Believe in the Big Bang? Cool, here’s your science degree.. June 26, 2012
Posted by #4 in Everything but the kitchen sink, It's all one big lie.Tags: Astronomy, Astrophysics, Big Bang, Cracker Jack, God, Quantum fluctuation, Quantum mechanics, random fluctuations, science
add a comment
Apparently all it takes nowadays to earn a degree in Astrophysics and Astronomy is believing in the Big Bang. That and making absurd statements that have no basis in fact.
A recent article published by Fox News in their science section declares “The Big Bang didn’t need God to start the universe”. You can read it here.
Researchers have now determined that quantum mechanics, all by themselves, can create universes.
“In the very weird world of quantum mechanics, which describes action on a subatomic scale, random fluctuations can produce matter and energy out of nothingness. And this can lead to very big things indeed, researchers say.”
Did you catch that? Random fluctuations can create something from nothing. Who’d a thunk it?
You would think, in an article declaring that God wasn’t needed, in the beginning, that what would follow would be a whole list of why’s and how’s that these marvelous fluctuations are able to, not only exist where nothing else exists, but create matter and energy from nothing.
That’s what we get for thinking (something you cannot do and hope to earn a science degree, I guess).
What actually follows are some pretty amazingly stupid statements, as if stupid statements are now “in” and the facts are “out”.
“If you would just, in this room, just twist time and space the right way, you might create an entirely new universe. It’s not clear you could get into that universe, but you would create it.”
“So it could be that this universe is merely the science fair project of a kid in another universe,”
I don’t know about you, but if I had known I could get millions of dollars in research grants, and impressive degrees to hang on my walls just by making ridiculous statements – I would have been making ridiculous statements for years by now.
Reading this article gives one, perhaps, the same kind of experience one gets by opening a box of Cracker Jacks and discovering the toy is lame and there are not enough of those yummy peanuts in the mix. I hate that. The prize inside, when I was a kid, was really cool and there were plenty of peanuts. Not anymore.
I find it hard to believe that so much credit is given to these people. Whatever happened to empirical evidence, verifiable results, scientific method? Are those no longer required when making such authoritative declarations?
The whole article if full of make-believe, guess-work and evidently, drugs. There is not one statement made from observed phenomena or scientific method. It is all pure conjecture. It’s like the bald man with the horrible comb-over; everyone can see it for what it is except the bald man because he wants desperately to look like he has hair. Of course, now, in our politically correct culture, we can’t tell the bald man that he is, by the way, bald, and we also can’t tell these “scientists” they are morons. Because that would be insensitive and hateful. I guess we’ll have to let them continue to believe they are brilliant.
I won’t belabor the point anymore. I’ll leave you with a few paragraphs of logical thinking where this topic is concerned. I believe (but not certain) they are made by Professor Edgar Andrews of the University of London.
1) The laws of nature, you say, are the “inescapable consequences” of “completely random quantum fluctuations”. By what logic can inescapable consequences arise from random events? Random events can only lead to contingent consequences but to be “inescapable” the consequences cannot be contingent but must be determinate (necessary).
2) For the laws of nature to be a “consequence” of anything, the principle of causality must operate. Without causality there can be neither causes nor consequences. But you then tell us that back beyond the big bang the laws of causality break down. You really cannot have it both ways.
3) You say the big bang was “caused” by “random quantum fluctuations”. Quite apart from reinforcing my last point by invoking causality prior to the existence of the cosmos, you have to answer a different question … fluctuations in what? Before the big bang there existed neither matter, energy, space nor time, so by definition there could be no fluctuations in any of these entities. (If you claim there was something of a material nature “there” before the big bang, we are no longer talking about the ultimate origin of the universe).
3) Next comes another question. Are not quantum fluctuations themselves a manifestation of natural law (e.g. the laws of quantum mechanics)? How then could quantum fluctuations be the ultimate cause of natural law as you claim? Did the laws governing quantum fluctuation invent themselves? Not even Stephen Hawking believes that.”
Okay – I can’t just end with those quotes. I have to leave you with the really good stuff. Forget random fluctuations and quantum mechanics. They can’t explain the origin of our universe; they can only explain how the universe works. The real explanation is. . .
Genesis 1: 1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
Yes – finally something that make perfect sense.
‘God Particle’ search really a matter of faith. December 13, 2011
Posted by #4 in Everything but the kitchen sink, It's all one big lie.Tags: Big Bang, CERN, God, Higgs Boson, Large Hadron Collider, LHC
4 comments
The headlines have taunted us for weeks, heralding the almost discovery of the Higgs Boson, a theorized particle that gives everything in the universe mass. These headlines are titillating but revealing: ‘may have found’, ‘still elusive’, ‘may have glimpsed’. I must admit – I have been very intrigued by what they are doing and what they hope to find, all the while shaking my head at the obvious theoretical gymnastics performed to avoid the truth, which is that no one even knows if a Higgs Boson particle exists; even now it is still a theory.
The Large Hadron Collider, where all this is taking place, is a 17 mile long tube buried underground on the Swiss border. This tube is the site for the world’s biggest demolition derby; where scientists smash photons together and record the collision and analyze the results. They have done this trillions of times, a very impressive undertaking – not just the number of collisions performed but the process of analyzing this much data.
Reading these scientific articles and wading through all the jargon is quite difficult for your average layperson – me in particular – and it is very easy to shrug your shoulders and give up under the overwhelming display of über-intelligence. But if you don’t give up and keep trying, you discover what a favorite comedian of mine used to say: “it is very obvious they are educated beyond their intelligence” – Jerry Clower.
It takes a great deal of IQ to not only build the Collider, but to even conceive the idea of crashing particles together with the hope of sifting the debris and making sense of it. That and discovering more and more about how our universe works is fascinating. But along the way, the gaining of this much intelligence has resulted in a sacrifice. They had to give something up. The Truth.
“In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” Genesis 1: 1
Just because you are really smart doesn’t mean that you are right. It also doesn’t mean you are always logical. Many highly intelligent scientists still will ignore the obvious because they don’t like where the evidence is taking them. The search for the Higgs Boson is really, at it’s core, not an attempt to explain how the universe works – it is an attempt to find an explanation that eliminates the need for a creator. The hope is that the Higgs Boson will take them back to the Big Bang. If they can find the particle that gives everything mass then there is no need for the supernatural. But the search is frustrating.
If Higgs bosons exist, they are elusive, popping up and then disappearing again quickly. It means, says Archer, that scientists at the LHC will only be able to observe their decaying remnants.
What is conveniently avoided is the logic that states: if there is a Higgs Boson Particle that does precisely what is theorized then it should be found in abundance. The thing that gives matter mass should be in evidence; we are, after all, surrounded by mass. And because they can’t find it that surely means they are barking up the wrong tree. One scientist had this to say…
“If we don’t see it, it actually means that the universe at the most fundamental level is more complicated than we thought,” says Archer, “and therefore maybe the way we’ve been attacking physics isn’t right.”
He is actually more right then he knows.
Proving that we and the universe were either created or accidentally formed is really not even possible. Whether you believe in a Creator or you believe in mindless evolution, they must both be held by faith alone.
Scientists cannot go back in time and view the beginnings of the universe. Smashing particles together is not going to show them what happened ‘in the beginning’. It is only going to show them what is happening now.
Creationists cannot prove the existence of God. Only God can do that if he chooses.
People in either camp can only look at the evidence on display and form an opinion; come to a conclusion. Because the evidence is the same for both. Evolutionists don’t have anything hidden and kept up their sleeves that is known only to them. Likewise Creationists must work with the same evidence that Evolutionists have. It is how the evidence is viewed that makes the difference.
Evolutionists must explain how the universe works without God in the picture. They don’t want God to be a factor.
Creationist want to marvel at the universe and give the glory to God for his creation. They want everyone to see how great God is.
Faith alone decides how a person is going to believe based on what they see.
If the scientists at the Large Hadron Collider do manage to find their mischievous particle and it does prove to be the explanation for why some particles have mass and others don’t – it won’t, in my opinion, disprove God. For me it will confirm how awesome he is. The scientists will no doubt pop some corks on champagne and boast that they have finally dealt creation a fatal blow.
Many people will be deceived by the use of the term ‘God particle’, many will be deceived by the results of the search and what the scientists say about it, many will be deceived because they simply won’t make an effort to look at the evidence for themselves.
I happen to agree that if the Higgs Boson is found it will be a great achievement in science. but unlike the scientists I won’t believe that it proves the Big Bang because that is not even possible – I won’t be deceived.
I will embrace the achievement for what it is: a confirmation of my faith – one more piece of evidence that shows the majesty and power of God my creator.
Colossians 1:16: For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. [All things] were created through Him and for Him.
