Big Bang? Nah! Just A Damp Squib!!

O

ondaball

Guest
Here are a number of scientific reasons why the Big Bang theory is unworkable and fallacious.

1 - The Big Bang theory is based on theoretical extremes. It may look good in math calculations, but it can’t actually happen.
A tiny bit of nothing packed so tightly together that it blew up and produced all the matter in the universe.

Seriously now, this is a fairy tale.

It is a bunch of armchair calculations, and nothing else. It is easy to theorize on paper. The Big Bang is a theoretical extreme, just as is a black hole.

It is easy to theorize that something is true, when it has never been seen and there is no definitive evidence that it exists or ever happened.

Let us not mistake Disneyland theories for science.

2 - Nothingness cannot pack together. It would have no way to push itself into a pile.

3 - A vacuum has no density. It is said that the nothingness got very dense, and that is why it exploded. But a total vacuum is the opposite of total density.

More

4 - There would be no ignition to explode nothingness.

No fire and no match.

It could not be a chemical explosion, for no chemicals existed.

It could not be a nuclear explosion, for there were no atoms!

5 - There is no way to expand it.

How can you expand what isn’t there?

Even if that magical vacuum could somehow be pulled together by gravity, what would then cause the pile of emptiness to push outward?

The "gravity" which brought it together would keep it from expanding.


6 - Nothingness cannot produce heat.

The intense heat caused by the exploding nothingness is said to have changed the nothingness into protons, neutrons, and electrons.

First, an empty vacuum in the extreme cold of outer space cannot get hot by itself.

Second, an empty void cannot magically change itself into matter.

Third, there can be no heat without an energy source.

More @ http://evolution-facts.org
 

Washington

Well-Known Member
Jul 3, 2003
5,092
358
Washington state
✟7,305.00
Faith
Agnostic
Here are a number of scientific reasons why the Big Bang theory is unworkable and fallacious.
Where? Where are the scientific reasons?

Seriously! Although you may believe that silliness such as "it can’t actually happen," "this is a fairy tale," and "Let us not mistake Disneyland theories for science." are scientific reasons, they aren't.

 
Upvote 0

Dragar

Like the root of -1
Jan 27, 2004
5,557
230
39
✟14,331.00
Faith
Atheist
Washington, you are not playing the game. You are supposed to be making up some ridiculous statement, claiming it is part of some well-known and widely held belief, and then pointing out how ridiculous it is.

Like the way Christians are always talking about shopping trolleys were the first life god created. It's ridiculous, but they insist on believing such nonsense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Reanimation
Upvote 0

eri

Regular Member
May 18, 2006
257
23
✟15,512.00
Faith
Atheist
Here are a number of scientific reasons why the Big Bang theory is unworkable and fallacious.

1 - The Big Bang theory is based on theoretical extremes. It may look good in math calculations, but it can’t actually happen.
A tiny bit of nothing packed so tightly together that it blew up and produced all the matter in the universe.

Seriously now, this is a fairy tale.


Yep, it is. Because that doesn't resemble actual big bang theory at all. But I'm sure you've been told that many times already - I'm guessing it's much easier for you to fight a straw man than the actual thing. Doesn't say much for your side of the argument.

It is a bunch of armchair calculations, and nothing else. It is easy to theorize on paper. The Big Bang is a theoretical extreme, just as is a black hole.

It is easy to theorize that something is true, when it has never been seen and there is no definitive evidence that it exists or ever happened.

Let us not mistake Disneyland theories for science.

Care to explain all the observations of black holes?

2 - Nothingness cannot pack together. It would have no way to push itself into a pile.

No one is saying that. Just you.

3 - A vacuum has no density. It is said that the nothingness got very dense, and that is why it exploded. But a total vacuum is the opposite of total density.

Again, you're arguing against an idea no one is proposing.

More
6 hours ago
4 - There would be no ignition to explode nothingness.

No fire and no match.

It could not be a chemical explosion, for no chemicals existed.

It could not be a nuclear explosion, for there were no atoms!

It wasn't an explosion. It was an expansion.

5 - There is no way to expand it.

How can you expand what isn’t there?

Even if that magical vacuum could somehow be pulled together by gravity, what would then cause the pile of emptiness to push outward?

The "gravity" which brought it together would keep it from expanding.

Gravity works best over large distances. It is easily overcome by electromagnetism at smaller distances, and nearly disappears entirely at the level of the strong and weak nuclear forces.


6 - Nothingness cannot produce heat.

The intense heat caused by the exploding nothingness is said to have changed the nothingness into protons, neutrons, and electrons.

First, an empty vacuum in the extreme cold of outer space cannot get hot by itself.

Second, an empty void cannot magically change itself into matter.

Third, there can be no heat without an energy source.

More @ http://evolution-facts.org

Again, not an explosion. Are you just cutting-and-pasting without thinking? Isn't that against the rules or something? Can you show us that you understand these arguments in the least?
 
Upvote 0

JBJoe

Regular Member
Apr 8, 2007
1,304
176
Pacific Northwest
Visit site
✟22,711.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
A tiny bit of nothing packed so tightly together that it blew up and produced all the matter in the universe.
This is not what is theorized to have happened.
2 - Nothingness cannot pack together. It would have no way to push itself into a pile.
True, but this is not what is theorized to have happened.
It is said that the nothingness got very dense, and that is why it exploded.
This is not what is theorized to have happened.
4 - There would be no ignition to explode nothingness.
The Big Bang Theory does not posit an explosion.
5 - There is no way to expand it.
Yes there is, since there was in fact something there.
6 - Nothingness cannot produce heat.
True, but something was there which did.
First, an empty vacuum in the extreme cold of outer space cannot get hot by itself.
True, but this is not what is theorized to have happened.
Second, an empty void cannot magically change itself into matter.
True, but this is not what is theorized to have happened.
Third, there can be no heat without an energy source.
True, but this is not what is theorized to have happened.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Joe_Sixpack

Member
Jan 24, 2003
104
4
Visit site
✟255.00
Faith
Atheist
Is it really worth it to reply? All these cosmologists doing a lot of work both theoretical and experimental coming up with a workable theory over the last nearly 100 years and some loon on the web who has never even bothered to learn what the theory actually says or what the evidence for it is thinks he can just dismiss it out of hand with his own lunacy. It is really depressing.
 
Upvote 0

MasterOfKrikkit

Regular Member
Feb 1, 2008
673
117
USA
✟16,435.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Private
Where? Where are the scientific reasons?

Seriously! Although you may believe that silliness such as "it can’t actually happen," "this is a fairy tale," and "Let us not mistake Disneyland theories for science." are scientific reasons, they aren't.


I have a horrible suspicion that "scientific" means (in ondaball's world) "not from Biblical quotes". ::shudder::
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Paconious

Iconoclast
Mar 21, 2008
185
20
Deep in the heart of Texas
✟7,913.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
Bing bang is made up? ahh.. figures, i could never understand the math behind physics. Surely they must be lying. But then again, how do you explain facts of the universe such as background microwave radiation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_microwave_background_radiation

by the way, this discovery earned the nobel prize in physics. Stop been a ostrich, get your head out of the dirt and look at the mountain of evidence your going against.
 
Upvote 0

MasterOfKrikkit

Regular Member
Feb 1, 2008
673
117
USA
✟16,435.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Private
I concur. I mean I'd be willing to believe you could fit 1 or 2 people in there AT MOST, but 17?

That's a mistranslation of the Book of Reticulated Sausages. It actually means 1.7 people, which is within the realms of possibility. Especially since we all know that prior to the Cleaving of the Coughing Unicorn, pumpkins were much bigger than they were today.

Clearly you know nothing about Christianity!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dragar
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Vene

In memory of ChordatesLegacy
Oct 20, 2007
4,155
319
Michigan
✟13,465.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
That's a mistranslation of the Book of Reticulated Sausages. It actually means 1.7 people, which is within the realms of possibility. Especially since we all know that prior to the Cleaving of the Coughing Unicorn, pumpkins were much bigger than they were today.

Clearly you know nothing about Christianity!
But, which 0.7th of a human? Are we going by mass or volume?
 
Upvote 0