God is in your mind?

blastingas10 · 12-17-2011, 07:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RVCA

If you don't believe in a traditional creator, and you don't believe it all sprang up from nothing, I'm curious as what your beliefs exactly are. Mind elaborating?

It's not considered a fact. No (credible) scientist considers The Big Bang Theory a fact, and that's because it's a theory. The Big Bang theory is currently the most reliable theory of creation that is most fully supported by observation and mathematics.

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.

RVCA · 12-17-2011, 07:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blastingas10

Yes, but many scientists seem to be afraid to speak out against it while others aren't afraid to question it.

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.

blastingas10 · 12-17-2011, 08:04 PM

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.

RVCA · 12-17-2011, 08:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blastingas10

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?

blastingas10 · 12-17-2011, 08:16 PM

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.

RVCA · 12-17-2011, 08:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blastingas10

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...?

**Goofle** · 12-17-2011, 08:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blastingas10

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.

I would stop there.

blastingas10 · 12-17-2011, 08:23 PM

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.

RVCA · 12-17-2011, 08:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blastingas10

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.

blastingas10 · 12-17-2011, 08:44 PM

Cosmic Rebirth Encoded in Background Radiation? : Discovery News

12-17-2011, 08:04 PM	#83 (permalink)
blastingas10 Music Addict Join Date: Aug 2011 Posts: 2,126	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. Last edited by blastingas10; 12-17-2011 at 08:14 PM.

12-17-2011, 08:16 PM	#85 (permalink)
blastingas10 Music Addict Join Date: Aug 2011 Posts: 2,126	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.

12-17-2011, 08:23 PM	#88 (permalink)
blastingas10 Music Addict Join Date: Aug 2011 Posts: 2,126	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.

12-17-2011, 08:44 PM	#90 (permalink)
blastingas10 Music Addict Join Date: Aug 2011 Posts: 2,126	Cosmic Rebirth Encoded in Background Radiation? : Discovery News