What made you a believer?

BOSS KTULU wrote: »

No, ? . People don't "believe" in the Big Bang. We DISCOVERED it. It's a thing that actually exists in the real world and we can analyze and examine it. ? is just how dumb ancient people who didn't know ? about the universe answered a variety of questions. Why's it raining? Well, some really powerful person in charge of the rain is doing his thing. But of course, today we know how rain actually works. And we know how the universe started. The end. ? 's dead.

So you're arguing about a dead guy on the internet? Smart move. And yeah, I said believe. Big deal. So people discovered the Big Bang. It is still what people say created he universe. "? " is the creator. If the Big Bang is the creator, what makes it different from "? "? I'm not saying that it is. My point is that science keeps trying to prove things. So that means there is always something that science cannot yet prove. So how can you say that science disproved ? ? Because you want it to? Sounds like a personal vendetta to me. Nobody has ever disproved ? . There are only theories. Until you can show me some science that without the shadow of a doubt states loudly and clearly that there is no ? , then you are just stating what you believe as it is a fact. Ain't that what you Atheists get mad at religious fanatics for? Spreading what they believe but promoting it as fact? Hypocrisy at it's finest.

Also, before the Big Bang was discovered, it couldn't be analyzed and examined. Does that mean it didn't exist before it was discovered?

BOSS KTULU wrote: »

You're not too bright, are ya?



Nobody's telling you to pray to the Big Bang or that it has something to do with your morals and your eternal fate. Nobody's saying the Big Bang has a consciousness.



Your conclusion doesn't follow from its premise here. Oh, who am I kidding. You don't know what those words mean.



Wrong.

Y'all used to demand we believe ? created the universe in literally 6 days. Then science proved that didn't happen, so you started saying it was all a big metaphor. ? gets smaller and smaller with every day of scientific research, that's why we call him a ? of the Gaps. You have to keep shoving him further and further into the increasingly small gaps in our knowledge of the reality of the universe and at this point, he's evaporated.



You don't know what a theory is, you don't understand why science doesn't deal in absolutes like religion, and you don't seem to understand that we're not trying to control peoples' sex lives, we're not trying to takeover government at every opportunity, we're not brainwashing children, and we're not trying to murder cartoonists with axes because they lampoon our prophets.

We're nothing like you.

First of all, who is "you" and "y'all"? Don't lump me in a category with those people. I'm just as much against them as you are, probably more. Your beef is with religion, not ? . And don't act like I'm dumb or something. It's likely that I'm more educated than you. And I don't just read something in a textbook or scripture and just believe it.

And thanks for proving my point in my earlier post. The bigger issue is whether or not ? is conscious. If you read scripture in it's original languages and know what the words mean and the etymology of certain terms, you will realize that the metaphors were always there. The Catholic church is what tried to make everything literal in order to control the masses. The Catholic church is what gives western religion a bad name. You Atheists take everything that the Catholic church manipulated, adopted, or made up and try to use it against all religions. That's not the way to go to win this so called war between two ? groups of people who think they know something. Trust me, Atheists are just as ignorant as mainstream religious fanatics. And that's coming from someone that is not biased to either side.

BOSS KTULU wrote: »

Oh, you can read Hebrew?

Oh right, you can't. You're just saying that because you're very dumb.

The scriptures were written in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. Classic Hebrew is not spoken in its pure form today, but it is studied by many people with the help of other semitic languages and modern Hebrew.

Faith in the Most High Yahawah came natural. Just something I grew up having.

The initial discovery of the 'Big Bang', which at the time was the discovery that the universe was much denser and hotter in the past, started in 1912. As data developed the actual theory was developed by Lemaitre in 1927. A competing theory called the Steady State theory was also being devloped at this time. However as radio source data piled up and the discovery of the Cosmic background radiation in 1964 put the Big Bang theory on top. Steady State was discarded.

New problems would arise to challenge the theory , the flatness problem and the horizon problem in particular. To answer these issues the theory was modified to include an inflationary period, which is the current understanding of the origin of the universe.

BOSS KTULU wrote: »

There are pictures of the Big Bang.

Sorry I just blew all your minds.

Not really. The best any scientist will tell you is there is evidence of a Big Bang. As a practicing scientist, you should know there are no absolutes concerning the Big Bang. Besides the Big Bang theory doesn't discount the presence of a ? /Omnipotent Force. At it's base level the big bang is an explosion, which many try to say was caused by many things, but the reality is an explosion is scientifically impossible without a chemical reaction whether that is caused by an change in volume or temperature or a mixing of disparate elements. In any event, the cause has not been fully explained with 100% certainty. Cause and Effect are still the order of the day. There is no getting around that. The Big Bang happened? Whatever or Whomever caused it is a higher power than the bang itself.

Saying there is a picture of the Big Bang is akin to saying you have a picture of a ? just because you smell intestinal gas. Your too late. Too late. Too late.

With all due respect to Otis Redding.