What existed before the big bang? Something must have!

[Magilla]

I haven't a problem with science per se. It's the "matter of fact" attitude they have regarding their theories on what "most probably" did or didn't happened at the beginning of all creation. It's human arrogant at it's finest.

 

In much the same way you categorically state that "Something must have!" (existed before the big bang)?

[esme]

...Several posters feel it's an incomprehensible question, which I would have to agree with.

 

would you class any of those posters as being among the most intelligent people on the planet capable of understanding things you or I cannot ?

 

just because you or I find something incomprehensible doesn't mean that is the case for everybody

 

I don't understand quantum mechanics but my TV is built using it and works very well so someone obviously does

[Grahame]

would you class any of those posters as being among the most intelligent people on the planet capable of understanding things you or I cannot ?

 

just because you or I find something incomprehensible doesn't mean that is the case for everybody

 

I don't understand quantum mechanics but my TV is built using it and works very well so someone obviously does

 

I understand the workings of Televisions, does that mean I understand quantum mechanics. Fraid not.

 

Neither do I have to understand everything in this thread in order to believe in God.

[esme]

do you understand how a transistor works at the atomic level then grahame ?

 

does that stop them working ?

 

someone understands how they work just not you or me

 

--EDIT--

 

sorry that should have been

 

"so you don't understand how a transistor works at the atomic level then graham ?"

 

my apologies for the poor phrasing

[whosewho]

I understand enough to know how little understanding of anything I have, and the more I learn the more I realise how little I know.

[Grahame]

do you understand how a transistor works at the atomic level then grahame ?

 

I said I did not understand about quantum mechanics, but I used to understand when germanium transistors first came out forty plus years ago about holes and electron flow through them. Not that it was relevant to my job to know that, but I could soon swot it up and I could design a simple transistor circuit using all the maths. Collecter current, base bias, values of components, amplification factor (gain), input independence, the job lot.

[danot]

Ah ... so it is a beef against scientists. Glad we got that straight.

 

Regarding the bold bit. Do you understand the meaning of the word "theory" in there? The very fact that the word is used is an admission that they don't know the answer. How can that be arrogant?

Yes I am aware, I'm also aware that theories are viewed completely differently to scientific Theories?

 

Posted by jacksrake

Do you consider it arrogant that scientists are, in effect, saying: "We don't know the answer to this question. This is the best idea we've come up with so far so we'll stick with it until it is shown to be wrong and then we'll try to come up with another one."?

That's not strictly true though. Not only do they treat their theory as being true, they consider alternative opinions(such as a creator)to be false.. that's arrogance. Now before you ask, no!, I'm not a believer, I have no reason to believe in a creator, but choosing not to believe in a creator, doesn't mean I approve of the arrogance of scientists who repeatedly belittle and ridicule those that do, when telling them that that they are wrong in believing it, wait for it!... because they can't prove it. It's arrogance.

 

Posted by Jakesrake

As an aside, the bold bit in your post is very similar to the accusation I've heard on a number of occasions in the past. Each and every time it's been uttered by an RE teacher. I'm not suggesting any conclusions be drawn from this; the sample size is too small. Just pointing out an interesting, related, bit of anecdotal evidence.

As I explained above, I've no reason to believe in a creator. I've no reason to believe scientific theories that are spoon fed to me. Like I tell you Johvo's when they come knocking:- Don't convert me.. convince me!

[Grahame]

I understand enough to know how little understanding of anything I have, and the more I learn the more I realise how little I know.

 

And there speaks a great mind.

[Cyclone]

It defies all logic. For nothing to have existed prior to the big bang would imply that nothing, not even space existed. Which raises the question,'if space didn't exist, then what is the universe expanding into. There has to be space to allow for expansion.

 

Correct, no time and no space.

 

The problem we have is our monkey brains trying to form an image of a big bang. It looks like something from a hollywood set. And obviously explosions require 3 dimensions to exist to explode into... That's the problem, it wasn't an explosion, and it wasn't a little (but really powerful) bomb like thing sat in a large empty space. Space didn't exist for it to sit in.

We don't really get it, we can't really get it, because we're inside the result of it. We're like stick figures on a page trying to figure out the origin of paper.

[danot]

would you class any of those posters as being among the most intelligent people on the planet capable of understanding things you or I cannot ?

 

just because you or I find something incomprehensible doesn't mean that is the case for everybody

 

I don't understand quantum mechanics but my TV is built using it and works very well so someone obviously does

I hope mankind do answer the question, but I can't see it being any time soon.