In a desperate search for ways to avoid the Big Bang Creation Event, and it’s distasteful metaphysical implications, atheists have devolved into creating Origin Of The Universe Mythologies.
I have tried to point out that science has shut the door on ANY of these mythologies, showing that they do not possess any credibility. So desperate are atheists in the wake of failure after failure to rid the universe of God as Cause that they are reverting to sheer nonsense. Even atheist High Priest, Richard Dawkins is on record as saying that nothing, literally nothing, “evolved.”
Can you understand what he’s saying? Really? Because most atheists can’t, or won’t. One even took me to task over mocking Dawkins’ comment by teaching me that, “The molecules that existed before the Big Bang evolved and changed.”
The divide that separates Something from Nothing, is greater than the universe itself; it’s greater than infinity itself. Yet that fact seems to be beyond the ability of the average atheist to understand. And even though Dawkins goes on to say that inert gases ALSO evolved, this atheist that I’m referring to said that as long as the choice was between what I said and what Dawkins says, he’ll go with Dawkins every time. I thought atheists took pride in thinking for themselves. I thought they prided themselves in logical and rational lines of thinking. Sounds instead as though “sheeple” is a term that can apply to almost anyone. So, what is it that atheists can’t or won’t understand?
The last go-round included the statement by an atheist, “All they [Borde, Guth, Vilenkin] say is that the cyclic universe is past-incomplete.” And then, “You don’t know what you’re talking about.”
Here’s the facts: Borde, Guth and Vilenkin have been able to extend their conclusion of the past-incomplete cyclic universe to the following atheist Origin Of The Universe Mythologies.
Oscillating universe -
Baby universes -
Multi verses -
The Cyclic Ekpyrotic Scenario -
The Chaotic Inflationary universe -
Inflationary multi-verse -
Bubble universes floating in a sea of false vacuum -
The many worlds hypothesis -
The black hole hypothesis -
Quantum gravity models -
Vacuum fluctuation models -
Imaginary time and imaginary space -
The conclusion they reached is that any model of an expanding universe, be it theoretical like the ones just mentioned or real, such as our own, is geodesically incomplete, or past-incomplete without a past finite space / time boundary.
What the atheists who are challenging what I’m saying don’t understand is that the phrase, “past-incomplete implies the need for an initial singularity. That means that ANY model of an expanding universe cannot be past-eternal. See www.phy.princeton.edu/~steinh/ under, “Answers to Frequently Asked Questions: Has the cyclic model been cycling forever.”
Now it used to be the case that those atheists who were rightly terrified of the implications of a universe with a beginning could hide behind our ignorance of pre Planck time events. In fact, those who remain ignorant regarding this theorem continue to say, “We just don’t know,” as though that somehow absolves them of their ignorance. It does not.
The Borde-Guth-Vilenkin Theorem does not depend upon any physical description or knowledge of the pre Plank time era. This theorem rids atheists of any hope of avoiding a singularity, a beginning, a Big Bang Creation Event. This is true PARTICULARLY for Dawkins’ favourite myth, the eternal inflationary multi-verse.
Because, in the eyes of biassed and bigoted atheists, I’m just a stupid Christian who couldn’t possibly know anything of value in this area, I leave you with the words of Vilenkin himself.
“It is said that an Argument is what convinces reasonable men, and a Proof is what it takes to convince an unreasonable man. With the proof now in place, cosmologists can no longer hide behind the possibility of a past-eternal universe. There is no escape, they have to face the problem of the cosmic beginning.” Alex Vilenkin, “Many Worlds In One - The Search for Other Universes,” 11
If you’re interested is learning what this theorem actually says, you might find these resources interesting.
Borde, Guth, and Vilenkin, “Inflation Is Not Past-Eternal,”
http://arXiv:gr-qc/0110012v1 April 18, 2002):10
A. Borde and A. Vilenkin, “Eternal Inflation and the Initial Singularity,” Physical Review Letters 72 (1994); 3305,3307