• This is a new section being rolled out to attract people interested in exploring the origins of the universe and the earth from a biblical perspective. Debate is encouraged and opposing viewpoints are welcome to post but certain rules must be followed. 1. No abusive tagging - if abusive tags are found - they will be deleted and disabled by the Admin team 2. No calling the biblical accounts a fable - fairy tale ect. This is a Christian site, so members that participate here must be respectful in their disagreement.

The origin of the universe cannot be determined scientifically

Skeeter

Skeeter

Well-known member
Banned
Right Divider said:
Science requires:
  • Observation
  • Repeatability
The origin of the universe does NOT meet either of those requirements.
Click to expand...
As you should well know, by now, an entire phenomenon need not be observable or repeatable to be studied by scientific method. Science often involves looking at puzzle pieces to study the finished puzzle. Predictions about the pieces need to be observable and repeatable in order to make deductions about the bigger picture. Why can't this register in your brain?

Light speed across vast distances allows us a look into the past. Simply put, observation of the movement of bodies in the universe allows us to trace back trajectories and consider rates of movement. Predictions can be tested, and conclusions can be drawn.
 
Last edited:
Right Divider

Right Divider

Body part
Skeeter said:
As you should well know, by now, an entire phenomenon need not be observable or repeatable to be studied by scientific method.
Click to expand...
The scientific method requires observation and repeatability.

Indeed there are other types of science... since science just means knowledge.
Skeeter said:
Science often involves looking at puzzle pieces to study the finished puzzle.
Click to expand...
Sure, but we still need to LOOK at the pieces. How do we "observe" the "big bang"?
Skeeter said:
Predictions about the pieces need to be observable and repeatable in order to make deductions about the bigger picture. Why can't this register in your brain?
Click to expand...
I understand it completely. Again, how do we "repeatably observe" the "big bang"?
Skeeter said:
Light speed across vast distances allows us a look into the past.
Click to expand...
God stretched out the universe. We see the results of that.
Skeeter said:
Simply put, observation of movement bodies in the universe allows us to trace back trajectories and consider rates of movement.
Click to expand...
Unless you are, again, extrapolating beyond what is reasonable.
 
Last edited:
E

Eric h

Well-known member
Skeeter said:
Light speed across vast distances allows us a look into the past. Simply put, observation of the movement of bodies in the universe allows us to trace back trajectories and consider rates of movement. Predictions can be tested, and conclusions can be drawn.
Click to expand...

That takes us back to the Big Bang; and the BB is not a satisfactory explanation for the beginning. Now try going back further than the BB, and science comes to a grinding halt.
 
M

marke

Well-known member
Skeeter said:
As you should well know, by now, an entire phenomenon need not be observable or repeatable to be studied by scientific method. Science often involves looking at puzzle pieces to study the finished puzzle. Predictions about the pieces need to be observable and repeatable in order to make deductions about the bigger picture. Why can't this register in your brain?

Light speed across vast distances allows us a look into the past. Simply put, observation of the movement of bodies in the universe allows us to trace back trajectories and consider rates of movement. Predictions can be tested, and conclusions can be drawn.
Click to expand...
If God created the universe and light from the farthest stars was immediately seen on earth, how could the speed of light be used to date the stars?
 
Skeeter

Skeeter

Well-known member
Banned
marke said:
If God created the universe and light from the farthest stars was immediately seen on earth, how could the speed of light be used to date the stars?
Click to expand...
That would mean that He created the emanated light at the same time he made the star.
 
P

Peter

New member
Skeeter said:
That would mean that He created the emanated light at the same time he made the star.
Click to expand...
Exactly.

Science may not be able to prove the origin of the universe, but it sure can get pretty darn conclusive. It does show that there is a God who is eternal and powerful (Rom 1:20).
 
E

Eric h

Well-known member
Skeeter said:
Predictions about the pieces need to be observable and repeatable in order to make deductions about the bigger picture.
Click to expand...

You cant repeat the origin of the universe, so the origin can't be observed, so no bigger picture.
 
P

Peter

New member
Eric h said:
You cant repeat the origin of the universe, so the origin can't be observed, so no bigger picture.
Click to expand...
On the other hand, we do have a written record that tells us how the universe came about and how God created it. Whatever lame claims the evolutionists make, they can't explain away the facts.
 
Silent Hunter

Silent Hunter

Well-known member
Right Divider said:
What is?
Click to expand...
Essentially, astronomers determine the age of stars by observing their spectrum, luminosity and motion through space. They use this information to get a star's profile, and then they compare the star to models that show what stars should look like at various points of their evolution.
 
Right Divider

Right Divider

Body part
M

marke

Well-known member
Silent Hunter said:
Essentially, astronomers determine the age of stars by observing their spectrum, luminosity and motion through space. They use this information to get a star's profile, and then they compare the star to models that show what stars should look like at various points of their evolution.
Click to expand...
Evolutionists concoct unprovable speculations about the stars then claim those speculations are scientific facts or evidence.
 
Last edited:
Idolater

Idolater

"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
Silent Hunter said:
I'm an astrophotographer, not an astrophysicist. I would suppose mathematical models are verified mathematically. You're a bright guy. Google it.
Click to expand...
That picture's pretty cool! How'd you do that? Is that a big telescope, or a smaller private one? Is that one exposure?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top