Atheists can you please explain how the big bang theory makes more sense?

Question

What caused the big bang? Can any of you explain that to us so that it truly makes sense because some of you all are telling us how stupid we are and pointing out to us how you are highly intelligent.You must therefore know what caused the Big bang.Please feel free to use simple words when you explain this to us sense you think we are stupid.

Answer 1

So from what I understand, the universe was created from nothing, but then there couldn't, there was nothing to create it! There HAD to have been an ever present entity to create it Aka. "God." That dosen't convert me to Christinanity just yet, but looks like you won : ) No one can argue with this, no one can say "well there was a ___ and that started it" but what created the ___? What was before that? It seems there had to have been SOMETHING with the ability to create form NOTHING that dosen't have to mean he is the father of Jesus, and put Adam and Eve here and all that, but a thing that people call "God" had to have or still does, exist with no question.

(I added this later after I saw not the next guy but the guy with the long speech) Matter had to have been created by something that was always there, how can matter always have been? Besides look at the world around you, look at the trees, and the animals in the ocean, and the things that make people laugh, and make people fall in love, all of that, did it just come from a rock falling in that soup? Ask a majority of amazing painters or artists where it comes from, chemicals in their brain?? There is something else, there has to be, it doesn't mean you are now in a religion and have to pray before each meal or something but you can atleast admit there is SOMETHING more, SOMETHING

Answer 2

Well I am not an Atheist, but I do have an interest in astronomy and in theoretical physics.

The big bang theory explains why universe is expanding.
The big bang theory states that at some time in the distant past there was nothing. A process known as vacuum fluctuation created what astrophysicists call a singularity. From that singularity, which was about the size of a dime, our Universe was born.It is hard to imagine the very beginning of the Universe. Physical laws as we know them did not exist due to the presence of incredibly large amounts of energy, in the form of photons. Some of the photons became quarks, and then the quarks formed neutrons and protons. Eventually huge numbers of Hydrogen, Helium and Lithium nuclei formed. The process of forming all these nuclei is called big bang nucleosynthesis. Theoretical predictions about the amounts and types of elements formed during the big bang have been made and seem to agree with observation. Furthermore, the cosmic microwave background (CMB), a theoretical prediction about photons left over from the big bang, was discovered in the 1960's and mapped out by a team at Berkeley in the early 1990's.




Top three reasons to believe big bang cosmology
Big Bang Nucleosynthesis
Cosmic Microwave Background
Hubble Expansion

Answer 3

The cause is complex and there is still debate about it. The theory that covers it all that is most accepted is called M Theory (this was an extension of string theory) and there isn't room for even the basics here and I am not a physics buff at all. But it has been around long enough that the math all makes sense.

If you really want an answer, post in the Physics section that you would like a brief intro to M Theory and how that could cause matter and the Big Bang. They will be happy to answer it for you.

Answer 4

It makes sense because, in some ways, it has been observed. For example, everything in the universe is in contant motion, and it is all moving in an outward direction, away from everything else---i.e. the universe is expanding.

As for what caused the Big Bang, no one knows for sure, yet. But...what if God caused the Big Bang, and that was how He got everything started? You know, just because something isn't in the Bible, doesn't mean it didn't happen or couldn't have happened. Not saying that you think that way...but a lot of people seem to have that precise idea.

Answer 5

150 years ago, we didn't know about bacteria. No clue. It wasn't understood until Louis Pasteur determined that germs caused disease.

You are asking the same questions that scientists ask. You have, however, asked this in the Religion & Spirituality section, where we are mostly humanities majors, not biologists or physicists. Would you come to R&S to find out what opus number was Mozart's 40th Symphony? I think not. You're asking us to play to our weakness. Quite frankly, you're being unfair.

So let me suggest two things:

1. If you are serious about wanting to know the current evidence-based understanding on the origins of the universe and on evolutionary theory, there are excellent descriptions found at http://www.talkorigins.org .

2. Consider that you are proposing (not so subtly) that anything that is not explained is a place for God to be discovered. This is commonly referred to in ontology as "the god of the gaps" theory. It typically assigns God to any blank space that science has not yet reached useful conclusions. Remember what I said about disease? Before bacteria were discovered, it was assumed God was punishing the ill, or that they were demon possessed, or some other supernatural phenomenon caused sickness. This is the same god of the gaps.

Science never assumes, and should never assume, anything is supernatural. The purpose of science is to discover through measured observation, testing, and repetition what natural causes lead to our natural world. If you impose a statement "God caused it," then this stops the search for knowledge, because God is ultimately unknowable. This is the reason that the "god of the gaps" theory is discounted among learned ontological academicians, and is ignored by science.

^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^

Answer 6

Well something the religiously infected don't have is evidence and the evidence for the existence for the universe points to an explosive event which the big bang postulates. Nobody knows, yet, what actually caused it, that however does not negate the validity of the Big Bang Theory.

Answer 7

It makes more sense because the theory only attempts to explain the parts for which we have evidence. In other words, there are no strongly developed theories of what happened BEFORE the Big Bang because, so far, we don't have any evidence about that period.


That's the difference in Religion and science. In religion, when there's a lack of evidence, someone just makes up a fairy tale to explain it and everyone is supposed to believe the fairy tale. Science doesn't work like that. Science isn't afraid of saying, "We don't know."

Answer 8

People tend to miss the fact that creationism in some ways a scientific theory. I don't think it should be taught in school, because a lot of it is based on faith. The idea is centered on there being a deity that caused existence to... well, exist. The theory of the big bang, is quite valid, but doesn't quite explain why. My bet is to be a nihilist, that way they're all wrong.

Answer 9

1. Pointing out your ignorance is not the same as stating that we are intelligent; you are just dumb.

2. You can not explain quantum theory in "simple words". You can't dumb down science for the ignorant.

3. If you want to learn about cosmology take a few college courses, I'm not going to be able to condense 5 semesters of physics, astronomy, and calculus into a single post.

Answer 10

You will probably never get a straight answer from them, on this question. Logically speaking, I think the only reason "Agnostics" would rather believe in the 'big bang theory' or 'the theory of evolution'; is because it attempts to "take Yahweh (God) out of the equation".

The reason I call them Agnostics, is because again logically speaking. What they are actually stating is "I do not believe in God". And since that is not an ABSOLUTE statement, it is correctly being used. However, when someone attempts to say they are an 'atheist'.

He or she is in fact, attempting to make an absolute statement; that there "is no God". Again, looking at this logically, for this to be even remotely possible; that person MUST HAVE ABSOLUTE knowledge of EVERYTHING - in, on, and around this planet.

Since, there is nobody alive who has ABSOLUTE knowledge; then the conclusion is that people who say "they do not believe in God" are Agnostics.

Therefore, 'atheism' is not possible or logical. Unless, they attempt to rewrite the rules of logic!