|
The only purpose for the argument's existence is so that one group can tell another they're wrong. Honestly, I don't care who's right, since it's not our past but our future that is of imminent concern.
|
Isn't there a possibility that people just want to know? It's not like Darwin went out shouting "HOW CAN I FUCK WITH RELIGION TODAY" while he was trying to develop the theory of evolution; he just wanted to know more about the universe because he felt his knowledge was inadequate.
|
The issue I have with the Big Bang theory is one of deferred causality. The idea that the big bang had to come from somewhere. Something had to create it. Recall that matter is neither created nor destroyed.
Something coming from nothing without cause, much like life from nonlife seems like a convenient exception from nature's laws.
|
I think that problem is escaped nicely by positing the theory that things outside the universe aren't subject to the rules of the universe. So while matter can't spontaneously be created in the universe, what's to say outside of the universe it can't be?
PS: Big bang theory doesn't say how the big bang occurred in the first place, it only describes what happens after all of that matter/energy got clumped into such a tiny space (you know, the whole timeline of the early universe and whatnot). Much as how evolution doesn't describe how life originally began, but how it's changed since it first got going.
PPS: Brady, Vonnegut's dead.
How ya doing, buddy?
85242
35212
RacinReaver