The Big Bang has never been proven, hence the word "Theory".

Haven't read any of the articles but the big bang may have been a collision with a parallel universe in a small part of our multi-verse.

 

All it does is make the "problem" (unknown) bigger and more complex.

There are some serious leaps in these that I'm not following.

 

 

Would those be a "Quantum Leap?" I loved that show.

Didn't Leonard go to Switzerland on the show to see the Hadron Collider??

The Big Bang has never been proven, hence the word "Theory".

 

You mean like the God created everything in six days Theory? Guess that's more of a "wish" than a theory though.

You mean like the God created everything in six days Theory? Guess that's more of a "wish" than a theory though.

 

As an agnostic, I don't understand the vitriol that comes from so many atheists, but I digress.

 

First off, Swamprat said nothing of the Genesis creation story. He only referenced the Big Bang Theory, which IS a theory, and IS part of the subject of this thread.

 

Secondly, you were the one that brought in your agenda against religion by mentioning the Genesis creation story.

 

And lastly, for the record, I've found that most reasonable Christians will at very least recognize the possibility that the Genesis creation story is a "poetic" retelling of sorts, particularly because of the fact that the earth wasn't created until the third day in the story. As we all know, a "day" is a term that quantifies the amount of time it takes the earth to rotate 360° on its axis, so it is pretty clear that in the story, the term "day" is not being used in it's traditional twenty-four hour sense.

If only people understood what a scientific theory is.

If only people understood what a scientific theory is.

 

I understand that scientific theory does not equal theory as most understand the meaning of just the word theory by itself.

 

But most ST is just that, and unproven but scientifically recognized theory of how something is thought to have happened.

I understand that scientific theory does not equal theory as most understand the meaning of just the word theory by itself.

 

But most ST is just that, and unproven but scientifically recognized theory of how something is thought to have happened.

 

Per your understanding, what is a scientific theory based upon?

Per your understanding, what is a scientific theory based upon?

 

Depends on which theory your talking about... Some are rooted in proof and have been proven factually... Some are just the best educated guess.

Depends on which theory your talking about... Some are rooted in proof and have been proven factually... Some are just the best educated guess.

What do you believes makes something an "educated guess"?

What do you believes makes something an "educated guess"?

 

The best minds researching something they can't "prove scientifically " but using thier best understanding of the subject to purpose what they think happened and how. There is and has always been plenty that science can't prove or disprove.

 

FWIW I'm not going to get into word play.

 

Fun topic... Too much to say typing on a phone tonight.

My brain hurts.

 

So could this mean the aliens we are most likely to meet are other versions of us in parallel universes

If only people understood what a scientific theory is.

 

Theory is theory. Whether it's based in scientific doctrine or religious doctrine, theory is still an assumption that requires faith in it's doctrine.

Theory is theory. Whether it's based in scientific doctrine or religious doctrine, theory is still an assumption that requires faith in it's doctrine.

 

Not true. Not all disciplines that use the word "theory" require the same characteristics for something to be called a theory.