Responses (2)
That an intelligent Designer brought forth the universe is in harmony with what some scientists call the “big-bang” theory of creation. In recent years this theory has gained ascendancy over the “steady-state” theory, which claims that the universe has existed eternally, is without beginning. But we do not have to rely on the shifting sands of modern scientific theory to prove that there is a Creator. For the Creator himself makes clear who and what he is: “This is what Jehovah has said, . . . ‘I myself have made the earth and have created even man upon it. I—my own hands have stretched out the heavens, and all the army of them I have commanded.’” (Isa. 45:11, 12) The evidence of his creatorship is to be observed and marveled at in so many things that we see around us. The book Life—How Did It Get Here? By Evolution or by Creation? will help you find the truth.
For more information on this subject and others, please go to jw.org "Online library." Also for free downloads, publications or read online.
Let's think this thing through:
Big bang is implied by
Receding galaxies, which are implied by
Doppler shift, which is caused by
Motion away from us, which is assumed from
Red shifted light
So we have this remarkable train of logic all based on a single phenomenon and an assumption. If that assumption is wrong then most of what we think we know about the universe ain't so. Well, Doppler effect is not the only cause of red shift. Every hospital uses a magnet to produce a red shift. It's called MRI. But astronomers deny magnetic fields in space. So there you are: dead skunk in the middle of the road, stinking to high heaven.
As long as they are making up bullsnot, they are free to make up plenty more. So they propose that space was created at the same time matter was created, therefore the big bang was centered right here and has not gone anywhere. Nothing has been observed to support this, it is all based on assumption.
The alleged scientific method:
1. Observe something.
2. Formulate a hypothesis.
3. Devise a test.
4. If the test fails, go to #2.
5. If the test passes and is confirmed, the hypothesis might be promoted to a theory and used to prove other hypotheses. And it might not.
The actual scientific method:
1. Formulate a theory.
2. Make a computer simulation.
3. Compare the simulation to observed data.
4. If they don't agree, find some way to adjust the data. If you can't adjust the data, ignore it.
5. Be sure your fellow scientists will agree with your findings, then publish.
Ok, but let's just assume for the moment that Big Bang is accurate theory (however, chances are it isn't), what would be the official assumption about the place where the bang actually occurred. Since all the exploded matter hurried away from the place of the explosion, there must be awfully lot of empty space, like, hundreds of light years between the place where singularity took place and the last space object to leave the "scene"?