I just don't *want* to believe!

[JIMINZ]

1. Science doesn't prove anything.
2. How the Big Bang "a lie"? That doesn't even make sense.
3. Are you aware that the Big Bang Theory was proposed by a Catholic priest?
4. There sure is a lot of evidence for the Big Bang when it's, as you put it, "a lie".

.
1) Is it possible to actually have a Bang, whether big or small in space where there isn't an atmosphere?

2) If there was a Big Bang and nobody was there to hear it, was there really a bang at all?

 

[USincognito]

Yet something cause everything to come into being.
What was it?
If science cannot answer that question then philosophy or religeon can be asked.
Not to look into this question is evassion.

In science, unlike theology, it's O.K. for the answer to be "we don't know". It's even O.K. for the answer to be "we'll probably never know".

 

[JIMINZ]

To be clear, are you suggesting denial does not involve choice? Perhaps exceptions could be made where doubt can be established, but is it a rational or irrational doubt?

.
The ultimate question then is.
Is it possible for a Believer to become a Non-Believer?

 

[JIMINZ]

In science, unlike theology, it's O.K. for the answer to be "we don't know". It's even O.K. for the answer to be "we'll probably never know".

.
Is that answer based upon you being an Atheist, or a Scientist?

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

. The ultimate question then is. Is it possible for a Believer to become a Non-Believer?

I believe a believer can backslide into such depths of sin, as to be deceived about their status with God, however in time God is faithful to bring them back into the fold. The experience for the believer is as if they fell away, but the reality in Heaven is, the prodigal has come home.

 

[pitabread]

To be clear, are you suggesting denial does not involve choice? Perhaps exceptions could be made where doubt can be established, but is it a rational or irrational doubt?

I suppose it may depend on circumstance.

For example a person can actively choose not to expose themselves to information which may contradict a particular belief. But if they already have an established belief, that previously established belief is not explicitly a choice.

In the case of cognitive dissonance, I don't think the underlying belief or conflicting beliefs themselves are a choice. If they were, cognitive dissonance wouldn't be a thing.

But rather a person's actionable response to that state of denial may be a choice.

 

[USincognito]

.
1) Is it possible to actually have a Bang, whether big or small in space where there isn't an atmosphere?

2) If there was a Big Bang and nobody was there to hear it, was there really a bang at all?

{sotto voce}
Psst. It wasn't an explosion. The appellation for the theory was derisively coined by Stead State Theory proponent Fred Hoyle.
{/sotto voce}

 

[USincognito]

.
Is that answer based upon you being an Atheist, or a Scientist?

That answer is based on my knowing what I'm talking about.

 

[Brightmoon]

.
1) Is it possible to actually have a Bang, whether big or small in space where there isn't an atmosphere?

2) If there was a Big Bang and nobody was there to hear it, was there really a bang at all?

All matter and energy , space and time started at the Big Bang. We don’t know what caused but we do understand it happened . Basically the energy was formed and by cooling off sort of “solidified” into matter . First by forming subatomic particles like quarks then the more familiar electron protons and neutrons and finally hydrogen . Since sound is a pressure wave and there was probably nothing to push against when the universe first expanded, I kinda doubt if it made a noise that a hypothetical bystander could hear. Im just speculating as I’m not a physicist

 

[tas8831]

.
1) Is it possible to actually have a Bang, whether big or small in space where there isn't an atmosphere?

Wow...

Um, the phrase 'big bang' was coined by someone that was against the notion of a singularity rapidly expanding - it was a derisive phrase.

2) If there was a Big Bang and nobody was there to hear it, was there really a bang at all?

If nobody observed God creating the universe, did He really do it?

 

[JIMINZ]

{sotto voce}
Psst. It wasn't an explosion. The appellation for the theory was derisively coined by Stead State Theory proponent Fred Hoyle.
{/sotto voce}

How do we know if there wasn't anyone there to hear it?

Could have been a big fizzzz.

Or just the great moving apart.

 

[JIMINZ]

That answer is based on my knowing what I'm talking about.

.
So your an Atheist, with some head knowledge, not a Scientist?

 

[JIMINZ]

All matter and energy , space and time started at the Big Bang. We don’t know what caused but we do understand it happened . Basically the energy was formed and by cooling off sort of “solidified” into matter . First by forming subatomic particles like quarks then the more familiar electron protons and neutrons and finally hydrogen . Since sound is a pressure wave and there was probably nothing to push against when the universe first expanded, I kinda doubt if it made a noise that a hypothetical bystander could hear. Im just speculating as I’m not a physicist

.
Then your answer is, in Hypothetical fact, there was no big BANG ! ! !

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

I don't believe denial is an active choice. Rather, it seems to be a response to the discomfort caused by cognitive dissonance.

I look at this way. Say I break my arm and it hurts. I can choose to ignore the pain and pretend nothing is wrong. But I can't choose to not feel the pain itself.

But choosing to ignore the pain and pretending nothing is wrong is denial, and it is an irrational choice. You're right about the pain, and the response of discomfort, cognitive dissonance sending alarm to the mind to the effect of; "hey it's time to go to a hospital and get this taken care of", the rational response.

 

[JIMINZ]

If nobody observed God creating the universe, did He really do it?

YES!

 

[pitabread]

But choosing to ignore the pain and pretending nothing is wrong is denial, and it is an irrational choice. You're right about the pain, and the response of discomfort, cognitive dissonance sending alarm to the mind to the effect of; "hey it's time to go to a hospital and get this taken care of", the rational response.

I edited my prior response because I realized it seemed like I was contradicting myself.

The point I was trying to get at is that our behaviors can be a choice. But the underlying state (mental or physical) which informs that behavior itself is not a choice. I would include a person's beliefs as part of that underlying state.

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

If nobody observed God creating the universe, did He really do it?

That's kind of like the question if a tree falls in the woods and nobody is there to witness it, did it make a sound? Thank goodness I was not there to observe my parents creation of me! But more seriously, how many beginnings have we observed? My guess is, for most of us, well that's being modest, the answer for all of us is few. It is like a painter and a painting without a signature and questioning whether a painter really created it, all while the evidence of the painting is in front of us, all the while our doubt depends on specifics to the painting.

 

[pitabread]

It is like a painter and a painting without a signature and questioning whether a painter really created it, all while the evidence of the painting is in front of us, all the while our doubt depends on specifics to the painting.

Except that in the case of the painting we already have demonstrable evidence of the existence of painters, the tools they use, how paintings are created, and so on. Can't exactly say the same for the origin of the universe as a result of creation via a supernatural being.

Otherwise people would be easily able to answer how the universe was created.

 

[tas8831]

That's kind of like the question if a tree falls in the woods and nobody is there to witness it, did it make a sound? Thank goodness I was not there to observe my parents creation of me! But more seriously, how many beginnings have we observed? My guess is, for most of us, well that's being modest, the answer for all of us is few. It is like a painter and a painting without a signature and questioning whether a painter really created it, all while the evidence of the painting is in front of us, all the while our doubt depends on specifics to the painting.

Yes, well, I was being facetious, simply responding to someone that used the same 'argument'.

 

[USincognito]

How do we know if there wasn't anyone there to hear it?

Could have been a big fizzzz.

Or just the great moving apart.

Are you having trouble comprehending what we're (because tas8831 responded with the same comment) writing or are you clowning around? I'm more than willing to try and clarify for you if the former.

So your an Atheist, with some head knowledge, not a Scientist?

1. "You're"
2. Why are you so focused on my profile when I am not the topic of discussion. You don't see me observing that you're a septuagenarian from Georgia and suggesting that might play a role in your responses so far, do you?
3. ERIC - The Science of "I Don't Know", Primary Science, 2013-Jan
>> When scientists do not know the answer to something, they do two things: admit "I don't know" and say "let's find out". <<