Big Bang or Intelligent Design?

[Dredric1]

Flies have wings.

Red bull gives you wings.

Therefore, flies have red bull.

Therefore, God does not exist.

Flies have wings.

therefore, they don't need red bull to give them wings.
therefore, flies don't have red bull.
therefore, God does exist.

[clrkbar]

The Big Bang just seems kinda far-fetched. It has the marks of a poor, man-made attempt to explain the unknown.

Big Bang:
There was nothing.
The nothing exploded.
Add in a few billion, trillion years so the human mind can't possibly know what would happen in that time span and therefore the theory is much safer.
Yay, here we are.

Just has a kinda... false?... ring to it?

[Goatboy]

The Big Bang just seems kinda far-fetched. It has the marks of a poor, man-made attempt to explain the unknown.

Big Bang:
There was nothing.
The nothing exploded.
Add in a few billion, trillion years so the human mind can't possibly know what would happen in that time span and therefore the theory is much safer.
Yay, here we are.

Just has a kinda... false?... ring to it?

You're saying that the biblical explanation doesn't seem man-made? I think you need to register again as "The_Jok3r"

[msbachman]

The Big Bang just seems kinda far-fetched. It has the marks of a poor, man-made attempt to explain the unknown.

[.....]

Just has a kinda... false?... ring to it?

As opposed to the idea that god did it, which we don't even have evidence for?

A lot of really smart scientists have came to that consensus by methods which you care not to learn about. Furthermore, if you have a conjecture about how the universe came into pass (which I'm sure you do...something involving god, no doubt) that you think is at least as viable as the big bang, you should be able to cite evidence to support it.

I'm eagerly waiting. Entries claiming the Bible to be scientifically accurate > /dev/null.

[sanddbox]

The Big Bang just seems kinda far-fetched. It has the marks of a poor, man-made attempt to explain the unknown.

Big Bang:
There was nothing.
The nothing exploded.
Add in a few billion, trillion years so the human mind can't possibly know what would happen in that time span and therefore the theory is much safer.
Yay, here we are.

Just has a kinda... false?... ring to it?

Simplification is one thing. But if you're going to oversimplify something so much that the theory is mutilated, raped, and then mutilated again, you might as well leave this thread. Do some research on the big bang.

[clrkbar]

As opposed to the idea that god did it, which we don't even have evidence for?

A lot of really smart scientists have came to that consensus by methods which you care not to learn about. Furthermore, if you have a conjecture about how the universe came into pass (which I'm sure you do...something involving god, no doubt) that you think is at least as viable as the big bang, you should be able to cite evidence to support it.

I'm eagerly waiting. Entries claiming the Bible to be scientifically accurate > /dev/null.

I'm not simplifying any more than the idea that there's a big floating man in the sky that magically created everything. Just wanting everyone to realize that the Big Bang has no more evidence for it than Intelligent Design. I was not trying to sound like a moron who knows nothing about the Big Bang (although I realize that's exactly what I made myself look like; sorry).

Even if the two theories have equal evidence, seems the idea of Creation should get precedence since it's been around for thousands of years, and the Big Bang only since the early 1930's. If a new religion was created tomorrow that claimed to know the truth about the past and how the world was created, would there be any reason to believe it? Unless they provided a ton of evidence...

[sanddbox]

As opposed to the idea that god did it, which we don't even have evidence for?

A lot of really smart scientists have came to that consensus by methods which you care not to learn about. Furthermore, if you have a conjecture about how the universe came into pass (which I'm sure you do...something involving god, no doubt) that you think is at least as viable as the big bang, you should be able to cite evidence to support it.

I'm eagerly waiting. Entries claiming the Bible to be scientifically accurate > /dev/null.

I'm not simplifying any more than the idea that there's a big floating man in the sky that magically created everything. Just wanting everyone to realize that the Big Bang has no more evidence for it than Intelligent Design. I was not trying to sound like a moron who knows nothing about the Big Bang (although I realize that's exactly what I made myself look like; sorry).

Even if the two theories have equal evidence, seems the idea of Creation should get precedence since it's been around for thousands of years, and the Big Bang only since the early 1930's. If a new religion was created tomorrow that claimed to know the truth about the past and how the world was created, would there be any reason to believe it? Unless they provided a ton of evidence...

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/astronomy/bigbang.html

At least read the evidence part, and remember:

* The BBT is not about the origin of the universe. Rather, its primary focus is the development of the universe over time.
* BBT does not imply that the universe was ever point-like.
* The origin of the universe was not an explosion of matter into already existing space.

[clrkbar]

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/astronomy/bigbang.html

At least read the evidence part, and remember:

* The BBT is not about the origin of the universe. Rather, its primary focus is the development of the universe over time.
* BBT does not imply that the universe was ever point-like.
* The origin of the universe was not an explosion of matter into already existing space.

Wow, that was like 10 pages of info. No offense, but I don't think I'm going to read it all because 1) I just graduated from high school and a lot of that information was over my head, and 2) it would take about 2 hours to really read it all.

Question: Does the big bang deal with the origin of the universe or not? Because I always thought it did. Now you are saying it just deals with the development of the universe.

[Vulpine]

Wow, that was like 10 pages of info. No offense, but I don't think I'm going to read it all because 1) I just graduated from high school and a lot of that information was over my head, and 2) it would take about 2 hours to really read it all.

Question: Does the big bang deal with the origin of the universe or not? Because I always thought it did. Now you are saying it just deals with the development of the universe.

If you are not willing to educate yourself, you really have no business questioning decades of substantiated scientific research. This is one of the main reasons why many theists (I'm not saying you, specifically) have no shred of credibility in their arguments: they refuse to even read and understand the material that they are arguing against.

[clrkbar]

Wow, that was like 10 pages of info. No offense, but I don't think I'm going to read it all because 1) I just graduated from high school and a lot of that information was over my head, and 2) it would take about 2 hours to really read it all.

Question: Does the big bang deal with the origin of the universe or not? Because I always thought it did. Now you are saying it just deals with the development of the universe.

If you are not willing to educate yourself, you really have no business questioning decades of substantiated scientific research. This is one of the main reasons why many theists (I'm not saying you, specifically) have no shred of credibility in their arguments: they refuse to even read and understand the material that they are arguing against.

I am willing to educate myself, that's just not my primary concern right now. I came to this site to find some good information about the computer world and thought I would put my two cents in on some of the posts - you know, toss around ideas. Like you, probably, I don't want to get into full-blown research right now.

Some creation-believers are like you said and wouldn't bother to learn what they are arguing against. I'm not like that though - I have done a few papers on the subject and done some research in the past.

Have you read the creation account in the Bible in depth? You probably have...