[I want the USA back]

Doesn’t prove the “big bang.” The “big bang” is not a sufficient explanation for the origin of the universe.

[dfwgator]

[hoagy62]

I know it’s a simplistic view, but it’s what I believe:

I believe in the Big Bang. God said “Let there be..” and BANG! there it was.

[Seizethecarp]

“Doesn’t prove the ‘big bang.’ The ‘big bang’ is not a sufficient explanation for the origin of the universe.”

Thee article says that this model explains the portion of the universe that resulted from the “big bang” but indicates the model does NOT explain the “cosmos” within which the big bang occurred:

quote from article:

“Confirming inflation would mean that the universe we see, extending 14 billion light-years in space with its hundreds of billions of galaxies, is only an infinitesimal patch in a larger cosmos whose extent, architecture and fate are unknowable. Moreover, beyond our own universe there might be an endless number of other universes bubbling into frothy eternity, like a pot of pasta water boiling over.”

Now we are likened to bubbling pasta!

[MosesKnows]

The “big bang” is not a sufficient explanation

The "Big Bang Theory" is the most sufficient explanation available, unless you have an improvement to offer.