Big bang theory vs god?

Of course, this silly old story is just a myth -- like God/Yahweh, Jesus, Allah, Zeus, Odin, Quetzlcoatl, Vishnu, Thor, Shiva, and all of the thousands of other gods that people have worshiped. There's no reliable evidence for any of them. If any of the major gods existed, there would be reliable evidence. Since no such evidence exists, these gods do not exist. There's also extensive evidence that they are all just myths, created to help soothe our fear of death, and perpetuated through religion to subjugate the underclass into obedience. Science has shown that there's no need for gods to explain the traditional reasons for a god -- origin of the universe, origin of life, origin of species, origin of humans, origin of morality. Science also shows us the psychological reasons that people believe in god(s). See the 1st link for the video, "Andy Thomson: Why We Believe in Gods" or buy his book at the 2nd link. The Big Bang Theory is supported by extensive empirical data. Six prominent facts are: ** The red shift of almost all galaxies, getting greater as their distance increases. — This shows that the galaxies are flying away from each other, at greater speeds at greater distances. ** The cosmic microwave background radiation. — This is a remnant of the radiation from the Big Bang, and has cooled over time to the exact temperature predicted. ** The variations in the cosmic microwave background radiation. — These variations fit theoretical predictions, and were caused by quantum differences near the start of Big Bang. ** The proportions of the lightest elements and isotopes. — This helps show that the calculations for nuclear interactions immediately following the Big Bang are correct. ** The changes in galaxies as we look further away (and thus back in time), with distant galaxies more primitive and having fewer heavy elements. — This shows some of the changes in the universe since the Big Bang, and confirms the deep time of the universe. ** The change in the apparent speed of type 1a supernova as we look back in time, with distant supernova exploding more slowly. — This shows that the light has been stretched out by the expansion of space over billions of years. For thousands of years, people have said that their gods were behind what they didn't understand -- life, lightning, stars, earthquakes, the origin of life, the world or the universe, etc. Positing a god to supposedly answer a question solves nothing. It just adds an unwarranted level of complexity and stops you from asking more questions. It used to be that science couldn't answer the question about the origin of the universe or of the Big Bang, but that didn't mean we should make up an answer (such as a god) and say that it was the cause. Within the last few decades science has discovered some good answers. Quantum mechanics shows that "nothing," as a philosophical concept, does not exist. There is always a quantum field with random fluctuations. There are many well-respected physicists, such as Stephen Hawking, Lawrence Krauss, Sean M. Carroll, Victor Stenger, Michio Kaku, Alan Guth, Alex Vilenkin, Robert A.J. Matthews, and Nobel laureate Frank Wilczek, who have created scientific models where the Big Bang and thus the entire universe could arise from nothing but a quantum vacuum fluctuation in the quantum field -- via natural processes. I know that this doesn't make sense in our Newtonian experience, but it does in the realm of quantum mechanics and relativity. As Nobel laureate physicist Richard Feynman wrote, "The theory of quantum electrodynamics describes nature as absurd from the point of view of common sense. And it agrees fully with experiment. So I hope you can accept nature as she is — absurd." "To surrender to ignorance and call it God has always been premature, and it remains premature today." — Isaac Asimov "As far as I can see, such a theory [of the primeval atom] remains entirely outside any metaphysical or religious question. It leaves the materialist free to deny any transcendental Being… For the believer, it removes any attempt at familiarity with God." — Georges Lemaître, Catholic priest who first proposed what became the Big Bang Theory For more, see the second group of links -- watch the video at the 1st link - "A Universe From Nothing" by theoretical physicist Lawrence Krauss, read an interview with him (at the 2nd link), get his new book (at the 3rd link), or read an excerpt from his book (at the 4th link). -

Big bang does not require belief, it requires evidence, if you chose not to believe it is no great loss to science. The theory does not exclude the possibility of god either, the contradiction between science and religion is also only a personal matter (after all science is merely the quantified study of nature...aka god's creation). If the universe is in fact god's creation the evidence that the big bang occurred exists because god intended for it to exist, so it is the human that is flawed if they fail to understand that creation, not god. There is no way to literally prove causality (see the problem of induction).

You have a few issues in your reasoning here: >>>no one knows for sure what caused the big bang so why can't god be the cause. Sure. But Barney the dinosaur could equally well be the 'cause'. As far as science is concerned, an unknown is an unknown. >>>scientists say that an explosion caused the big bang but where did the explosion come from? No, that's not correct. The Big Bang was a sudden, rapid expansion. Nothing exploded. >>>an explosion couldn't have just happened from nothing The Big Bang formed from a singularity - all the matter and energy in the universe condensed into a single point. So it's not correct to say that the Big Bang came from 'nothing'; it's correct to say the Big Bang came from 'everything'. === >>"Of course the cold exists... haven't you ever been cold?" Lol, no College Professor would say that 'cold' exists. === >>"scientist need to show what caused the big bang in order to prove it's real." Logical non-sequitur === Added: >>"if you acuatlly take the time to read about the big bang you'll find that "the big bang" was the name of the explosion" The Big Bang is not an explosion of matter moving outward to fill an empty universe. Instead, space itself expands with time everywhere and increases the physical distance between two comoving points. REF: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang >>"how would you know that a college professor wouldnt say that cold exist" He'd have to be a pretty stupid professor. I learned that cold didn't exist when I was in sixth grade, so I'd expect a College professor to know better than a sixth grader. >> logic is establishing facts we have yet to find facts on what caused the big bang You don't have to prove what caused something to know it exists. What kind of childish nonsense is this? I don't know what caused my lunch, but it exists. It's a non-sequitur. >> we have yet to find facts on what caused the big bang This is also incorrect. As we know, the Big Bang was a sudden rapid expansion of all the matter in the universe. The forces involved in the expansion can be shown via quantum mechanics. What you are trying to say is that we don't know what happened before or at the point of the singularity. It's possible, for example, that there was a contraction of a precious Big Bang and the process is cyclical. But we have no evidence, so we can't say.

you know that story is a complete lie right? its been proven a thousand times those events NEVER happened and even if they did they dont even remotely prove that your made up god exists. there has absolutely never been any proof whatsoever for your "god" that is an unassaliable fact.

There is actually an abundance of empirical evidence for the big bang. One is the phenomenon known as a "red shift". A red shift occurs whenever light seen from an object moving away from the observer is shifted up a wavelength. This supports the theory in that the universe is still expanding because the light we see from these galaxies suggests they are moving away. The speed at which they are moving away, the wavelength of light and a myriad of other aspects all fit into the mathematics of the proposed big bang. More evidence comes from cosmic microwave back round radiation, nucleosynthesis and the distribution of galaxies. Also, just because we don't know what happened leading up to the big bang doesn't automatically give you the right to ascertain that it is fictitious. Using your same logic, "scientist need to show what caused the big bang in order to prove it's real", I must ask how you can be so certain that a god created the universe? How can you "prove" he did? In fact, do you have any evidence what so ever? You clearly have little to no knowledge on what the big bang theory actually proposes. Have you ever even taken a basic physics course?

How many times did you mention a god in your 'question'? I lost count. Seriously though, science isn't some sinister belief. It only takes what we observe and try to make a coherent picture from it. It can't have 'evil' intentions. That's a joke since I think the idea of evil a joke. But proof? We're stuck on this miniscule little mudball in this tremendous sea of fire and desolation. All we can do is try to make the best sense of it possible; rationally and sensibly. And sorry, religion and the belief of deities is wishful thinking and has no basis in reality to me. I realize we all could be wrong...and think it highly likely...that we are ants trying to describe the world. And we will always have trouble communicating our thoughts on such as long as we continue to assume whatever we wish. That's not the way to enlightenment IMHO.

You can't prove a positive by a series of negatives. As Bertrand Russel said, the burden of proof for an unprovable hypothesis lies with the proposer of that hypothesis, not for the doubter to prove them wrong.

if god created man, then god must be created as well. if you say god was already there, then why unnecessarily say god exists. you're jumping from man to god when existence is in between. one can't prove god. but we know there is existence. so why can't we say existence already was. if you say existence was created(by a higher power), then again who created this higher power? in the beginning was the primordial chaos, form that sprang the cosmos. from the cosmos sprang gaia and such. and so on...

'We have yet to find facts on what caused the big bang, therefore god exists and the big bang is proof of it.' That is based neither on logic, fact, nor rational inference. According to you, if one cannot know what the college professor would or would not say because one is not the professor, then surely one cannot know whether god could create the universe because one is not god himself.