• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Let's not talk about the Big Bang

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
I didn't assume, I asked because I know you don't know, and if you don't know that, then I do not believe what follows.
You need to come up for a valid reason for that belief. You made a claim that required evidence. You acted as if it were a fact.

And it does not matter what you believe. What maters is what you know. And you do not appear to know at all.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Except that it's true. And from what I have read of Ben Dhyan's posts, I don't always agree with his ideas, but nevertheless, he asked a good question. It's almost, not quite, like the theory of abiogenesis. :) Oh, but stick to figuring the validity of not knowing or knowing what was before the "Big Bang." :) Perhaps then we can talk about gravity. :)
No, it was a pointless question. If a person travels from New York to LA do we need to know if he was in Boston or DC before he left New York? You are just desperate for an excuse to ignore the sciences.
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
Why is it a good question?
\
Face it you do not know if it is a good question or not. He was given a chance to justify it. He ran away from that offer. Running away is a very bad sign in a debate.
And here I was just thinking how you told him that he insults you, I thought my, but that sounds like you...insulting people and not answering.
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
So in a "good debate" a person should really, like you say, answer the question with facts if possible. @Subduction Zone . So what happens when there ARE no 'facts,' such as what happened before a "Big Bang"? Instead of insulting and refusing to answer, why not just answer truthfuilly?
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
And here I was just thinking how you told him that he insults you, I thought my, but that sounds like you...insulting people and not answering.
Oh my. No, I do not insult people. Some people do not like to be corrected when they make silly mistakes, but that is not my fault.

Where have I ever insulted you? And what makes you think that I felt that he had insulted me? He merely asked a question because he knows that he cannot support his claims.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
So in a "good debate" a person should really, like you say, answer the question with facts if possible. @Subduction Zone . So what happens when there ARE no 'facts,' such as what happened before a "Big Bang"? Instead of insulting and refusing to answer, why not just answer truthfuilly?
I answered truthfully. His question was an act of running away. I explained to you why his question was pointless. He made a claim that put a burden of proof upon him. He could not answer that question.
 

Ben Dhyan

Veteran Member
You need to come up for a valid reason for that belief. You made a claim that required evidence. You acted as if it were a fact.

And it does not matter what you believe. What maters is what you know. And you do not appear to know at all.
Too easy, why and how did the BB happen?
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Haha, why did the BB happen?
I don't know. You seem to know more about it than anyone else. You are the one that claims that we need to know what happened before. You have not justified that yet. I can openly state that I do not know. In fact I do not think that anyone knows yet. But you seem to think that you know.
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
I don't know. You seem to know more about it than anyone else. You are the one that claims that we need to know what happened before. You have not justified that yet. I can openly state that I do not know. In fact I do not think that anyone knows yet. But you seem to think that you know.
Of course it would be more than helpful to know what happened before, if indeed there was anything at the time of the "Big Bang," since, of course, S. Hawking did state that the universe can come from -- nothing.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Of course it would be more than helpful to know what happened before, if indeed there was anything at the time of the "Big Bang," since, of course, S. Hawking did state that the universe can come from -- nothing.
It might be helpful. The problem is that with some versions of the BB time began at the Big Bang. There was no before the Big Bang in those versions. That means that the question may be nonsensical.
 

Ben Dhyan

Veteran Member
That does not justify your claim. You need to do better than that. You need to show that knowledge of a "before the Big Bang" is necessary.
Be serious, why was the big bang?
When did time start?
What existed before time started?
What is outside the expanding universe?
 

Ben Dhyan

Veteran Member
I don't know. You seem to know more about it than anyone else. You are the one that claims that we need to know what happened before. You have not justified that yet. I can openly state that I do not know. In fact I do not think that anyone knows yet. But you seem to think that you know.
You don't know! The birth of the universe that bought you into existence and you aren't curious to know how it came to pass?
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Be serious, why was the big bang?
When did time start?
What existed before time started?
What is outside the expanding universe?
I am the serious one here. You keep making claims that require support and then run away from them when you are caught.

You claimed to have read and understood an article that does not even appear to have passed peer review. I am still waiting for an explanation of that too.
 

gnostic

The Lost One
It's almost, not quite, like the theory of abiogenesis.

Evolution is a scientific theory.

Abiogenesis is still a hypothesis...but it is a falsifiable hypothesis, because there are already some evidence and some experiments that support at least 3 of the models.

Abiogenesis is a working (falsifiable) hypothesis, because biologists, molecular biologists and biochemists are still actively searching for more evidence.

They need more evidence and data, before they can conclude which of the numbers of models is potentially the candidate of being the new “scientific theory”.
 
Top