I'm mostly agnostic and undecided towards this kind of thing. But I don't believe that life is just a pointless act of chance. And I don't believe in the traditional view of god. Many people believe that god created us in his image, therefore he looks like us. I don't believe that a man in the sky created the universe - if that's what Christians think.

Yes, but many scientists seem to be afraid to speak out against it and other popular ideas, while others aren't afraid to question it, like Roger Penrose.

Whaaaaaat? You're joking, right? The very essence of science is that theories are proposed, and that ANYONE is free to test them and try to disprove them. The better theories are the ones that more people try to disprove, but don't.

Take, for example, the recent Neutrino phenomenon where one group of scientists claimed to have measured a neutrino traveling faster than the speed of light. They published their research and experiment IN FULL for EVERYONE to examine, and groups across the globe have taken to replicating their experiment in an attempt to disprove it.

It's no different for the Big Bang theory.

Of course ideas are always open to be questioned, but I somewhat disagree. Everyone may have been trying to disprove this neutrino theory because it was recent. I'm sure there were plenty of scientists trying to disprove the big bang theory when it was a recent idea. But when ideas become so accepted with Time, they tend to be questioned less; with good reason, though, because they are solid theories. The big bang is widely accepted because it is a good theory, therefore it's not questioned as much anymore.

Right... so what's the problem again? Until we find a better theory to start testing, or until any alternative theories start standing up to as much experimental analysis, what is wrong with accepting the Big Bang Theory as the most plausible explanation for how the universe came into existence?

Nothing. But my point is that its so widely accepted that it probably isn't questioned as much as it should be. The scientists who are questioning it are coming up with some evidence that there could be a little more to it.

Such as...?

I would stop there.

As I mentioned earlier:

. Scientists have found rings of radiation in the cosmos that may be older than the Big Bang, suggesting that event was just the latest in a series of rebirths.

Sorry, can you provide a source? I must have missed that. How can something contained within the cosmos be older than the cosmos themselves? I don't understand.