BlueCross787

The Big Bang is only a theory. Most of you accept is as fact and evolution as well. "The Big Bang theory is an effort to explain what happened at the very beginning of our universe... According to the standard theory, our universe sprang into existence as "singularity" around 13.7 billion years ago. What is a "singularity" and where does it come from? Well, to be honest, we don't know for sure. "
http://www.big-bang-theory.com/

That is why this is only a "theory." But "singularity"? Springing out from nowhere!? !?

All I have to say is three words:
Conservation of energy

clocpw2

Big-Bang-Theory... another way of saying "I don't believe that God created the universe, despite super complexity and aweness, but I don't have an explanation to you as to who created it, so let's say an explosion aligned everything perfectly against astronomical to the power of astronomical odds"

TomboyMom

Do you know what the word "theory" means in this context?

Hedshaker

So where did God spring from then? A spirtual singularity?

Sensei Meela

Well, when one doesn't start with the assumption that the universe was created, one has no need to "have an explanation to you as to who created it."

And anyway, claims of "astronomical to the power of astronomical odds" are always dubious.

Black Feather

The Big Bang Theory has nothing to do with the origin of God.

Hedshaker

Yep, I left out the smilie,

Black Feather

I'll forgive you THIS time. :devil3:

Donnmathan

First, I can say that the site you linked to has its own problems. A couple of things give it away.
Nice assumption the article writer makes, here. Skip all the scientific inquiry and jump right to "goddidit". Want to guess what the bias of the author is? I also looked up one of the physicists the author cites as dissenting, Dr. Hannes Alfvén; the problem is, according to Wikipedia, the alternate he proposed has failed several tests, and is thus not regarded as a viable theory. Wikipedia on Plasma Cosmology

It should also be noted that Dr. Alfven appears to have been objecting to the Big Bang model on theological grounds.

Second...BlueCross, all a "singularity" is is a point at which science can provide no answers...the theories known at the time do not explain what happens, and the normal laws of the universe seem to fail. Note, this does not happen until you get within microseconds of the "bang" itself. Now, science may be close to solving the problem; a number of physicists are very excited about the possibilities of string "theory" (and I put the word in quotes here because, while it is called so, it has not been tested to the usual degree that I am aware of) and M-"theory" (again). These constructs seem to be able to fill in the answers to any number of questions, from the weakness of gravity to the nature of the big bang.

Writer@Large

Okay. Do you know what a theory is?

ooh, and psychic as well! Actually, I'd argue that most of us accept BBT as the most plausible explanation we've got, for the moment. Until someone sorts out M-Theory, at least.

You didn't bother to read anything else on that page, did you?

I see your three words, and raise you two: rules break down in quantum.

--W@L