot know for sure, our nature and essence as the being that we are define the way we function, perceive, think and know. And with that definition stands and falls what we are not, and cannot perceive like, and cannot think out. In other words: the limited cannot embrace the unlimited. But we can know that we cannot know. That's at least something.

But for question about the HOW, science is the best thing we have for analysis and examination. But of course, our theories are OUR theories, however well-founded they are. They are our artificial orders by which we try to make sense of things as best as we currently can.

To me the great mystery and miracle of existence is the question why there are things at all, and mind to reflect on them. Why isn't there simply nothing instead? We cannot know that. That inability is a challenge to us, a dilemma, that we either grow by, or that burns us out and makes us falling into existential despair. That choice is ours. Or not?

What I wanted to say is, I agree with what you said.