Debunking the Big Bang...

[revelarts]

presentation by scientist that show the huge science problems with the big bang model.

By a former atheist scientist that worked at NASA who became a creationist because of the science and then later became a christian.

[NightTrain]

Good vid, Rev.

A small quibble... that AC hum in the audio track is terrible! They need to filter that out.

[darin]

anyone verified his credentials?

[Drummond]

There used to be two prevailing theories about the creation of the Universe. Namely, 'Big Bang', versus 'Steady State'. The two were opposites.

But, because so much pointed to an origin-point, Hoyle, Gold and Bondi .. the ones responsible for 'Steady State' .. had to modify their thinking. It became 'Modified Steady State', because so much scientific observation DID point to an initial 'Big Bang'.

Hoyle and his colleagues were poor losers, it seems.

I see no reason to debunk the 'Big Bang'. It perfectly indicates the existence of a God. Big Bang means the Universe was created. That means, there was a Creator, one timeless, unrestricted to space. This for me does a good job of describing a God, complete with Godly powers, and the product of their use !

[darin]

Beyond God - intelligent design is just better science. At the crux of the problem - today's secular society refuses ANY answers or even evidence that counters the 'group think' - there's no intelligence allowed to be taught, despite overwhelming evidence.

[Drummond]

Beyond God - intelligent design is just better science. At the crux of the problem - today's secular society refuses ANY answers or even evidence that counters the 'group think' - there's no intelligence allowed to be taught, despite overwhelming evidence.

Remember our friend, Augusto ? Came on here with his secular thinking, apparently believing he could counter us all with a bit of 'commonsense' .. and when it didn't prove to be the easy task he thought it'd be, the insults started.

My own countering arguments .. with just the one exception .. he ran away from.

To me, the existence of a God is logically irrefutable. The Universe, regardless of precise detail as to how, DID have its point of origin, and everything that defines existence AS WE CAN KNOW IT, is dependent on laws specific to the Universe itself. Yet, the Universe was created. Whatever did create it, MUST, by any definition we can struggle to come up with, have had 'Godly' powers, and a 'Godly' non-dependence on conditions which restrain us mere mortals.

[Noir]

Having to go out so stopping about 25mins in.

He's currently talking about how the conservation of energy and mass are 'true' and this violates the requirements for the big bang. At any point does he go on to say how a Universe was created without the Laws of conservation being broken?

[revelarts]

Having to go out so stopping about 25mins in.

He's currently talking about how the conservation of energy and mass are 'true' and this violates the requirements for the big bang. At any point does he go on to say how a Universe was created without the Laws of conservation being broken?

No he doesn't.
But naturally it's impossible.

others have pointed out that either way someone invokes a miracle to get us where we are now.
When i read Hawking's Brief history of Time i laughed out loud when he talked about a "singularity" at the beginning of time.
He just described a "miracle".

Physicist Lawrence Krauss's book about the the "universe from nothing" has been reviewed and they say he doesn't REALLY start from nothing But he starts with a quantum field ..in time... with energy.. moving... fluctuation. then you get matter, the universe (or universes) and everything.

Everyone invokes a miracle to get started and at various points along the line. So the 1st question is, is it an uncaused impersonally unconscious random miracle or is it caused and intelligently designed as it appears to be?

[Noir]

No he doesn't.

In which case i think i'll save myself from watching the final hour.

[Gunny]

Having to go out so stopping about 25mins in.

He's currently talking about how the conservation of energy and mass are 'true' and this violates the requirements for the big bang. At any point does he go on to say how a Universe was created without the Laws of conservation being broken?

Sure. One word answer. They call him God.

[pete311]

The gravitational wave discovery was a big deal
http://www.space.com/25088-gravitational-waves.html

[Voted4Reagan]

anyone verified his credentials?

I posted a bunch of links.... seems like he is universally viewed as a bit of a crackpot and a Loon.

[revelarts]

[Voted4Reagan]

Rev... the guy is a whack-doodle...

He is affiliated with the 4th Day Alliance.

https://vimeo.com/fourthday

From their website....

The 4th Day Alliance is a non-profit religious organization dedicated to proclaiming the Glory of God through astronomy (a Creation Astronomy ministry). We accomplish this primarily by educating the public about astronomy through star parties, lectures, and seminars, and by distributing magazines, books, tracts, and astronomy articles from a Biblical creationist perspective.

Is Neil DeGrasse Tyson among them? Carl Sagan? Keppler? Levy or Shoemaker?

No... these people are driven strictly by a religious agenda.

They offer no hard facts... just loose interpretation and correlations that could mean any one of a thousand things.

The whole movement of Creation Astronomy is a bunch of whacko's....

seriously Rev... you are smarter than to believe this crap....Right?

[revelarts]

anyone else been skimming the news here.

The James Webb telescope has really got Big Bang cosmologist scrambling for MORE patches/excuses for the theory.
It's amazing/funny to watch and listen to the repeated choruses & variations of:

---Just because all the new observations are NOTHING like we've Predicted for decades, that doesn't mean we're wrong...
all it means is....---