Hello peoples, this is GachiYellow. I Just created a section devoted solely to religion. I will be dealing mostly with Christianity since I myself am a Christian. A lot of what I post will be from a logical point of view. Thus in this section there will be many quotations and citations. I may not do a lot of the actual writing myself here unless people start asking me questions.
So without further adieu lets start off with a bang, a big bang. First off let me give a little information for those who don’t know what the title of this blog is referring to. Abiogenesis is a scientific term to describe the beginning of this earth or how it was brought into existence. It is important to note this because Abiogenesis and Evolution are not the same thing. Evolution is not how the world was created — The reason I want to point this out is because many people who support evolution like to end arguments, using fallacy, by trying to discredit people, via trivial inconsistencies, instead of defending their points and or trying to validate them.
A person will start debating against evolution, will bring up the creation of the earth, and an evolutionist seek to end the debate by pointing out the differences between Abiogenesis and evolution thus relieving them from speaking upon the main topic of the subject
Person 1: We didnt come from monkeys
Person 2: Of course we didn’t we came from prime apes.
Then “person #2” seeks end the conversation knowing all they did was point out a technicality in the other persons categorization of animals. It did nothing to add creditably to “person 2’s” argument but what it did is make them appear creditable without them having to debate about whither or not humans came from prime apes.
I digress, going back to Abiogenesis this blog seeks to show individuals that when someone who supports evolution, does not know the answer or in some cases has the incorrect answer, the masses allow them to change their answer at will even though evolutionist were telling them they had the correct answer to begin with.
If a biblical scholars says “they do not know” they a labeled liars that are spreading misinformation. Why are scientist allowed not to know but biblical scholars aren’t? Talk about bias. This leads me to the main point of this article. Many scientists are starting to disagree with the Big Bang Theory. Which is it? Is the Big Bang Theory true or false? If they don’t know they shouldn’t claim to know. I thought faith was strictly for the religious. Enough of me speaking. Here are creditable sources.
“Researchers from the University of Melbourne and Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology (RMIT) brushed away the theory of the start of the universe as being a big bang. That model posits that our universe apparently inflated, expanded and cooled, going from very, very small and very, very hot and dense, to the size and temperature of our current universe. The followers of this prevailing theory believe it continues to expand and cool to this day.”
“”The biggest problem with the Big Bang model is the bang itself,” he continued. “At the bang, physics breaks down.”
“A new cosmology successfully explains the accelerating expansion of the universe without dark energy; but only if the universe has no beginning and no end.”
Oh at the end of this I do want to point out that disproving Big Bang does not prove God created the earth. What it does prove is that people have faith in “science” [that’s in quotations because the big bang theory is not science by definition] Science is suppose to rely strictly upon logic not upon what a person may or may not believe. It also prove people were lied to. They were told “This is the truth” when it is not.