>there are Americans on this board RIGHT NOW who don't believe in or even understand the big bang theory
>implying anyone who isn't an astrophysicist comes even close to truly comprehending the theory of the big bang
it is a bit more complicated than "particle ball expands lelelelel XDDD"
according to the big bang theory the universe must be filled with over 90% dark matter and dark energy in order for it to work in the first place
it is predicted by the objects hubble saw back in the 1920s and at that time relativity was hot stuff so they applied the red shift phenomenon to every thing "far away"
in the 90s there were some discoveries of quazars that break the rule of energy such that if one apply the redshift phenomenon you would get massive amount of energy from these stars that breaks the bbt because of how much redshift they have, ie not on the same scale as the galaxies that "birth" them
this leads to 2 things that contradicts bbt
1 galaxies are still being created
2 redshift are not purely related to distance
the bbt is not an observational theory, it is a theory made from mathematical postulations to apply to the universe
tldr: it is a pretty weak theory
Have this image, it's on the house.
>there are Americans on this board RIGHT NOW who don't believe in a single universe
there really is an academic conspiracy going on
as times goes on the nature of quasars will illuminate the dark nature of the universe, pun intended
They think some sort of magic put these things there and made the explode not GOD (pbuh).
Considering the other things they elect not to believe, which have much more practical consequences for public policy and their treatment of the sciences, not believing in rapid cosmogenesis from a singularity is not that big a deal.
If Big Bang Theory is true then this rock should be a universe
>tfw you see an ausfailian shitposter who feels superior pretending that he understands the big bang theory.
At least I can be glad that I will always see an Asutralina who is less, funny and more stupid than me.
Feels good man.
No. The Big Bang theory is simply the best explanation we can think of right now with current tech and lines of thought. There's nothing to say that in 50 years you will be proven completely wrong and look like a fool because you chose to believe a theory was the absolute truth. We used to think a lot of things were carved in stone until breakthroughs in technology proved it wrong
>insulting someone's virginity on an imageboard
I was going to defend you against bullying but you are a cursed soul that wandered here from elsewhere
>all of a sudden it explodes and creates the universe
>yet you trade Christianity for Science
because the scientific method is based purely on replicable results and has time and again created incredible things
'god' is what arabs believe in when they blow themselves up
what's the book about
now that the christian era is over, THE KATANA HAT ERA CAN BEGIN!!!
did you literally add a question mark to my post you stupid fuck?
is that your intellectual triumph for today?
If you actually cared about the scientific method you would realize that a theory =/= the truth. But you choose to put your faith in the bbt the same why Cletus puts his faith in God
There never was nothing. The ancient Greek philosophers figured this shit out 500 years before Christianity.
But not only “Non-Being” does not exist outside of the sphere of Being; it does not even exist inside Being (under the unthinkable aspect of emptiness, of change in shape, color and place, of birth and death).
>Not believing in our Lord and savior Jesus Christ
>The Big Bang theory is simply the best explanation we can think of right now with current tech and lines of thought.
>There's nothing to say that in 50 years you will be proven completely wrong and look like a fool because you chose to believe a theory was the absolute truth.
Not quite. Take Lamarckism, for example. The Darwinian theory of evolution was inspired to an extent by Lamarck's ideas (offspring inheritance), yet disagreed on some points, most notably being that of inheritance of acquired traits. Scientific theories can indeed be completely rejected, yet they mostly build upon previous models. A new theory on the origin of the universe would likely converge some points with the Big Bang theory. Even Lamarckism can be said to be somewhat true in relation to cultural inheritance (memes).
and where did that somebody come from, and where did THAT somebody/something come from etc
Why not start from a place where we can put together a theory with evidence based on things we so far know to be true, otherwise we can just keep going back forever
so ahh lets recollect
>u don't know it's just A THEORY THEREFORE GOD DID IT
>u didn't read this book? UR UNEDUCATED
>edgy, edgy edgy *tips fedora* go polish ur katana
why are christians so fucking pathetic? it always comes to this. jesus died like a bitch and is never coming back btw
>jesus died like a bitch and is never coming back btw
Kek. Jesus left his mark on human history, just like Siddhārta Gautama and Muhammad did. Maybe a lot of what he said was altered by the apostles and the Church, but it's undeniable that whatever Jesus said changed Western civilization forever. His body died, but his legacy (however changed) persists.
Not even religious, but you can't deny he was an important historical figure.
yeah and now he's not
if not for constantine he would never have been
if you're following an abrahamic religion and not a jew you're kidding yourself. even that is bullshit but the later iterations of it are worse
>he thinks the big bang theory is stupid
>he doesn't even know who Edwin Hubble was