Tuesday, September 8, 2009

Why Can’t It Be Infinite? III

One of the beautiful things about scientific theories, theories not based upon speculation but upon what we already know is that they can be tested. We can look for confirming evidence and in some cases discover their logical conclusions.

We’ve already seen that the:
2nd Law of Thermodynamics and
Expansion of the universe point to a definitive space / time boundary, a Big Bang Creation Event.

Something else that scientists would expect to find, IF there had been such a singularity is Background Radiation. In 1965 Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson discovered the afterglow of the biggest explosion of all time, the Big Bang. They discovered exactly what science has predicted should be there if there had indeed been a Creation Event.

Cosmic Background Radiation is really remnants of the heat and light left over from the singularity. While the light is no longer visible, the heat, in the form of radiation CAN be detected.

Robert Jastrow:
“No explanation other than the Big Bang has been found for the fireball radiation. The clincher, which has convinced almost the last Doubting Thomas (not atheists but they’re a different case altogether), is that the radiation discovered by Penzias and Wilson has exactly the pattern of wavelengths expected for the light and heat produced in a great explosion. Supporters of the steady state theory (atheists to a person) have tried desperately to find an alternative explanation, but they have failed. At the present time, the Big Bang theory has no competitors.” (insertion in brackets mine)

In a Court Room a single line of evidence is powerful. Add a second line of confirming evidence and plea bargaining would ensure that the case never makes it to Court. Add a third line of evidence and the guy wouldn’t be able to find a defence lawyer to take his case. That’s what we have so far. Regardless, faith in atheism forces individuals to cling to, well, to cling to nothing, literally.

We know from science that whatever begins to exist has an explanation of its existence either in the Necessity of its being (it can’t NOT exist) or in an external cause. We know that the universe is not necessary so it must have been caused by something external to itself. After all, no one would be so foolish as to say that the universe created itself or that it pre existed itself. Well, there is one group that is willing to say that, but . . .

According to atheism the universe doesn’t have an explanation of its existence. They say that “It just happened.” Over a dozen theories and over a dozen more variations on those theories have come and gone in a vain attempt to rule out a definite beginning for our universe and thus do away with the implication that a Supernatural God brought about this beginning. Despite the current scientific knowledge described above, atheists persist in stating that either matter has always existed (impossible) or that matter created itself (also impossible). Why do they do this? Because >

. If there is an explanation of the universe’s existence, then atheism is not true. And that is because the only explanation that fits the evidence of how and why the universe came into being is Creator God. That is why Richard Dawkins himself has lately admitted that a good case could be made for the existence of a Deistic God. Actually, I believe that some day there won’t be any atheists. There will be people for God and people against God but there won’t be anyone who believes that God doesn’t exist. And, irony of ironies it will be science that will prove the existence of God.

. Because of overwhelming scientific evidence, most atheists do grudgingly admit that the universe did indeed have a beginning. Unfortunately for atheists, it can be said with absolute confidence that no cosmogonic model has been:
As repeatedly verified in its predictions,
As corroborated by attempts at its falsification,
As concordant with empirical discoveries, and
As philosophically coherent as the Standard Big Bang Creation Event Model.

Hence, most atheists are implicitly committed to God being the explanation of why the universe came into existence.

9 comments:

God 777 said...

I am God of the Gaps.

Rabhimself said...

"Despite the current scientific knowledge described above, atheists persist in stating that either matter has always existed (impossible) or that matter created itself (also impossible)."

That sentence highlights the big problem you have.

No we don't, you tar us all with the same brush time and time again like we are a religious group.

We just don't believe in god. That is all.

The other problem is you state your case as scientific fact. There are suggestions that matter cannot be eternal - that does not mean it isn't. Like i said before, what if Hawking's is right and the big bang was the result of a black hole effectively going in reverse and releasing its contents?

This would still be a single point where everything comes from. As i said before, where that matter itself coms from, i don't know.

Furthermore, on the black hole theory, i believe that this in turn offers an explanation on your 2nd law problem. Black holes radiate energy (Hawking radiation)

But i have also pointed out before that if we somehow proved how matter was created, you would then focus on the next step back, and the next step back, and the next step back.

What you are exhibiting is anti-science at it's best. You have an answer to your problem in mind (god) and you are giving a case as if it is fact so that your answer is right.

Even if matter is not eternal, that does not mean a god did it!

I'd quicker believe a neighbouring parallel universe temporarily tore and spilled its contents into our universe (thus creating it) than a supernatural being clicking his fingers and everything being here.

You reported in the last post that science fits what the bible says.

Oh come off it. The bible claims everything was made in 7 days. I don't want to hear any of the usual, "you can't take it literally", horse-shit. That's what the bible says, and that is what supposedly happened. It's wrong. End of.

I will re-iterate once more, that even if there is an improbable god responsible, it is not the christian god. No way.

I'd bet steady state theory is supported by the minority of atheists, as you so gloriously point out, the evidence points to a singularity.

But what is this singularity?

You conclude, indeed going as far to state it as fact, that this singularity was nothing.

FACT is we don't know, but in any case, nothing or something, it doesn't mean we can conclude it must be god. You would love it to be god, but that is not the rational thing to do.

We just don't know makarios. Is god responsible for the Mpemba effect? We can't explain that either so it must be god, right?

Rabhimself said...

Oh, and another thing.

No, it's not your theory, but you parrot it like you understand it becasue it appears to fit what you advocate.

I mean, for example, do you really have a qualitative understanding of the concept of entropy?

If i melt a block of ice, is entropy increasing or decreasing? Can you explain your answer?

Or do you just parrot because it fits what you preach?

I'm sorry mak but i'm just not a big fan of people saying things to back themselves up, but they just really don't understand the back up in question itself.

And let's be honest, the beginnings of the universe isn't exactly a trivial matter.

Like, imagine i was trying to convince you that geology can prove that the story of Noah's Ark is false, and the evidence i spraf of involves some complex pieces of geological information, rules and terms that i don't fully understand myself. It would hardly be right for me to do this would it?

Basically, the way you talk, you'd think you have done a hell of a lot of research into this field, and have a lot of understanding about it. Particularly if you parade it as fact, and furthermore parade it as conclusive evidence of god.

"If there is an explanation of the universe’s existence, then atheism is not true"

Ridiculous.

Makarios said...

I'll tell you what's ridiculous, not allowing comments on things we don't fully understand.

atlasmann said...

So let me get this straight Makarios, you believe that roughly 14 billion years ago God "created" the big bang and set into motion the scientifically accepted theories of how our earth and life on this planet evolved over the past 4.5 billion years and roughly 6,000 ago he took an interest in our lives for about 4,000 years and has since left us to our own demise? Or do you only believe the convenient science and revert back to scripture at some point?

Makarios said...

What makes you think that He's left us? I experience His presence all day every day.

Did you know that you're the only person on this planet that He pays attention to?

Glen20 said...

Interesting question. Makarios, do "you believe that roughly 14 billion years ago God "created" the big bang and set into motion the scientifically accepted theories of how our earth and life on this planet evolved over the past 4.5 billion years and roughly 6,000 ago he took an interest in our lives..."?

Rabhimself said...

I never even said that, but that is fine, skip over my point if it troubles you.

I thought i made it quite clear it is the fact you parrot it AS IF you know it inside-out that is irritating.

I also pointed out it is not a trivial matter, and you aren't merely 'commenting' on it.

You wouldn't like it if i started talking to you as if i knew the bible like a priest.

atlasmann said...

The reason I stated that He has left us is that since the bible was revised 2000 years ago, He has not done any of the miraculous things that he used to do. Why do you think that is?

As for me, that is really sweet but I would prefer he listen to the little girls being raped and murdered today or an easy one, rain over Africa would save millions of lives.