User:Jzyehoshua/Evidence Against Big Bang

Temporal Nature of Matter
According to the 2nd law of thermodynamics, matter is temporal. It decays. It is not self-existent or eternal. Logically, we do not see little Big Bangs poofing material into existence around us, so the Big Bang is not subject to the Scientific Method. It cannot be witnessed or reproduced. Indeed, experiments with Hadron Colliders could aptly be considered the desperate attempts of Evolutionists to make Big Bang theory subject to the scientific method by trying to find a way to reproduce the key elements of their theory. There still remains no evidence material can pop into existence from nothing. Ultimately, with a Big Bang, one is left to ask where the particles required for the collision came from. Matter inevitably cannot exist on its own.

The Evolutionist likes to ask paradoxically on the other hand, "Who created God?" However, matter requires a beginning because it cannot be eternal or self-existent, therefore, the only solution is to posit a dimension such as the spiritual that is not bound by the laws of the physical. Evolutionists in essence try to do the same thing by theorizing that a singularity existed where all the laws of physics broke down, to allow the conditions necessary for their Big Bang. However, their attacks on the supernatural then become somewhat hypocritical, it would seem, as they are appealing to a theory that denies the laws of physics and known science, yet want to criticize Creationists for likewise considering that a power outside the material exists. As the Brothers Winn sarcastically note, "'In an interview with Ben Stein for the movie Expelled, he stated quite clearly that no-one knows how life started, and that there’s a real possibility that life on this planet may have been seeded or influenced by higher forms of life. Like aliens or something... So he agrees that life could have been influenced or created by someone not from around here. So what are we fighting about? Semantics. You see, Dr. Dawkins doesn’t like it when people call the extraterrestrial 'God.''"

In the second case, Evolutionists are theorizing about Intelligent Design, they just don't like, as the Brothers Winn put it, "call[ing] the extraterrestrial 'God.'" (Nevermind that this would not explain where the aliens themselves came from, and fails to address the underlying issue.) Both times they resort to supernatural explanations, i.e. explanations outside the known natural realm. And yet, they try to distinguish between this and Creationism. Ultimately, the physical cannot be eternal or self-existent, but a spiritual Creator would not be constrained by the laws of physics or the material. Ultimately, someone or something must be eternal, logically, for anything to now exist, and this cannot be answered from physical matter.

Universe Expansion Accelerating
If the Big Bang occurred in the distant past as believed, we should see the expansion rate gradually decelerating. This is not what's been occurring. Contrary to conventional thinking, it is actually speeding up, and the discovery in 2011 that this was occurring led to a Nobel for the scientists involved. "'The teams studied dozens of exploding stars, or supernovae, expecting to confirm theories dating back to the 1920s that the universe has expanded for 14 billion years since Big Bang, but ever more slowly. Astonished, they found the opposite was true. 'We ended up telling the world we have this crazy result -- the universe is speeding up,' the Montana-born Schmidt, based in Australia, said by telephone to the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, where the 2011 prizewinners were announced.' -Anna Ringstrom, Reuters"

To my mind, this suggests the gradualistic Uniformitarian model is once again proving incorrect, and such vast ages are not in fact at work. Lyell devised Uniformitarianism originally because he didn't like his mentor, William Buckland, using the then-prevailing theory of Uniformitarianism to support the Biblical Flood. "''Catastrophism,' as this school of thought came to be known, was attacked in 1830 by a British lawyer-turned-geologist named Charles Lyell (1797-1875). Lyell started his career studying under the catastrophist William Buckland at Oxford. But Lyell became disenchanted with Buckland when Buckland tried to link catastrophism to the Bible, looking for evidence that the most recent catastrophe had actually been Noah's flood. Lyell wanted to find a way to make geology a true science of its own, built on observation and not susceptible to wild speculations or dependent on the supernatural.' -University of California, Berkeley, Understanding Evolution"

Though we now know catastrophes did indeed occur, and the fossil record shows gradualistic evolution did not occur (resulting in the theory of Punctuated Equilibrium denying Phyletic Gradualism, i.e. Uniformitarianism), Evolutionists still insist on clinging stubbornly to gradual, constant, drawn-out time frames and billions of years whenever possible; surely because they believe these their only hope of somehow explaining a purely naturalistic explanation to the universe via chance rather than God. They base their presumptions as surely on the belief that God cannot exist as they accuse Creationists of presuming God does exist. Like Catastrophism, I anticipate the model of the universe will likewise prove problematic for their Uniformitarianistic models.