If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Daily Beast)   Evangelicals say gravity waves prove God used the Big Bang to create the universe, while evangelicals say gravity waves prove scientists know nothing, and evangelicals say gravity waves prove the Big Bang never happened   (thedailybeast.com) divider line 144
    More: Obvious, gravity waves, Big Bang theory, universe, Einstein's General Theory of Relativity, god, biblical literalism, laws of thermodynamics, existence of God  
•       •       •

2243 clicks; posted to Geek » on 24 Mar 2014 at 9:22 AM (38 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



144 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-03-24 08:26:37 AM  
Creationist's Uncertainty Principle? Schrödinger's Deity?
 
2014-03-24 09:26:07 AM  
Not surprising as Evangelicals don't all speak with out voice or follow one leaded.
 
2014-03-24 09:29:51 AM  
What about wavy gravy?
 
2014-03-24 09:31:56 AM  
Why is this a discussion? When Jesus wrote the Bible he put down in clear, unambiguous English, what happened.
 
2014-03-24 09:33:14 AM  
Evangelicals aren't qualified to even have this conversation.
 
2014-03-24 09:38:37 AM  

Dwight_Yeast: Not surprising as Evangelicals don't all speak with out voice or follow one leaded.


Yes they do, those others just aren't Real Christians. There is only one valid interpretation of the bible, and that's theirs!
 
2014-03-24 09:49:32 AM  
I too wish the Big Bang Theory didn't exist, but my coworkers watch it every day in the break room. Sorry church peoples.
 
2014-03-24 09:50:29 AM  

Dwight_Yeast: Not surprising as Evangelicals don't all speak with out voice or follow one leaded.


That is not only true, but somewhat fundamental to protestantism in general, but especially American protestantism.

That being said, I still can't figure out why it is such an affront to even the most die-hard bible-thumper that the universe, created by an ETERNAL God using HIS rules, mind you, couldn't be eons old.  Humans were a creation of God, and we don't work via any sort of rules-of-physics-and-chemistry-breaking magic... we work like biological organisms work.  The sun was a creation of God, and it works like a massive fusion reactor and not by any magic.  Why would God simply magic the universe into existence on this "I can't even put a new floor in my kitchen" time scale and then impart all these laws of physics to the creation that he violated?

I know it makes people feel less special, but the bible covers the history of a limited slice of humanity on one planet among billions of others in the universe.  That's not up for dispute.
 
2014-03-24 09:50:48 AM  
If they can find one scientist that disagrees with a prevailing evidence based theory, they say that the science is unsettled. Though somehow, all of their divergent views about their faith are valid.
 
2014-03-24 09:52:53 AM  
Gravity waves only cleared things up re: inflation theory.  The Big Bang issue was settled when we measured the CMBR.

No religious text ever written made a prediction this ridiculously accurate.  Nor ever will.
imgs.xkcd.com
You know how all the brackets in Buffet's billion dollar challenge were busted before the second round was over?
If the above measurement was predicted non-scientifically, it would be like filling out a perfect bracket.  Every single year.  For every year the tournament has been in existence.  And ever will exist.

That's what XKCD means by, "It works, biatches."
 
2014-03-24 09:55:22 AM  
Ah, Evangelism, the Christian variation of the New Age movement. In that they both stem from nutjobs and con artists pretending practices and beliefs they just made up somehow were actually ancient traditions.

/Although Nazism didn't grow out of Evangelist Christianity, so it has that going for it.
 
2014-03-24 09:57:41 AM  

factoryconnection: I still can't figure out why it is such an affront to even the most die-hard bible-thumper that the universe, created by an ETERNAL God using HIS rules, mind you, couldn't be eons old.....

I know it makes people feel less special, but the bible covers the history of a limited slice of humanity on one planet among billions of others in the universe.  That's not up for dispute.


I think that it's because, if the Bible is "The Truth" because it's divinely inspired word of God, then why wouldn't it include ALL the relevant information, instead of just a limited slice?

Also, associated an all powerful God with the Big Bang means god still needed 14 Billion years, and a several tries (dinosaurs and other humanoid species) to get intelligent design right.
 
2014-03-24 09:57:58 AM  
factoryconnection:
I know it makes people feel less special, but the bible covers the history of a limited slice of humanity on one planet among billions of others in the universe.  That's not up for dispute.

A priest I know once gave the most accurate description of the Bible I've heard - it's the story of one people's history with God.
 
2014-03-24 09:59:28 AM  

dragonchild: No religious text ever written made a prediction this ridiculously accurate.  Nor ever will.


You're going to be embarrassed come the rapture.

foot. in. mouth.
 
2014-03-24 10:00:06 AM  
This just in: Bronze Age folklore is not especially relevant to 21st Century cosmology.
 
2014-03-24 10:03:43 AM  

Wellon Dowd: Why is this a discussion? When Jesus wrote the Bible he put down in clear, unambiguous English, what happened.


Exactly. God created the Big Bang. And from the plasma and neutrino soup, there coalesced the planets and a single book which entered the Earth's atmosphere and landed in pew 3 of the First Congregational Baptist Church of Mississippi.  The big bang was basically God dumping his Legos all over the floor.
 
2014-03-24 10:05:21 AM  
Your God is too small.
 
2014-03-24 10:08:06 AM  

weddingsinger: Also, associated an all powerful God with the Big Bang means god still needed 14 Billion years, and a several tries (dinosaurs and other humanoid species) to get intelligent design right.


It's a little bit of a misconception to say that dinosaurs didn't get it right.

They were adapted pretty well for the planet when they lived. Then an asteroid hit, resources became scarce, and they died off. It'd be like sticking some puppies in a freezer case and then claiming they weren't well adapted when they froze to death.

You also have to define exactly what you mean by getting it "right". Some crocodiles are essentially unchanged since the time of the dinosaurs. They've been around, in some form or another, much longer than most other species, but they have a relatively limited impact on the world as a whole. People have been on the scene a relatively short period of time, but we've had a much greater impact.
 
2014-03-24 10:08:35 AM  
How soon until Evangelical start protestation the latest Sandra Bullock  movie?
 
2014-03-24 10:08:52 AM  
Wow. Almost as if there is more than one evangelical.
 
2014-03-24 10:13:58 AM  

weddingsinger: Also, associated an all powerful God with the Big Bang means god still needed 14 Billion years, and a several tries (dinosaurs and other humanoid species) to get intelligent design right.


It doesn't matter if it was only 6000 years old; our design is anything BUT intelligent.  God farked up.

The human body is a marvel in some ways, but it also has all kinds of flaws that could be easily fixed if re-engineering them was feasible.  Our backs are an adaptation of knuckle-draggers so there's an extremely sharp 90-degree bend near the hip which leads to all sorts of lower back problems.  Our retinas are installed backwards; the optic nerve has to punch a hole through the eyeball and all the sensors are facing the wrong direction.  As a result our peripheral vision is crap, our eyes have blind spots and the retina is prone to detaching.  We eat, drink and breathe with the same throat, so we tend to choke.  Whales don't have that flaw.

We have too many teeth (some of them need to be removed), our brains are prone to chemical addictions, our sperm can't survive core body temperatures so our reproduction reserves are literally dangling outside the male body, our pain sensations are often erroneous (you feel diaphragm pain in your shoulders FFS and don't feel pain in your liver or brain at all -- two of the most important organs of the body), and we have no mechanism for detecting oxygen depletion or carbon monoxide accumulation -- none whatsoever.  We feel fine, we suddenly get dizzy, we pass out and then we die.

If God designed humans in His own image, God's either one sick bastard or an idiot that falls well short of all-powerful.
 
2014-03-24 10:14:10 AM  
Sometimes I think about whether gods actually exist in the American Gods sort of way, then I feel sad that this all encompassing god of omnipotent is slowly withering away into the gaps of fossil records and the infinitesimal moment right after the Big Bang. Dude probably drinks heavily somewhere in Alabama.
 
2014-03-24 10:14:58 AM  

weddingsinger: I think that it's because, if the Bible is "The Truth" because it's divinely inspired word of God, then why wouldn't it include ALL the relevant information, instead of just a limited slice?


What you consider relevant and what I consider relevant might not be the same.  So the Bible should contain both sets of information, right?  Given the existence of billions of humans (and that's just in the present, what about the information that will be deemed relevant to future humans?), that set of information that should be included in the Bible then expands to the point of being functionally-infinite.

You want to try and study an infinitely-large Bible?
mle.mymiddleearth.com
 
2014-03-24 10:16:25 AM  

dragonchild: If God designed humans in His own image, God's either one sick bastard or an idiot that falls well short of all-powerful.


Seven billions humans in all corners of the planet and you're griping that God should have made us BETTER survivors. Yeesh.
 
2014-03-24 10:16:47 AM  
Believing that the Bible can't be true unless the creation story is literally true is like saying "Darmok" is a bad episode of Star Trek TNG because the idea of a metaphor-based language is stupid.
 
2014-03-24 10:19:21 AM  

Son of Thunder: What you consider relevant and what I consider relevant might not be the same.  So the Bible should contain both sets of information, right?  Given the existence of billions of humans (and that's just in the present, what about the information that will be deemed relevant to future humans?), that set of information that should be included in the Bible then expands to the point of being functionally-infinite.

You want to try and study an infinitely-large Bible?
[mle.mymiddleearth.com image 350x350]


LOL

Maybe God knew humans are panicy morons so he left outthe existence of other planets, but what about the time before 6000 years ago (which still included humans... wait, was God on vacation or something?)
 
2014-03-24 10:21:41 AM  

Mr_Fabulous: This just in: Bronze Age folklore is not especially relevant to 21st Century cosmology.


That is why you just take a verse from here, a sentence from there, and the odd word scattered in from other places, and get the bible to say whatever you want it to say. Very popular amongst Evangelists, especially the TV versions who want to pass 50s traditions off as ancient biblical ones.
 
2014-03-24 10:24:41 AM  

Mad_Radhu: Your God is too small.


But my spoon is too big.
 
2014-03-24 10:26:48 AM  

Nem Wan: Believing that the Bible can't be true unless the creation story is literally true is like saying "Darmok" is a bad episode of Star Trek TNG because the idea of a metaphor-based language is stupid.


Not bad.  Lately I've been saying something similar using TOS.  You have to deal with a genre on its own terms.  The point of the episode "Let This Be Your Last Battlefield" is that racism is stupid and destructive.  The young-earth creationists and "new" atheists both remind me of people who watch that episode and either completely reject it because it is silly to think that evolution could produce a species that looks perfectly human except for bifurcated coloration and energy powers (new atheists) or desperately try to fanwank some reason why evolution COULD produce a species that looks perfectly human except for bifurcated coloration and energy powers (YEC).  Both miss the point, and both fail to take the genre on its own terms.
 
2014-03-24 10:29:01 AM  

Fubini: It's a little bit of a misconception to say that dinosaurs didn't get it right.


Dinosaurs must not have been right since God wiped them out, obviously because they sinned.  Or something.

Alligators/Crocodiles must be the Noah/Lot of the Jurassic era.  Saved by the hand of God for a greater purpose: to be a comedic prop in an Adam Sandler comedy about golf.  Or possibly to cull the unfaithful who worship Xenu in Florida.
 
2014-03-24 10:29:02 AM  

limeyfellow: Very popular amongst Evangelists, especially the TV versions who want to pass 50s traditions off as ancient biblical ones


The Bible is a mirror- quoting it only reveals yourself.
 
2014-03-24 10:33:45 AM  

Son of Thunder: Not bad.  Lately I've been saying something similar using TOS.  You have to deal with a genre on its own terms.  The point of the episode "Let This Be Your Last Battlefield" is that racism is stupid and destructive.  The young-earth creationists and "new" atheists both remind me of people who watch that episode and either completely reject it because it is silly to think that evolution could produce a species that looks perfectly human except for bifurcated coloration and energy powers (new atheists) or desperately try to fanwank some reason why evolution COULD produce a species that looks perfectly human except for bifurcated coloration and energy powers (YEC).  Both miss the point, and both fail to take the genre on its own terms.


What the fark are you babbling about?
 
2014-03-24 10:34:57 AM  

CheekyMonkey: But my spoon is too big.


My anus is bleeding!
 
2014-03-24 10:36:36 AM  

dragonchild: It doesn't matter if it was only 6000 years old; our design is anything BUT intelligent.  God farked up.


And yet, we're one of the most prolific creatures on the planet, and definitely the one with the greatest capacity to modify our own environment. Like I was saying above, you can quibble over what it means for a species to be "successful", but by any stretch of the imagination humanity is "successful".

It's a little contradictory to say that one of the most successful organisms on the planet is somehow greatly deficient. Moreover, the ID people never claimed that God made humans perfect. In fact, most would claim that people are conspicuously deficient.
 
2014-03-24 10:38:29 AM  

Fubini: And yet, we're one of the most prolific creatures on the planet, and definitely the one with the greatest capacity to modify our own environment. Like I was saying above, you can quibble over what it means for a species to be "successful", but by any stretch of the imagination humanity is "successful".


I'd say that if we can make it off the planet and colonize other worlds we'd be successful. Until then we're susceptible to a chance event wiping us all out.
 
2014-03-24 10:39:27 AM  

Son of Thunder: Seven billions humans in all corners of the planet and you're griping that God should have made us BETTER survivors.


Actually that's a problem by itself.  We've overpopulated the planet and don't know how to stop.

By your own logic our "design" should be more flawed.  Which makes the definition of "perfection" conveniently arbitrary, but it still doesn't explain why our flaws are so spectacularly dumb when we could just, say, age more rapidly.
 
2014-03-24 10:42:59 AM  

Fubini: Like I was saying above, you can quibble over what it means for a species to be "successful", but by any stretch of the imagination humanity is "successful".


Well, it's successful by the standard of "hasn't gone extinct". As mammals go, we're wildly successful- maybe not on raw numbers, but certainly in terms of range. Humans exist in pretty much every climate on Earth, although there are no permanent inhabitants of Antarctica.

Compared to any random species of bacteria, however- we're chumps. Arguably, humanity's largest contribution to the ecosystem is the fact that our bodies form the perfect environment for oodles of bacteria. Our own bodies have fewer human cells than bacterial ones. From an evolutionary standpoint, humans are little more than an interesting, multicellular novelty. Evolution doesn't prize cities, or art, or civilization or science- we do. We do because we've been successful doing those things, and because evolution's primary driver is "keep doing what works until you die from it".
 
2014-03-24 10:43:11 AM  
I could never understand why creationists had such a problem with the Big Bang. The theory states a single event resulted in the beginning of the universe as we know it. I would think they would see this as supportive of their beliefs.
 
2014-03-24 10:43:15 AM  

t3knomanser: CheekyMonkey: But my spoon is too big.

My anus is bleeding!


I am a banana!
 
2014-03-24 10:44:25 AM  

Fubini: Like I was saying above, you can quibble over what it means for a species to be "successful", but by any stretch of the imagination humanity is "successful".


Of course it's successful, there's just no evidence it was intelligently designed at all.  It does make a whole lot more sense that our combination of strengths and weaknesses are the result of billions of years of successive adaptations.  Who the fark would design a retina backwards?  As a means of vision it's inferior, and as a means of making a deliberately flawed body as any sort of constraint it's asinine.
 
2014-03-24 10:49:09 AM  

dragonchild: We've overpopulated the planet and don't know how to stop.


I'm not really sure either half of this statement is true. Our population certainly is putting a strain on the ecosystem, but how much of that arises from inefficiencies in our own approach? Western society has an over-reliance on incredibly inefficient sources of protein (we eat too much meat). We insist on using dirty sources of energy production, largely because the cost-benefit of cleaner sources isn't dramatic enough to overcome institutional resistance. Our cities are poorly designed, and (especially in the US) we have land-use policies that create suburbs, the least efficient form of human habitation ever conceived.

Were we more efficient, we could probably support our current population without much trouble, and probably support a larger population without straining the ecosystem.

At the same time, we  do know how to stop. Most of the population growth is happening in nations that are just starting to industrialize and modernize, or have done so in the past generation. Even there, we're seeing birth rates drop. In parts of Europe and North America, population growth has become population decline. Family size, globally, is trending towards replenishment rates.

Hans Rosling did a great presentation for the BBC on this subject (Hans Rosling gives nothing  but great presentations, and for all of the weaknesses of TED and its system, I'll forever be grateful to them for introducing Mr. Rosling to the world).
 
2014-03-24 10:50:48 AM  
What if the, most likely men, who wrote the bible actually had everything figured out by were just really really bad technical writers?  I mean it can happen, has anybody ever read the manual for an MSI motherboard? Poorly written Korean that is poorly translated into English reads like mystical bullshiat too.
 
2014-03-24 10:53:01 AM  

Egoy3k: What if the, most likely men, who wrote the bible actually had everything figured out by were just really really bad technical writers?  I mean it can happen, has anybody ever read the manual for an MSI motherboard? Poorly written Korean that is poorly translated into English reads like mystical bullshiat too.


"Hey, hey! Stop farkin' with Korean Jesus. He ain't got time for yo problems, he's busy wit Korean shiat!"
 
2014-03-24 10:54:36 AM  

Epicedion: I'd say that if we can make it off the planet and colonize other worlds we'd be successful. Until then we're susceptible to a chance event wiping us all out.


That's true of most everything else though. Relatively, humans are still one of the most successful creatures. It flies in the face of the "humans are deficient, therefore there is no God" argument.


dragonchild: Of course it's successful, there's just no evidence it was intelligently designed at all.  It does make a whole lot more sense that our combination of strengths and weaknesses are the result of billions of years of successive adaptations.  Who the fark would design a retina backwards?  As a means of vision it's inferior, and as a means of making a deliberately flawed body as any sort of constraint it's asinine.


Again: who in the ID community is claiming that God designed people perfectly? More likely they'd tell you that humans are by design imperfect and cite something about sinful nature or "made in the image of God".

What I'm saying is that you've just made yourself a strawman.
 
2014-03-24 10:55:48 AM  
This is what happens when you come up with the conclusion first and then try to get the facts to fit it.
 
2014-03-24 10:57:21 AM  

dragonchild: Who the fark would design a retina backwards?  As a means of vision it's inferior, and as a means of making a deliberately flawed body as any sort of constraint it's asinine.


I also just realized that this whole argument contains a strain of the "why does a perfect God allow evil to exist" that people have debated since forever.
 
2014-03-24 10:58:36 AM  

Fubini: Relatively, humans are still one of the most successful creatures


Relative to  what? By what standard? You can't just make claims like that. We're successful in that we've not gone extinct, and that our range is so broad and varied that we're unlikely to go extinct in the next generation.
 
2014-03-24 11:01:50 AM  

factoryconnection: Why would God simply magic the universe into existence on this "I can't even put a new floor in my kitchen" time scale and then impart all these laws of physics to the creation that he violated?


Because the old testament was written by a primitive people that believed in magic, and therefore we have to believe in magic.

/and yet I have a strong feeling that the evangelical community will get upset about the magic stuff that goes on in the new Noah movie
 
2014-03-24 11:02:34 AM  
I keep having sarcasm as the Rick Sanchez voice in my head.

i.cdn.turner.com

The only thing we can know about your "god" (hic) is that whatever they tell you about him her or it, will be wrong. That's right Morty, we're talking fractal wrongness. Wrongness so powerful it can be wrong even if it's true, Morty. (hic)
 
2014-03-24 11:03:39 AM  

dragonchild: If God designed humans in His own image, God's either one sick bastard or an idiot that falls well short of all-powerful.


That's why I subscribe to the theory of Idiotic Design. It fits the facts far better than Intelligent Design.

Mr_Fabulous: This just in: Bronze Age folklore is not especially relevant to 21st Century cosmology.


I always get a tiny little bit tetchy when people dismiss the Bible as "Bronze Age folklore".

In fairness, the folklore also captures some interesting elements of the Bronze Age/Iron Age transition and the influence of the Late Bronze Age Collapse.
 
Displayed 50 of 144 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report