Title: Tucker Carlson: Guest says Big Bang is Nonsense Source:
[None] URL Source:https://www.youtube.com/shorts/FpcXw3Td4Ws Published:Jan 27, 2025 Author:Horse Post Date:2025-01-27 04:01:25 by Horse Keywords:None Views:18808 Comments:316
Chamath Palihapitiya: Zuckerberg, Rogan, Musk, and the Incoming “Golden Age” Under Trump
0:00 The War Machine Takeover
3:22 Chamath’s Dark Passenger
19:47 The Emptiness of Silicon Valley Elites
27:06 Is the US at Risk of Losing Its Place as Leader of the Free World?
33:15 The Traps That Kill American Ingenuity
44:19 The Climate Agenda vs. Artificial Intelligence
59:34 Is There an Existing Healthcare System That Actually Works?
1:13:41 Origins of the All-In Podcast
1:20:57 How Chamath Changed Silicon Valley’s Perception of Donald Trump
1:41:40 Reacting to Mark Zuckerberg’s Joe Rogan Appearance
The Big Bang theory basically embodies the very words of Genesis: "Let there be light". Does in not?
Why would you denigrate any scientific explanation for whatever method by which our universe was created? Is it a foregone conclusion that the creation of the universe was done with some form of divine magic that can never be understood in any way?
The big bang theory begins with matter already in existence, super compressed by gravity, which then explodes.
Not necessarily. And in fact, I don't think that's the theory at all as it implies a super compressed mass pre-existed the BB. Given the current belief that space and time are related, I understand the BB theory to mark the creation of both.
It is reasonable to believe the universe was created by some means, and it could have been created by some event that happened in an alternate dimension, something outside of this universe. We could call that event an act of God, which is fine, so it doesn't mean the BB theory is rejecting God.
But in any event, & more to the point, we can agree we DO exist and the universe we are in DOES exist. If the BB theory is eventually rejected by scientific community and an alternate theory put int its place, would you necessarily reject that theory as well, just because it is a product of man?
Also, why does being wrong in scientific understanding of a matter equate to rejecting God? We are all wrong about various things in life.
why does being wrong in scientific understanding of a matter equate to rejecting God?
The BB denies that God has communicated to us, that He has told us clearly how He created the universe.
The BB may pay lip service to "God" but adamantly denies that He has intentionally instructed us on His method* of creation.
As to rejecting God, try being a Christian professor (or student) in a secular university. You'll find out immediately who is narrow minded and vindictive.
The BB denies that God has communicated to us, that He has told us clearly how He created the universe.
I would say the BB theory is completely silent about any possible divine communication. And "how" God may have created the universe is far from clear. Simply speaking it into existence is, at best, a very obtuse "method". Certainly it doesn't work for the rest of us.
In reality a word is an expression of an idea. The word "bang" conveys the idea of a sudden burst. How do YOU know the idea God used wasn't something similar?
As I said earlier, it's all a matter of the fact that God DID NOT write ANYTHING, the bible is merely the musings of ancient people who tried to explain all that exists.
They did get some things right though, perhaps from some ancient spiritual knowledge that exists beyond that which is explainable.
Uh huh. Relying on English words to reflect spiritual Hebrew thought isn't a precise science, especially when not only the words are often mistranslated, but the origin of the words is the hand of a man who wrote them from limited knowledge of much of anything.
You'd poison a blind man's dog and steal his cane You'd gift-wrap a leper and mail him to your aunt Jane You'd even force-feed a diabetic a candy cane You can go to hell