Big Bang Blowup at Scientific American

Institute for Creation Research ^ | 5-30-2017 | Jake Hebert, Ph.D.

[fishtank]

Big Bang Blowup at Scientific American

by Jake Hebert, Ph.D. *

The February 2017 issue of Scientific American contains an article by three prominent theoretical physicists from Princeton and Harvard who strongly question the validity of cosmic inflation, an important part of the modern Big Bang theory.1 They argued that inflation can never be shown to be wrong—it cannot be falsified—and therefore inflation isn’t even a scientific hypothesis.

Inflation theory was proposed by physicist Alan Guth to solve a number of serious problems in early versions of the Big Bang model. Supposedly, the universe underwent an extremely short period of accelerated expansion right after the Big Bang.

However, physicists later realized this version of inflation theory was too simplistic.

[FredZarguna]

In fact, Creation Ex Nihilo was always the "official" position of both Church and Synagogue. Why this is problematic for some religious people has more to do with a hardening anti-scientific attitude than it does with religion or science.

[MarkL]

No scientist can even begin to explain how or why it happened,

And they admit that there's no way to know what came before "the big bang" by its definition, so there is no way to know what might have caused it.

Mark

[MarkL]

If the Universe is ‘expanding’, what is it ‘expanding’ into?.............

Space.

"Space is big. Really big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist, but that's just peanuts to space." - Douglas Adams

Mark

[hopespringseternal]

Science is most assuredly about why. Why do stars go supernova? How and why are inseparable. In the case of certain branches of pseudoscience, asking why, how, or even what gets you blacklisted because those questions are a threat.

[TBP]

The materialists would.

[Theophilus]

Creation is fully revealed while faith is the evidence of things not seen.

Psalm 19:1
The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork

Hebrews 11:1
Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

[sparklite2]

No, science is not about why. You’ll recall I said ‘why’ allows for the premise smuggling of intent. And intent means consciousness. And consciousness means God. It’s a creationist trope

[Theophilus]

In order to "allow" something, one must set themselves above that thing.

Isaiah 40:8 
The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever.

When every word of every Scientific American article ever written and we are forgotten, the word of our God shall stand forever.

[hopespringseternal]

You are supplying your own meaning to the word so you can have your strawman to take down.

I gave you an example of a why that science has no problem answering, but you ignore it so you can keep attacking your strawman.

[spirited irish]

You imagine that your empirical worldview, for such it is, is not ‘New Ageish.’ You are wrong, as Karl Popper (1902-1994), a British philosopher and professor at the London School of Economics made clear. Because he is regarded as one of the greatest philosophers of science of the 20th century, what he had to say about Darwinism and the so-called empirical worldview is very important.

Though Popper esteemed evolutionary theory and natural selection, he also forthrightly stated that Darwinism is not a testable scientific theory but rather a metaphysical research program. By this he means that not only is Darwinism spiritual, but so are its' two most important foundations, classical empiricism and the observationalist philosophy of science that grew out of it.

Empiricism is a theory of knowledge that contradicts itself by asserting that human knowledge comes only or primarily via sensory experience rather than the mind (spirit) while observationalism asserts that human knowledge and theories must be based on empirical observations....instead of the mind. For this reason, Popper argued strongly against empiricism and observationalism, saying that scientific theories and human knowledge generally, is conjectural or hypothetical and is generated by the creative imagination.

In other words, all three theories originated in the unseen mind, a power of which is imagination. As mind is a power of soul, then Darwinism, empiricism, and observationalism are spiritual. In short, all three theories are frauds. They claim to be what they are not in order to obtain an advantage over the Genesis account of creation ex nihilo by imposition of immoral means.

Nevertheless, today this fraudulent hypothetical system of the creative imagination and the ancient occult pagan lore undergirding it are promoted by its practitioners as more than mere science. Evolution is promulgated as an ideology, a secular religion,

"...a full-fledged alternative to Christianity, with meaning and morality. I am an ardent evolutionist and an ex-Christian, but I must admit that in this one complaint – and Mr [sic] Gish is but one of many to make it – the literalists are absolutely right. Evolution is a religion. This was true of evolution in the beginning, and it is true of evolution still today.... Evolution therefore came into being as a kind of secular ideology, an explicit substitute for Christianity." Michael Ruse

Michael Ruse was professor of philosophy and zoology at the University of Guelph, Canada. He was the leading anti-creationist philosopher whose fraudulent conjectures and flawed arguments convinced a biased judge to rule against the 'balanced treatment' of creation and evolution in an Arkansas school bill proposed in 1981. At the trial, he and other anti-creationists loftily dismissed the claim that evolution was an anti-god religion. (creation.com)

As Ruse admits, evolution is an anti-creation religion, a "full-fledged alternative to Christianity." It is promulgated by contemporary Western heirs of a rebellion against our Heavenly Father, Creator and Sustainer of all that exists, that emerged out of the Renaissance giving birth to an occult intelligentsia, open intercourse with fallen angels, out-of-body astral plane travels, and Illuminism (enlightenment via spirits), an occult nature religion that teaches that man,

"...can evolve, through initiatory steps, into a god state himself." (New World Order: The Ancient Plan of Secret Societies," William Still, p. 27)

"The figure of the Renaissance man is not complete if the place of the Magician is forgotten. Ficino was scholar, priest, and magician." (The Occult Underground, James Webb, p. 222)

In the heart of Christendom during the time of the Renaissance the "alternative" originally took the form of occult pantheist humanism bespeaking evolution and reincarnation of divine spark or spirit to higher and higher states of god-consciousness. Later on another form arose: evolutionary secular (materialist) humanism. While the former was blatantly occult and spiritually pagan, the latter was essentially a de-spiritualized but nevertheless arcane version of the former falsely presenting itself as demonstrable empirical science to masses of hopeless people:

"Reason had died sometime before 1865," wrote Webb. "After the Age of Reason came the Age of the Irrational...." Bereft of assurances of immortality after so great an attack on biblical revelation masses of hopeless people were, "begging for a revelation which was scientifically demonstrable."

Karl Marx's Illuminist-inspired messianic Communism was advertised as the longed-for "scientifically demonstrable" revelation. However, Marx's dialectical-materialism (evolutionary theory) is merely a de-spiritualized version of Hegel's occult dialectic system. Master-magician G.W.F. Hegel was an important member of the occult intelligentsia. He closely studied ancient wisdom traditions including Egyptian Hermetic magic and Babylonian Kabala as well as mesmerism, psychic phenomena, dowsing, precognition, and sorcery. He professed belief in a pantheistic Earth Spirit, and informally aligned himself with Hermetic societies, anti-Christian God Freemasons, and the pantheist Rosicrucian's. (Hegel and the Hermetic Tradition, Glenn Alexander Magee, 2001)

Enrico Ferri (1856-1926) provides another example of occult magic science parading as empirical science. A prominent socialist of his day and an Italian criminologist who for many years was the editor of Avanti, a socialist daily, Ferri wrote of the divine miracle-producing energies animating natural causation in "Socialism and Religious Beliefs." Ferri confessed:

"....modern positive science...has substituted the conception of natural causality for the conception of miracles and divinity....I add that not only is Darwinism not contrary to socialism, but that it forms one of its fundamental scientific premises. As Virchow justly remarked, socialism is nothing else than the logical and vital outcome partly of Darwinism and partly of Spencerian evolution." (Marxists.org)

In another example of occult magic disguised as empirical science, Gustav Wetter expounds on the magical 'mental' and 'divine' properties animating and informing nonliving matter and dialectic: "...matter itself continually attains to higher perfection under its own power, thanks to indwelling dialectic...the dialectical materialists attribution of 'dialectic' to matter confers on it, not mental attributes only, but even divine ones." (Dialectical Materialism, Gustav A. Wetter, 1977, p. 58)

As you might guess, I am neither awestruck nor mystified by empirical gnosis---an irrational, fruitless worldview that in its’ modern, de-spiritualized form emerged out of an evolutionary occult pantheism whose roots stretch back to the plain of Shinar.

The Christian Truth which has been undermined and displaced by an irrational, fruitless, pagan, pantheist occult gnosis is no mere philosophical truth but the Truth of Life and salvation: "..... I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing, therefore choose life, that both you and your descendants may live; that you may love the Lord your God, that you may obey His voice, and that you may cling to Him, for He is your life..." Deuteronomy 30:19-20

The Second Person of the Holy Trinity, the Word become Flesh, Jesus Christ the Physician came to heal the spiritually sick. But whoever rejects the Physician, whether through indifference or outright denial, rejects His prescriptio

[HLPhat]

Which, in your religiously fallible and uninspired opinion, should we interpret literally:

Ezek 28:11-13

11 The word of the Lord came to me: 12 "Son of man, take up a lament concerning the king of Tyre and say to him: 'This is what the Sovereign Lord says:

"'You were the model of perfection, full of wisdom and perfect in beauty.

13 You were in Eden, the garden of God;
NIV

Or:

Gen 3:23-24

23 So the Lord God banished him from the Garden of Eden to work the ground from which he had been taken. 24 After he drove the man out, he placed on the east sidee of the Garden of Eden cherubim and a flaming sword flashing back and forth to guard the way to the tree of life.
NIV

?

[HLPhat]

>>But whoever rejects the Physician,

Observing the self-evident facts regarding Natural Law does not constitute rejecting the Physician.

Got anymore straw stuffed in that vociferously vapid fallible, uninspiring, dominion-assuming opinion of yourn?

[FredZarguna]

Your analysis is a non-starter, because Popper recanted those views on natural selection. Like the claim that "Einstein was devout," creationists love to use statements out of context or from uncertain or evolving places in the careers of particular scientists as testimonies against interest. Einstein was not "devout" in any meaningful sense, and Popper did not reject science as an undertaking.

Creationists continue, nevertheless, to haul out these [mis-]quotes long after they've been refuted hundreds or thousands of times. If there was any value to Creationism, creationists would not need to lie so transparently, or so often.

As for all of the rest, it is nonsense. These are simply regurgitations of various heresies -- both religious and scientific -- that have been circulating since the beginning of civilization. They were summarized a great deal more succinctly by George Berkeley, to be sure, but they are nonsense all the same.

The human condition has materially improved tremendously since The Resurrection, and nearly all of that improvement can be attributed to science; almost none of it to religion. The reason for that success is that despite your tl;dr mumbo-jumbo, scientific investigation makes sense of the world and produces useful results, which leads to more investigation, and more useful results, and so on...

In contrast, the argument you are advancing, that scientific knowledge is merely an illusion of the mind, was best refuted by Ben Johnson, who, was asked how he could possibly refute Bishop Berkeley's claim that the world was nothing more than a creation of the imagination replied: "I refute it by putting my boot in his ass."

Science will continue to improve the human condition without your approval, and your literalist interpretation of Scripture will continue to go nowhere.

[HLPhat]

>>The reason for that success is...

...the sociobiological cultural fitness manifested by reading the manual that came with the species and following the instructions before the (Romans chapter 1) oil light becomes illuminated on the dash.

 

Mark 10:6-9

6 "But at the beginning of creation God 'made them male and female.'a 7 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife,b 8 and the two will become one flesh.'c So they are no longer two, but one. 9 Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate."

NIV

Not surprisingly, cultures who follow the instructions given by the Creator of Natural Law - also enjoy historically high levels of reproductive competitive sociobiological FITNESS; and cultures who don't... are described in Romans chapter 1.

 

[spirited irish]

In contending against the two most influential nature schools of thought, Greek Epicureans or Atomists (materialists) and Stoics (mystical pantheists), the Apostle Paul set the resurrection of Jesus Christ the Word Incarnate in the context of the sovereign decree of the God of Revelation and the inescapable fact of God's judgment on sin. The reaction of pagan sages was either to scoff and mock Paul or to brush him off with, "We will hear thee again of this matter." Acts 17:32 (The Word of Flux, Rousas John Rushdoony, p. 48)

By challenging the pagans concept of the unknown god in relation to the gods (idols of the mind) they claimed to know and by asserting the sovereignty of the revealed God of Scripture (Acts 17:22-31) Pauls' challenge seriously threatened their corpus of nature science, evolutionary cosmogony, and philosophy. This threat was taken seriously for Paul had in effect declared that if there exists an unknown god of the gods (idols of the mind) which pagans claim to know yet which is wholly unknown despite exercising influence for good or evil on that which they say and know, do they really know anything at all? If this unknown god of gods exists then why not destroy all the altars to the gods pagans claim to know since they are inventions of men’s creative imaginations, absurd idols, useless for salvation, the work of man’s hands:

"They have mouths, but they cannot speak; They have eyes, but they cannot see; They have ears, but they cannot hear; They have noses, but they cannot smell; They have hands, but they cannot feel; They have feet, but they cannot walk; They cannot make a sound with their throat. Those who make them will become like them..." Psalm 115:4-8

In other words, men who worship the idols of their own minds and inert, unknowing things of creation (i.e., matter, energy and/or evolution, time, space) become ignorant, absurd and stupid, unable to account for either the origin of life or man's thought-life, will, and conscience.

By contrast St. Augustine (AD 354-430), an ardent defender of creation ex nihilo, easily affirmed that as all men are the spiritual image-bearers of the transcendent Triune God of life and creation then it logically follows that each person is a trinity of being, — of body, soul and its citadel spirit (thought-life, will, conscience):

"The essence of the human is not the body, but the soul. It is the soul alone that God made in his own image and the soul that he loves....For the sake of the soul...the Son of God came into the world...." (Incomplete Work on Matthew, Homily 25, Ancient Christian Devotional, Oden and Crosby, p. 153) In Christian thought, a person is a spirit and personality is the total individuality of the spirit. Without spirit there is no person.

The key to individual liberty in the temporal sphere is man's spiritual liberty contrasted against a genetically programmed animal-like orientation. Animals do not have spirits, which are linked to intelligence, imagination, sensitivity, self-consciousness, reflection and the capacity for truth and moral goodness.

A human being is uniquely free because his inner person can spiritually transcend matter to access the supernatural dimension as Paul affirms:

"Now the Lord is Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom" (2 Cor. 3:17)

Cornelius Van Til, the most profound writer in apologetics in the twentieth century points out that on the basis of evolutionary naturalism (idols of mind) it is impossible to know anything unless everything can be known, and since it is impossible to know everything then the whole of nature religion, empirical science, and evolutionary philosophy is irrational because it cannot account for life, man's soul/spirit, objective truth and moral law. Therefore evolutionary naturalism is of ignorance,

"...of ignorance far deeper than (naturalists) are willing and able on (their assumptions) to own." On the basis of naturalism, "there is no knowledge at all; there is nothing but ignorance." (ibid, p. 48)

[HLPhat]

Q: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3556525/posts?page=131#131

A: { crickets crickets crickets }

 

“I HAVE SWORN UPON THE ALTAR OF GOD ETERNAL HOSTILITY TO EVERY FORM OF TYRANNY OVER THE MIND OF MAN”
—Thomas Jefferson

Maybe if you hurry you can catch a ride on the elevator with a fellow religiously opinionated “intellectual” dominionist tyrant:

[Interview with Professor Martin Jay (University of California, Berkeley) on the Frankfurt School, January 2016.]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqRnnJnm3T4

Then you two can spend a few centuries bouncing dialectically between the 8th and 9th floors of Dante’s inferno theorizing about which one to get off on by spending the rest of eternity assuming dominion over it... with your opinions.