BAD NEWS FOR ATHEISTS: SCIENTISTS SAY UNIVERSE SHOULDN'T EXIST IF BIG BANG IS TRUE
Alex Kocman : Jun 26, 2014 : Charisma News

"The Higgs boson particle probably does exist. God upholds the creation with the power of His word, and I think this is just a humanly seen manifestation of that." – Dr. Danny Faulkner, Answers in Genesis

SpaceNew research bears bad news for the Big Bang theory of the universe's origin. (Photo via Charisma News)

Scientists at King's College in London have found that the current model of the Big Bang would have resulted in a universe that collapsed soon after its formation.

According to the researchers, the rapid cosmic expansion physicists would expect to see after the Big Bang would have caused a good bit of turbulence—a situation worsened, not helped, by the so-called "God particle."

This "God particle," the Higgs boson, should have crushed our universe, shifting it into a lower energy field in which collapse would have been inevitable.

While it is doubtful astrophysicists will discard the Big Bang model, it might suffer a worse fate: the death of a thousand qualifications.

"When we hear the term Big Bang theory, many people assume it was conceived in its present form and has remained unassailed ever since. In reality, it is a very pliable model," wrote Answers in Genesis scientist Dr. Danny Faulkner in September 2013. "Several assumed variables in the equations have been changed to make the numbers match new findings. Today's Big Bang model little resembles the one your grandfather learned, and it is likely to continue morphing."

Breaking Christian News

The Higgs field is where matterization of Energy takes place. Whatever creation is, as at today, happened in the Higgs field. So the Big Bang Theory isnt true, creation is still on-going in the Higgs field as I type this. Energy matter conversation is the rule, but what Energy is, is what God is. God is not a being but Energy Infinity.

Billyonaire:

The Higgs field is where matterization of Energy takes place. Whatever creation is, as at today, happened in the Higgs field. So the Big Bang Theory isnt true, creation is still on-going in the Higgs field as I type this. Energy matter conversation is the rule, but what Energy is, is what God is. God is not a being but Energy Infinity.

What then happened to the 1st law of thermodynamics?

OLAADEGBU:

What then happened to the 1st law of thermodynamics?

No Energy is created, but energy is matterized. Densification of energy is matterization. And thats what creation is. Guess who created Energy ? 1st Law of Thermodynamics answers that; Energy can not be created no destroyed. Guess who created God ? You should figure it out, God can not be created nor destroyed. Can you still what God is ? What religion calls God, is what scientist call Energy.

Billyonaire:

No Energy is created, but energy is matterized. Densification of energy is matterization. And thats what creation is. Guess who created Energy ? 1st Law of Thermodynamics answers that; Energy can not be created no destroyed. Guess who created God ? You should figure it out, God can not be created nor destroyed. Can you still what God is ? What religion calls God, is what scientist call Energy.

Where did the original energy or matter come from?

And what exactly concerns atheists with this?

OLAADEGBU:

Where did the original energy or matter come from?

Original is a concept of time, because in the 3rd dimension there is time. Beyond 3rd dimension, there is no time. Existence is beyond dimension 3. So in essence, the question you are asking does not exist from an astral point of view.

UrbanMystique: And what exactly concerns atheists with this?

Nothing, but non sequitur is a staple of religionists, so I won't be surprised if the OP is prepared to present another one here. In other words, he's trying to imply that the big bang isn't true which means that his bible is.

UrbanMystique:

And what exactly concerns atheists with this?

Everything. The whole atheistic evolutionary theory depends on the big bang as to the cause of the universe.

Billyonaire:

Original is a concept of time, because in the 3rd dimension there is time. Beyond 3rd dimension, there is no time. Existence is beyond dimension 3. So in essence, the question you are asking does not exist from an astral point of view.

At least you concede that time has a beginning. My questions is; when did the space time continuity begin?

Weah96:

Nothing, but non sequitur is a staple of religionists, so I won't be surprised if the OP is prepared to present another one here. In other words, he's trying to imply that the big bang isn't true which means that his bible is.

The scientists in the OP have sufficiently proved this, no?

OLAADEGBU:

Everything. The whole atheistic evolutionary theory depends on the big bang as to the cause of the universe.

lol really? When did evolutionary theory become atheistic evolutionary theory and not scientific evolutionary theory? How does it depend on the big bang theory?
I know couple of theists that accept the theory.

By the way, do you have a better alternative for the big bang theory?

UrbanMystique:

lol really? When did evolutionary theory become atheistic evolutionary theory and not scientific evolutionary theory? How does it depend on the big bang theory?

Your so called evolutionary worldview depends on the big bang theory which the OP has debunked. Without a cause (and mass/energy source) there can be no big bang, evolution of stars, or of life.

UrbanMystique:

I know couple of theists that accept the theory.

Such folks are called theist evolutionists. It is either you believe the creation account or not, there's no sitting on the fence.

UrbanMystique:

By the way, do you have a better alternative for the big bang theory?

There are only 3 alternatives as to the ultimate cause of the universe:

1. The universe created itself;

2. The universe has always existed or,

3. The universe had to be created.

Only one of the above possibilities can be scientifically and logically right.

OLAADEGBU:

Where did the original energy or matter come from?

...and where did a conscious God come from too?
Our existence is an Enigma both to Atheists and believers alike.

Oduduwaboy:

...and where did a conscious God come from too?
Our existence is an Enigma both to Atheists and believers alike.

Do you believe God exists?

OLAADEGBU:

At least you concede that time has a beginning. My questions is; when did the space time continuity begin?

That question does not exist.

Billyonaire:

That question does not exist.

I just asked it. When did your 3rd dimension begin?

OLAADEGBU:

Everything. The whole atheistic evolutionary theory depends on the big bang as to the cause of the universe.

Atheists don't depend on evolution or the big bang to know that the authors of your holy book are making the s)hit up. You are making an appeal to ignorance. Even if evolution and the big bang theories are false, we're still left with ignorance. If you then claim to have the answers, then submit them for peer reviewed scrutiny. Let's find out how you arrived at those answers. If you're going to tell me that they fell from the sky directly to the authors of your book, then prepare to demostrate. Otherwise, keep clutching unto your faith in your foreign authors, and let serious people investigate nature.

OLAADEGBU:

Your so called evolutionary worldview depends on the big bang theory which the OP has debunked. Without a cause (and mass/energy source) there can be no big bang, evolution of stars, or of life.

You still haven't answered the question.... What concerns atheists with someone debunking a scientific theory? Answer that first...

Such folks are called theist evolutionists. It is either you believe the creation account or not, there's no sitting on the fence.

Tell that to the pope

There are only 3 alternatives as to the ultimate cause of the universe:

1. The universe created itself;

2. The universe has always existed or,

3. The universe had to be created.

Only one of the above possibilities can be scientifically and logically right.

this actually made sense.... Now which one do you think best explain how the universe exist?

By the way, your topic is crap, cos it has nothing to do with atheists, That is first.
Second, evolution doesn't talk about what happened in the beginning it only talks about what happened after.... Which means it could be after big bang or whatever creation crap you brought.... Evolution is a sound theory and doesn't rely on another theory as such... Although big bang explains certain things or should I say shed more light but the crap you posted doesn't debunk anything about evolution....

So tackle big bang and live evolution out of it...

Weah96:

Atheists don't depend on evolution or the big bang to know that the authors of your holy book are making the s)hit up. You are making an appeal to ignorance. Even if evolution and the big bang theories are false, we're still left with ignorance. If you then claim to have the answers, then submit them for peer reviewed scrutiny. Let's find out how you arrived at those answers. If you're going to tell me that they fell from the sky directly to the authors of your book, then prepare to demostrate. Otherwise, keep clutching unto your faith in your foreign authors, and let serious people investigate nature.

You are left with ignorance because you have closed your eyes to the truth hence you depend of blind faith. The answer to 2 + 2 is 4 but because you don't like the shape of 4 you will accept any other answer except 4.

UrbanMystique:

You still haven't answered the question.... What concerns atheists with someone debunking a scientific theory? Answer that first...

Scientist did not debunk a scientific theory they debunked a fairy-tale for adults.

UrbanMystique:

Tell that to the pope

The pope is not a scientist neither.

UrbanMystique:

this actual made sense.... Now which one do you think best explain how the universe exist?

Option 3. What do you think?

UrbanMystique:

By the way, your topic is crap, cos it has nothing to do with atheists, That is first.
Second, evolution doesn't talk about what happened in the beginning it only talks about what happened after.... Which means it could be after big bang or whatever creation crap you brought.... Evolution is a sound theory and doesn't rely on another theory as such... Although big bang explains certain things or should I say shed more light but the crap you posted doesn't debunk anything about evolution....

So tackle big bang and live evolution out of it...

Talk about a builder building a tower block saying the foundation has got nothing to do with him.

Jesus is the truth: the end of all search and research. The first, The first law of thermodynamics; The last, the last law both known and yet to be discovered. The ever existing one. The revealer of all scientific laws. Debut. 29: 29.
The one who lives outside space and time. The one who towers above philosophy, science, and imaginations
The head of all principality and powers. The only energy world ever knows and needs.

O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called: I Tim. 6: 20

Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. Col. 2: 8

What Weah96 said.

Also, please post a link to the source article or if possible the original paper. Its not that I don't trust you, just that Christians have been known to lie about, misrepresent and deliberately misunderstand scientific findings to defend their false beliefs.

OLAADEGBU:

Scientist did not debunk a scientific theory they debunked a fairy-tale for adults.

you mean like unknown creature creating the universe with magic word without anything creating it?

I ask again, how does it concern atheists? Even the link you quoted didn't refer to atheist, it only talks to those interested in the theory. We have atheists that are not scientists. in fact many atheists are not scientists and some don't even know about big bang.... I'm not a scientist but science has been able to prove itself over the years more than your religion or crappy god. So, I'm a strong fan of science.! Even though I do not totally accept big bang like evolution but it still made too many sense than creation story. Intact in ratio 90:0.5

The pope is not a scientist neither.

right, but his church gave you the creation story that you carry for head.

Option 3. What do you think?

ok. Right.! Created by who or what?

OLAADEGBU:

You are left with ignorance because you have closed your eyes to the truth hence you depend of blind faith. The answer to 2 + 2 is 4 but because you don't like the shape of 4 you will accept any other answer except 4.

You expect me to believe that you have the answers in a 2000 yr old manuscript written by men who claimed to have spoken to God somehow. Meanwhile, my eyes and ears see that others have made the exact same claim. People like the prophet Mohammed. The only difference between Paul from the bible and Mohammed from Islam is the message. But they both claimed to have encountered and spoken to somebody named God who created the earth. If Paul, Mohammed, and Matthew etc expect me to just trust them and take their word for it, as you and the Muslims have, then I say f()ck them. I don't believe the authors of your book, or the prophet Mohammed. So even if science had ZERO answers to anything, I still won't trust Paul or Mohammed enough to just take their word for it. I'd much rather trust someone African, even if he too is telling lies.

UrbanMystique:

you mean like unknown creature creating the universe with magic world without anything creating it?

I ask again, how does it concern atheists? Even the link you quoted didn't refer to atheist, it only talks to those interested in the theory. We have atheist that are not scientists. in fact many atheist are not scientists and some don't even know about big bang.... I'm not a scientist but science has been able to prove itself over the years more than your religion or crappy god. So, I'm a strong fan of science.! Even though I do not totally accept big bang like evolution but it still made too many sense than creation story. Intact in ratio 90:0.5

If there were no God there will be no atheists.

UrbanMystique:

right, but his church gave you the creation story that you carry for head.

Thank God you are wrong.

UrbanMystique:

ok. Right.! Created by who or what?

You will have to agree that it was created in the first place before you begin to ask by whom or what. Do you agree?

Weah96:

You expect me to believe that you have the answers in a 2000 yr old manuscript written by men who claimed to have spoken to God somehow. Meanwhile, my eyes and ears see that others have made the exact same claim. People like the prophet Mohammed. The only difference between Paul from the bible and Mohammed from Islam is the message. But they both claimed to have encountered and spoken to somebody named God who created the earth. If Paul, Mohammed, and Matthew etc expect me to just trust them and take their word for it, as you and the Muslims have, then I say f()ck them. I don't believe the authors of your book, or the prophet Mohammed. So even if science had ZERO answers to anything, I still won't trust Paul or Mohammed enough to just take their word for it. I'd much rather trust someone African, even if he too is telling lies.

That's where you problem lies. You will not accept 4 to be the answer of 2 + 2 because your mind is already made up and you will not be confused with the facts.

OLAADEGBU:

If there were no God there will be no atheists.

more like if there is no delusion that god exists, there won't be atheist.
BTW, are you trying to troll me? How does that relate to the post?

Thank God you are wrong.

Tell me about it.

You will have to agree that it was created in the first place before you begin to ask by whom or what. Do you agree?

you have to prove that it was created b4 I agree with you

OLAADEGBU:

That's where you problem lies. You will not accept 4 to be the answer of 2 + 2 because your mind is already made up and you will not be confused with the facts.

stop making irrelevant statement. 2+2 = 4 because it has been proven beyond reasonable doubt. Even if he doesn't like the shape of 4, he doesn't have a choice than to accept or debunk it with something superior and generally acceptable.
How does this relate to your illogical unprovable imaginary god that created everything but can only be acceptable by faith....
Its like asking me to accept 2+2=5 by faith