Posted on 04/25/2014 8:30:14 AM PDT by fishtank
Americans Question the Big Bang
by Brian Thomas, M.S. *
A new poll revealed that 51 percent of Americans question the Big Bang theory, and 54 percent of Americans believe that the universe is so complex that there must have been a designer.1 Mainstream scientists are not happy about it.
The Associated Press-GfK poll queried Americans' confidence in a number of other issues—the genetic code's link to inherited traits, smoking's link to lung cancer—and the respondents expressed more confidence in these issues than they did in the Big Bang. According to AP, "Those results depress and upset some of America's top scientists, including several Nobel Prize winners, who vouched for the science in the statements tested, calling them settled scientific facts."2
But the Big Bang theory asks us to believe the incredible—that randomized forms of matter and energy coming from an unknown source self-organized into stars, galaxies, planets, life and ultimately people.
...more at link
(Excerpt) Read more at icr.org ...
” 54 percent of Americans believe that the universe is so complex that there must have been a designer”
Hmmm, I guess the mass indoctrination by the public schools, the media, and our government doesn’t seem to be working. They will need to step it up.
Only 51% question the validity of an unproven theory? Scientifically speaking, that number should be 100%.
The Big Bang theory is based mainly on the red shift, based on the premise that light is supposed to move at a standard speed no matter (get the pun?) what.
Since the red shift is seen from objects that are the furthest away, and we know that light is effected by gravity, then if science is wrong about one universal speed of light, all is explained without expansion. The light is simply slowing due to the gravitational pull behind it.
Hence why it is important to protect the electorial college.
“But the Big Bang theory asks us to believe the incredible—that randomized forms of matter and energy coming from an unknown source self-organized into stars, galaxies, planets, life and ultimately people.”
And one religion asks us to believe that a giant magic man in the sky (who came from where?) made everything in six days about 7,000 years ago, while another religion teaches us that the universe exists on the back of a giant turtle.
I’ll just keep an open mind
Smoking causes cancer ... 82%
A mental illness is a medical condition that affects the brain ... 71%
Inside our cells, there is a complex genetic code that helps determine who we are ... 69%
Overusing Antibiotics causes development of Drug-resistant bacteria ... 53%
GLOBAL WARMING ... 33%
Evolution 31%
Earth is 4.5 billion years old ... 27%
Universe began 13.8B years ago with big bang ... 21%
The article tried to pin the answers on religion, but I don't buy it. If that were true, I would expect the earth and universe question to poll better than evolution since there is a large segments of Christian that support big bang but not evolution. I suspect that Evolution, Earth's Age and Big Bang are in the who cares category for most people.
The global warming is a who cares issue because it polls so low on urgent issues. But does it poll low because people don't but it or it is viewed problem down the road?
Atheists say there’s no evidence of God.
Yeah, everything just appeared out of nothingness for no particular reason right?
You can convert energy and matter but not destroy them. How do you explain the big bang then?
I think one of the biggest arguments in favor of a "big bang" is Olbers Paradox, i.e., the night sky is dark. If the universe were infinite in both time and space, the night sky should be as bright as the surface of the sun. It isn't.
My Muslim associate used to ask with a grin, about the big bang which he did not accept at all, “Who lit the fuse ?”
Actually, that release of photons occurred a whole 380,000 years after the creation -- and after inflation (the "big bang") -- when the temperature of the expanding universe dropped to 3,000 degrees Kelvin.
When the initial plasma reached that neo-universal temperature, protons and electrons were finally able to combine into hydrogen -- allowing free photons to escape.
"...and God said, 'Let there be light'..."
This shouldn’t be surprising. There’s a profound difference between operational (observable, repeatable) science and historical (happened only once) science. The latter is necessarily a matter of faith in one form or the other. Especially when one considers the First and Second Laws of Thermodynamics.
Except that the same account in Genesis 1 clearly state he made the Sun, Moon and Stars on day 4. The Biblical account directly contradicts the Big Bang and evolutionary sequencing, thus one or the other is in grave error.
“Good grief. Why is there ANY problem with God creating us via a Big Bang? Unreal.”
I have no problem with that. I have no problem saying, “I don’t know.” There are a whole lot of things I don’t know and that doesn’t bother me over much. I happen to agree with you but I have no way of “proving” it. That is my faith and religious belief, as such, not really open to scientific inquiry.
At least you have a starting point with him.
Atheists think we are idiots and begin with a dismissal if we try to talk science.
Doesn't say that. It says God made "the two great lights...the greater one to rule the day and the lesser one to rule the night."
From the beginning of Christianity, theologians knew there was something funny about the days of Gen 1, because how can you have morning and evening on days 1-3 if the sun and moon aren't made yet? They saw right away there was something odd going on.
My personal opinion is that the sun (at least) was created with the light on day 1. Earth then had a hazy, perpetually cloudy atmosphere like Venus's. There was day and night but no heavenly bodies were visible. The creation of the plants on Day 3 released massive quantities of free oxygen into the air, and our atmosphere went from (if I remember my biology classes right) a cloudy reducing one to a clear oxygenating one. On Day 4, the sun and moon and stars first became visible to the surface of the earth and could be used to tell time.
Perhaps Genesis chose to say "the two lights" rather than "the sun and moon" for a reason. Because it wasn't the bodies themselves that were made on that day, just the light from them.
You stated QUOTE: Doesn't say that. It says God made "the two great lights...the greater one to rule the day and the lesser one to rule the night."
Not sure why you contradicted my statement, but the scripture plainly states
Gen 1:14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark sacred times, and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth.” And it was so. 16 God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17God set them in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth, 18to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19And there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day.
Psalm 104:2 The LORD wraps himself in light as with a garment; he stretches out the heavens like a tent
God himself was the light on the earth for the first four days of creation.
The Big Bang theory was first postulated by a Belgian Priest Georges Lemaitre. It was derided by his contemporaries as being a religious apology for the Genesis story.
"Settled scientific facts"? I wasn't skeptical before about the Big Bang, but now I think I am.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.