A- I've not said I'm a young creationist. I've only explained how they view the universe.Factfinder said:@just_sayin
Young creationists would say that the universe is the product of a miracle. Miracles by definition do not follow scientific processes, so you could not disprove them by standard scientific observation.
When you break down your arguments this is exactly what you get. So why do you falsely make claims of bringing science to the table that somehow was supposed to back up what you posit?
What we have here is a classic example of a strawman fallacy.ZeusAres42 said:What we have here, folks, is a poisoning of the well. This is a preemptive ad hominem with the sole intention of discrediting the other party before they even say anything in return. With me, for example, just-sayin makes the false implicit claim that I always use AI to do my posts for me, thus implying that I cannot think for myself and/or am not genuine. Now that we have that red flag painted let's get to truth, facts, and reality.just_sayin said:Zeus,ZeusAres42 said:MayCaesar said:When you say that you "don't believe" in Big Bang, what exactly do you refer to? The specific claim that the Universe used to be much denser than it is now? The claim that it is expanding? The claim that it is not infinite? Or, perhaps, you believe that the entire physics framework used to arrive at the Big Bang Theory is wrong somehow?
As it is, your statement sounds similar to, "I don't believe in engineering", or "I don't believe in marriage". It is far too ambiguous to lead to a meaningful conversation without further clarification.
@MayCaesar
Maybe they even meant this:
I mean the sitcom. They may not believe in Sheldon Cooper lmao.
Let me do a Zeus and quote an AI on the subject:The Big Bang theory is a widely accepted scientific model explaining the origin and evolution of the universe. However, like any scientific theory, it is not without its limitations and areas of ongoing research and debate. Some of the key challenges and open questions associated with the Big Bang theory include:
Singularity Problem: The Big Bang theory describes the universe as originating from a singularity—a point of infinite density and temperature. However, the concept of a singularity is problematic because it suggests that our current laws of physics break down under such extreme conditions. Resolving this issue requires a theory of quantum gravity, which would unify quantum mechanics and general relativity.
Initial Conditions: The Big Bang theory does not explain what caused the initial singularity or what conditions prevailed before it. Understanding the initial conditions of the universe remains a major challenge in cosmology.
Horizon Problem: The universe appears to be uniform on large scales, with the same basic properties in all directions. However, regions of the universe that are now very distant from each other were never in causal contact (they couldn't have interacted or exchanged information due to the finite speed of light). This raises the question of how such uniformity arose without communication between these distant regions.
Flatness Problem: Observations indicate that the universe is very close to flat, meaning that parallel lines will never meet and the angles of a triangle add up to 180 degrees. The Big Bang theory suggests that the universe's curvature should evolve over time, but it remains remarkably close to flat. This fine-tuning of the universe's geometry requires explanation.
Dark Matter and Dark Energy: The Big Bang theory relies on the existence of dark matter and dark energy to explain various observations, such as the rotation curves of galaxies and the accelerated expansion of the universe. However, the nature of dark matter and dark energy remains mysterious, and their existence has not been directly confirmed through laboratory experiments.
Inflation: To address some of the issues mentioned above, cosmologists have proposed the theory of cosmic inflation, which suggests that the universe underwent a rapid exponential expansion in the early moments after the Big Bang. While inflation has been successful in explaining several cosmological observations, the details of how inflation occurred and what drove it are still not fully understood.
These challenges and unanswered questions drive ongoing research in cosmology and theoretical physics, with scientists continually seeking to refine and extend our understanding of the universe's origins and evolution.
It appears your AI is indeed more informed than you and @MayCaesar. Good to know.
Note: If anyone feels the need to verify the above for AI content (it appears that just_saying now thinks I use AI in almost all of my posts) using AI detection, check out one or more of the following tools (it's usually a good idea to use more than one in case the others miss something):
- I have only posted a satirical comment about the Big Bang Theory sitcom in this thread.
- What MayCaesar did was post genuine scientific inquiry—he nor I made any arguments about the Big Bang theory.
- I haven't used AI here for a while, and when I have, I have admitted it. I also do not use the format that just-saying has suggested. Juleskorngold does use that format quite often, though (perhaps he thinks we are twins). As for me, in most cases, it has taken some human effort to get the AI to do what I want it to do, as opposed to just asking a question and then posting the output.
- Just_saying also uses AI, by the way, but he will not admit it. He rewords some passages to evade detection and assumes no one will notice (perhaps he also believes he is the only one around here with this level of computer literacy). Moreover, after playing around with free and premium AI detectors (with deep scanning), I noticed that this can be detected at least among a few. But there is also, of course, a manual way to do this. It wouldn't be prudent to rely solely on automatic tools (AKA automation bias).
- Later, I will create a thread about how to detect AI content manually and a post in which everything I do will be my sole wording but designed deliberately to be detected as AI content by AI detectors. Hence, manual detection is probably also a good idea. PS: Humanizers are sh!t and a waste of money!
- Lastly, I mostly use AI for grammar and spelling checking, factual accuracy, logical validity, etc. But I don't just stop at AI; I also cross-reference with other sources depending on whether I want a formally casual or purely formal debate. If it's just casual, though, who cares?!
I have left it to these four because while there are loads more, these are the three I have found to be the most robust in my recent personal experimentation with them. The premium versions, of course, will offer the most in-depth scanning. But you get what you pay for!
Finally, even if someone has posted AI content, that is irrelevant to the validity of the content. Generally, dismissing or discrediting the validity of content predicated on its mere source is foolish.
I would agree with you that the cosmic microwave background fits best with the big bang model. However, several other cosmogenic models claim that it fits with their model also. For example a steady state model would claim that the CMB is there because the universe is eternal and the expanding of our region of the universe is because universes are always being created so there will be some areas where expansion is observed. Roger Penrose has a hybrid model that incorporates parts of the big bang model. There are several other models which appeal to the same evidence.xlJ_dolphin_473 said:The evidence for the Big Bang is all around us, in the form of the Cosmic Microwave Background. It is made of microwave radiation because the universe has expanded, stretching the wavelength. Billions of years ago, it would have been visible light, making it indisputable.
Furthermore, scientific measurements reveal that all galaxies are moving away from us. Is that because we are at the centre of the Universe? No - it's because the Universe is expanding. Galaxies that are further away are moving faster, confirming this theory. If you trace back this motion far enough in time, you reach a single point - the Big Bang.
Note that this is not incompatible with all forms of god - there could be a deistic god who does not interfere with the Universe, or used the Big Bang as a tool to achieve its aims. But to believe in young-earth creationism, you have to ignore all scientific evidence to the contrary.
And yet the powers of reason are there.Bogan said:"There is no firm reason to anticipate that the intellectual capacities of peoples geographically separated in their evolution should prove to have evolved identically. Our wanting to reserve equal powers of reason as some universal heritage of humanity will not be enough to make it so. " Nobel Laureate Professor James Watson, director of the Human Genome Project.