What existed before the big bang? Something must have!

[danot]

Why what is flawed?

The scientific line of thought. Scientists speak with certainty whilst not being certain at all.

[Obelix]

The scientific line of thought. Scientists speak with certainty whilst not being certain at all.

 

Which is simply not true. Just because people find something incomprehensible it doesn't mean it's flawed or not true.

[truman]

The scientific line of thought. Scientists speak with certainty whilst not being certain at all.

 

Go on then,what's your take on it...?

[danot]

They don't. If I cannot explain something as a scientist I say so. If I can explain I give my reasonings why, and the logic behind them in a paper. No scientists makes an unsupported presumption and calls it proof, at best it's a hypothesis that is to be tested, and even a hypothesis requires something fir it to be postulated in the first place.

With regards to my question; they have indeed made unsupported presumptions. They are no more certain that the universe wasn't created than you or I, they've simply chosen to follow that line of thought to eliminate the possibility of it having been created.

[danot]

Go on then,what's your take on it...?

Like you; I'm at a loss.

[danot]

Which is simply not true. Just because people find something incomprehensible it doesn't mean it's flawed or not true.

If this is true, then Graham should take a bow;)

[danot]

So do you accept quantum theory..?

Are you asking in the theoretical sense, i.e, are you asking me if time travel is possible?

[Obelix]

With regards to my question; they have indeed made unsupported presumptions. They are no more certain that the universe wasn't created than you or I, they've simply chosen to follow that line of thought to eliminate the possibility of it having been created.

 

Where is the unsupported presumption? The logic has been explained to you and it is impeccable and in fact has been so ever since the question was first posed centuries ago.

[Obelix]

Are you asking in the theoretical sense, i.e, are you asking me if time travel is possible?

 

Since when does quantum theory require time travel to be possible? You are making a strawman

[onewheeldave]

With regards to my question; they have indeed made unsupported presumptions. They are no more certain that the universe wasn't created than you or I, they've simply chosen to follow that line of thought to eliminate the possibility of it having been created.

 

Given your current inability/refusal to accept that space can exist in and of itself, uncontained by a further space, you'll also have to accept that a creator would encounter the exact same problem.

 

i.e. a creator would be unable to create an uncontained space, because, by your reasoning, it is impossible that an uncontained space could exist.

 

And, that is the root of why scientists tend to avoid the use of 'creators' to explain the universe, because, the concept of a creator tends, upon analysis, to not explain anything- the things that are unexplained on 'non-creator accounts', tend, upon analysis, to remain unexplained when a creator is invoked.

 

Of course, no scientist can rule out the existence of a creator, but, given that, in the scientists eyes, the existence of a creator explains nothing that can't equally well be explained (or remain unexplained) by a non-creator account, there's absolutely no reason to bring in the creator in the first place.