The "Big Bang Theory" began with Belgian astronomer, Georges Lemaitre (1894-1966). He said the mass that exploded was no more than a few light years in diameter (2 light years is about 12 trillion miles). By 1965 that was reduced to 275 million miles. By 1972, it was reduced again to 71 million miles. By 1974 it was reduced again to 54 thousand miles, and by 1983 to a "trillionth of a proton", and now to nothing at all, which they call a "singularity".
Is the "Big Bang" Science? Nope!
On the other had "In the beginning God..." makes a lot more sense!1,943 Views7 Reposts 2 Quotes 50 Likes 7 Bookmarks
11 comments
“ and now to nothing at all, which they call a "singularity".”
“Is the "Big Bang" Science? Nope!”
“On the other had "In the beginning God..." makes a lot more sense!”
Yet another example of, from http://www.creationtheory.org/Essays/Phrases.xhtml
Big Bang Theory
Non-fundies: “The theory that the universe's ongoing expansion, size and layout are consistent with a very rapid expansion from a single point in the distant past.”
Fundies: “The theory that the universe came from nothing.”
Allmost all creationists believe that "rapid expansion from a singularity in the distant past" somehow means "something from nothing", even though it means nothing of the sort.
Oh, he omits that Lemaître was also a Catholic priest, an actual man of both science and faith, who was initially accused of being a crypto-creationist. This may be due to playing in “Big Christianity” mode. It may also be due to disproving that Intelligent Design is not catching on due to being persecuted by anti-Christian bigots making false accusations - but then, the Hovinds certainly do not have the brain to engage in that Long Game. And, perhaps most pressingly, acknowledging the initial controversy within science risks exposing “if it’s not the current scientific theory, then it MUST be Young-Earth Creationism!” as the false dichotomy it is, as the theory prevalent at the time was that of a static, eternal universe, as it predates Hubble’s discoveries. That said, that may well giving Eric too much credit and he may not even be aware of this famous fact about Lamaître, relaying only factoids received through chinese whispers.
Anyways: Oh yes, those silly scientists, adjusting their understanding of the world as new discoveries are made, rather than doubling down on some old folk tale! First they claim that the Earth is a sphere, then that someone had made it to Japan the other way round, then that that’s actually a whole New World completely unknown to both Occident and Orient, and then that Vikings actually made it there half a millennium earlier! Everyone knows that Earth is flat, with Delphi at the centre, and that there are no continents but Africa, Asia and Europe!
On the other had "In the beginning God..." makes a lot more sense!
Does it really make sense for an transcendent omnipotent entity to create the world, piece by piece, starting with a circle of day and night, taking the latter part off despite not even having any need for vision let alone illumination, over the course of six days, and then taking an entire day of rest despite being timeless and unchanging? And to then have an entirely different creation story featuring an even more anthropomorphic god?
Also, what happens in the beginning of Genesis is not actually the creation of the Universe ex nihilo , but the division of the primordial waters into a section above and one below by creating the sky and the earth - a narrative very characteristic in the myths of the old river oasis civilisations of Egypt and Mesopotamia, revealing its post-Exilic origins, contrasting the second, older, mmyth’s imagery of barren land vitalised by the first rain, far more in line with the conditions in the Levant.
Is the "Big Bang" Science? Nope!
YES! What you described is EXACTLY science! Constantly updating your theories with newer discoveries and knowledge to make them more accurate is pretty much the DEFINITION of science!!! YOU IMBECILE !!!
On the other had "In the beginning God..." makes a lot more sense!
How? Handwaving with “an invisible sky daddy did it because I don’t have an actual answer” is something toddlers do! Besides "In the beginning Ra..." or "In the beginning Odin..." or "In the beginning Nyx..." mean just as much anyway; that is nothing at all.
Seriously, either Eric Hovind is very dedicated in his trolling, or he is himself a supermassive black hole of sheer, undying stupidity!
I’m sorry, but I so feel the need to punch something because I’m simply that enraged by this moron’s unadulterated idiocy.
Meanwhile in the central place of worship of that which is the source of your KJV, Westminster Abbey:
image
The Church of England agrees with Prof. Stephen Hawking, don’t bother them about it OP.
The thing about the Big Bang Theory is that it was a TV show it’s extremely well supported by evidence. Not only the observations that the universe is expanding, but the discovery of cosmic microwave background radiation , which was hypothesized by Lemaitre himself!
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
