Top Ten Problems with the Big Bang

[In situ]

Besides which, it is not exactly obvious why a creationist should prefer a model of the universe which has nothing identifiable as the moment of creation.

Because it all was done by magic anyway - so why even bother with observational evidence?

 

[lesliedellow]

That must be according to a definition of a static universe unheard of so far. The rest of the list seams to be the same kind of nonsense.

It is.

 

[In situ]

I guess it's a way of relieving stress or something.

Are you saying your believes creates cognitive stress, or are you saying you are just trolling for fun&relaxation?

 

[In situ]

It is.

I know.... it is the same old complaints. But creationist like to pretend they never been refuted and that everything they say are "new findings" which makes "many scientist" now "change their view" - but they never mention these scientists are old, well known, creationists which have had the very same (refuted) oppinions for decades...

 

[SkyWriting]

We can test past events. Based on a hypothesis of a past event we can check for the present state it would produce. Say there is a guy who has been shot, and you think it was the butler. You can make prediction about what you will find (a matching gun registered to the butler, gun powder residue on the butlers hands, etc.) and use that to test your theories about the butler doing it. A blanket statement that you can test past events would invalidate basically all of forensics.

If there is the possibility that the butler hunts, or any other possibility, then your
lethal injection into the butlers neck for murder would itself be a crime.

 

[In situ]

I don't understand a single point.

I was just tossing the scientifically-minded people here something to play with.

Well, a science literate person would say: the list makes no sense at all.

Take the first point as an example; it is pretty easy to show that a static universe is unstable. As soon as something makes the slightest wrong move in a static universe, everything will start to collapse onto itself due to gravity - in fact Newtons universe is such kind of unstable universe. A non-collapsing universe must expand! This is what Einstein also realized. To compensate Einstein incorporated a "mystic" expanding force to prevent the universe to collapse.

Why somebody would say that the data best fits a static universe is beyond me unless they are ignorant, stupid or just lying or trying to pull a prank...

 

[In situ]

your lethal injection into the butlers neck for murder would itself be a crime.

What is, and what is not, a crime is regulated by the written law, not by opinions.

 

[In situ]

Assuming all of that is true do you or anyone else have an alternative proposal?

Of course they have: the BMB! (Big Magic Bang)

The good news with the BMB is that it does not require any evidence whatsoever - just a belief it did happen!

 

[SkyWriting]

What is, and what is not, a crime is regulated by the written law, not by opinions.

Your definition is not correct.

 

[SkyWriting]

We can test past events. Based on a hypothesis of a past event we can check for the present state it would produce. Say there is a guy who has been shot, and you think it was the butler. You can make prediction about what you will find (a matching gun registered to the butler, gun powder residue on the butlers hands, etc.) and use that to test your theories about the butler doing it. A blanket statement that you can test past events would invalidate basically all of forensics.

I'm not sure what you think forensics is, but it's not what you imply
or what you've seen on the boob tube. I've worked for an investigator
for the coroner.

 

[SkyWriting]

We can test past events. Based on a hypothesis of a past event we can check for the present state it would produce.

"The scientific method, a time-honored approach for discovering and testing scientific truth, does not and cannot work for the forensic sciences in its standard form because it does not work for past events. Past events cannot be observed, cannot be predicted or deduced from physical evidence, and cannot be tested experimentally."

 

[[serious]]

If there is the possibility that the butler hunts, or any other possibility, then your
lethal injection into the butlers neck for murder would itself be a crime.

Ah, so any hunter becomes immune from prosecution in murder cases? I think not.

 

[SkyWriting]

Ah, so any hunter becomes immune from prosecution in murder cases? I think not.

I agree.

 

[AV1611VET]

As soon as something makes the slightest wrong move in a static universe,

Such as?

 

[lesliedellow]

Such as?

Such as a star exploding, and upsetting the unbelievably fine tuned gravitational balance that was keeping everything static.

Ever tried balancing a needle on its point? Well that would be easier than a static universe.

 

[AV1611VET]

Such as a star exploding, and upsetting the unbelievably fine tuned gravitational balance that was keeping everything static.

Ever tried balancing a needle on its point? Well that would be easier than a static universe.

Okay, thank you.

 

[Doveaman]

Such as a star exploding, and upsetting the unbelievably fine tuned gravitational balance that was keeping everything static.

There is nothing scientific about your statement at all.

But it sounds cool.

 

[lesliedellow]

There is nothing scientific about your statement at all.

But it sounds cool.

It's not my fault if you would fail a high school level science exam.

 

[SkyWriting]

Such as a star exploding, and upsetting the unbelievably fine tuned gravitational balance that was keeping everything static.
Ever tried balancing a needle on its point?

That is pretty close to what researchers have discovered
on many different points.

 

[[serious]]

I'm not sure what you think forensics is, but it's not what you imply
or what you've seen on the boob tube. I've worked for an investigator
for the coroner.

Sounds like science that can test past events!