Evidence that universe created itself

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Where has anyone said life began from a rock? I'll bet there is no one.

He has no idea. He read it on creation.com once and his little pecker got hard. So now we get to hear it 20 times a day in the science section.

 

[Clyde 154]

There are theories, such as String Theory. There is a theory that White Holes exist - the opposite of Black Holes, and mathematically possible. Instead of sucking in matter like Black Holes, White Holes shoot out matter. So our particular universe could have simply exploded out of the ass end of one of those.

The brilliant Lawrence Krauss has a new book out on this, "A Universe From Nothing", Amazon product ASIN 1451624468
That's the beauty and fun of science: You always get to be curious, challenge yourself, ask questions, think, experiment, and admit that you don't have all the answers. Awesome!
.

Theories are not facts. And to suggest that there was a CAUSE to the effect known as the physical universe by "kicking the can down the road" to another level or supposed "alternate cause" that is yet to be determined is nothing but CIRCULAR LOGIC. Regardless of how many alternate universes, i.e., theorized causes.........at some point in this circular logic, there was the first...that is yet to be explained via application of the laws of physics. Not knowing something is not a cause for anything except ignorance. The entire supposed science of cosmology is nothing but PHILOSOPHY dressed up as science as its all based upon conjecture, speculation, and unprovable assumptions.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Theories are not facts.

Sometimes theories are facts. Some theories are true. True things are facts.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

..at some point in this circular logic, there was the first..

Sorry, but you do not know the truth of that. You tried to sneak that in there.

 

[ChemEngineer]

More recently a physician rose at an AMA meeting to announce that he discovered the bacterium which caused human ulcers. The doctors laughed at him. But he was right. So was the Jesuit Priest who told Einstein that Einstein's theories led to the Primordial Atom (The Big Bang).
Einstein did not want there to be a beginning as announced in Genesis 1:1 and replied to Father Geoges Lemaitre, "Your mathematics is correct but your physics is terrible."

It took years for Einstein and other scientists to accept The Big Bang, after it was demonstrated to be correct when Red Shift was detected.

 

[Stann]

What ya got?

Popcorn, instantaneous, full of chaos and irregularities. Best example in your world.

 

[Mac1958]

Theories are not facts. And to suggest that there was a CAUSE to the effect known as the physical universe by "kicking the can down the road" to another level or supposed "alternate cause" that is yet to be determined is nothing but CIRCULAR LOGIC. Regardless of how many alternate universes, i.e., theorized causes.........at some point in this circular logic, there was the first...that is yet to be explained via application of the laws of physics. Not knowing something is not a cause for anything except ignorance. The entire supposed science of cosmology is nothing but PHILOSOPHY dressed up as science as its all based upon conjecture, speculation, and unprovable assumptions.

So, do you know how we got here?

 

[Hollie]

More recently a physician rose at an AMA meeting to announce that he discovered the bacterium which caused human ulcers. The doctors laughed at him. But he was right. So was the Jesuit Priest who told Einstein that Einstein's theories led to the Primordial Atom (The Big Bang).
Einstein did not want there to be a beginning as announced in Genesis 1:1 and replied to Father Geoges Lemaitre, "Your mathematics is correct but your physics is terrible."

It took years for Einstein and other scientists to accept The Big Bang, after it was demonstrated to be correct when Red Shift was detected.

More recently, a religious extremist cut and pasted something he read on a fundie website even though it was wrong.

Firstly, your fraudulent ''quote'' attributed to Einstein is incorrect. It's another instance of religious extremists trolling fundie websites and mindlessly stealing fraudulent ''quotes''.

Secondly, nothing about Einstein's work suggests he ''did not want there to be a beginning as announced in Genesis 1:1". Literally nothing about the expansion of the universe is consistent with your gods magic tricks.

 

[zaangalewa]

Theories are not facts.

A theory of evolution say something about the facts in context biological evolution.

The theory of relativity includes for example the fact that the absolute speed of light in vacuum is always measured with the same value - independent how fast the observer flies who measures the lightspeed. And as a result of this fact for example the flow of time is realtivelly less or more fast - depending on the speed of an observer.

And to suggest that there was a CAUSE to the effect known as the physical universe by "kicking the can down the road" to another level or supposed "alternate cause" that is yet to be determined is nothing but CIRCULAR LOGIC.

Perhaps you misunderstand what the people in former times said. They said god is the first cause, what means god is uncaused because a first cause is always uncaused. A cause has an effect, which we are able to imagine as flow of energy from the cause to the effect. So the first cause had all energy and got it from nothing.

Now take out the word "god" and we have today the same model about the universe. A first cause (the big bang) was the reason for the universe. Because it is the first cause we are not able to ask for a cause of this first cause. It is uncaused.

Nevertheless believe Christians god made it.

Regardless of how many alternate universes,

Alternate universes are an idea - a belief.

i.e., theorized causes.........at some point in this circular logic, there was the first...that is yet to be explained via application of the laws of physics. Not knowing something is not a cause for anything except ignorance.

Sokrates said: "My authority bases on the fact that I am able to say what I don't know on rational reasons." Or did he say something else? .. Whatever ...

The entire supposed science of cosmology is nothing but PHILOSOPHY

Science is also always philosophy - but what you call philosophy seems not to be philosophy.

dressed up as science as its all based upon conjecture, speculation, and unprovable assumptions.

Such as "alternate universes"? Or "white holes"?

 

[zaangalewa]

More recently a physician rose at an AMA meeting to announce that he discovered the bacterium which caused human ulcers. The doctors laughed at him. But he was right. So was the Jesuit Priest who told Einstein that Einstein's theories led to the Primordial Atom (The Big Bang).
Einstein did not want there to be a beginning as announced in Genesis 1:1 and replied to Father Geoges Lemaitre, "Your mathematics is correct but your physics is terrible."

Sure it was terrible for Einstein, because this showed he made a very big mistake when he had installed a so called 'cosmological constant' in his theory, because he had been convinced the universe is static and not dynamic. And Lemaitre was a priest - what was for Einstein also a big problem, because he had the totally stupid prejudice religious people - specially Catholics - are enemies of science and rationality. And Einstein never forgave Lemaitre the own mistakes and the own prejudices (he indeed had nearly none) - that's why he used for everything what Lemaitre had found out the wrong label "Hubble".

It took years for Einstein and other scientists to accept The Big Bang, after it was demonstrated to be correct when Red Shift was detected.

 

[LittleNipper]

Where has anyone said life began from a rock? I'll bet there is no one.

The implications are unsurmountable. If life can ONLY originate from another living thing, there is no possible way life could have spontaneous appeared "naturally". However, if biological life was a natural process then the only ingredients available are actually STATIC ELECTRICITY, WATER, and ROCK/STONE. Evolutionists are far too slick to fall into that trap. They ignore this issue --- call it something else, and pretended it isn't their problem...

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

However, if biological life was a natural process then the only ingredients available are actually STATIC ELECTRICITY, WATER, and ROCK/STONE.

Well that's just stupid and wrong. Amino acids are the basic building blocks.

 

[LittleNipper]

Well that's just stupid and wrong. Amino acids are the basic building blocks.

I'm so stupid and so wrong. What are evolutionists saying?
Where did amino acids originate from?





A new study finds that when certain rocks below the seafloor interact with seawater and undergo serpentinization, they can create amino acids. These serpentinizing rocks were common in early Earth's crust, and may have provided the chemical precursors that formed before the origin of life

 

[LittleNipper]

Now, I'm not saying that I agree with you. I'm saying that evolutionists inevitably have to believe life originated from rock. The reality is that amino acids exists, but no one has created life from amino acid. They may manufacture amino acids; however, still no life.

 

[Captain Caveman]

What ya got?

Well, matter and energy cannot be destroyed, so, a big bang of energy created matter, it was loud. But, to get the energy for the big bang, there was a big bang of matter. And to get that matter, there was a big bang of energy. Now, to get that energy there was a big bang of........

Come back to me in a few billion years time to see if I'm getting closer to these wacko scientist's theory.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I'm so stupid and so wrong. What are evolutionists saying?

What a stupid question. This has been explained to you a million times.: Abiogenesis and evolution are separate topics.

Any rational person whose mind is not addled by iron aged myths believes life formed by deterministic, physical processes. You claim to know otherwise, without any good reason or shred of evidence. Just a book of iron aged myths.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Well, matter and energy cannot be destroyed, so, a big bang of energy created matter, it was loud. But, to get the energy for the big bang, there was a big bang of matter. And to get that matter, there was a big bang of energy. Now, to get that energy there was a big bang of........

Come back to me in a few billion years time to see if I'm getting closer to these wacko scientist's theory.

Well that willl never happen, since you cle3arly do not understand any of the theory at all, and I doubt you have any interest in understanding it..

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I'm saying that evolutionists inevitably have to believe life originated from rock.

No, that's just so stupid and wrong and has been explained to you.. You are a shameless little liar. All you religious jihadists turn into shameless little liars, when your magical beliefs are on the line.

 

[Colin norris]

The implications are unsurmountable. If life can ONLY originate from another living thing, there is no possible way life could have spontaneous appeared "naturally". However, if biological life was a natural process then the only ingredients available are actually STATIC ELECTRICITY, WATER, and ROCK/STONE. Evolutionists are far too slick to fall into that trap. They ignore this issue --- call it something else, and pretended it isn't their problem...

I won't be debating you. Clearly you don't understand anything about the process.
If youre so smart you should have researched what science is saying but I suspect a religion or other ridiculous
reason is forbidding that.
Enjoy your ignorant bliss

 

[Hollie]

Now, I'm not saying that I agree with you. I'm saying that evolutionists inevitably have to believe life originated from rock. The reality is that amino acids exists, but no one has created life from amino acid. They may manufacture amino acids; however, still no life.

Evolutionists don't believe that life originated from rocks. That's a falsehood that religious extremists promote. Promoting falsehoods is a common tactic of religionists.