[gallo]

Quote by: svstevenr The truth is, no one knows for sure how the universe started.

Hopefully you are aware that your post only addresses half of the topic here. It has nothing to do with evolutionary biology. That being said, I don't know of anyone but creationists who actually claim to know how the universe started.

That really is something that, as smart or as educated you think you are, can not be denied.

I happen to agree with you but creationists don't. Creationists think that they have a book that tells them how it happened. But they usually aren't very smart or educated.

Everything you believe about any theory about our beginning is just that - a theory.

Do you know what a scientific theory is? Isn't it a bit redundant to say that "a theory is a theory"? I think I know your problem. You aren't using the definition of the word "theory" that scientists do. When scientists use the word they mean a set of statements of principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena. In science, theories are tested repeatedly and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena. Theories are usually tested by use of the scientific method.

A theory is not a guess, educated or otherwise. Some examples of scientific theories are the heliocentric theory, the theory of plate tectonics, the theory of gravitation, theories of nuclear physics, atomic theory, natural selection, and on and on.

The person who believes in the big bang theory will tell you tons and tons of crap about how it is the only possible solution.

That's just not true. Who have you been listening to? First of all, no one actually "believes in" the big bang theory. Anyone who knows anything is quite aware that there are several other theories of the origin of the universe. Some scientists, based on the evidence, accept the big bang theory as the best. Perhaps you might like to read The Big Bang by Joseph Silk. It's pretty readable. Other good books are The Elegant Universe by Brian Greene or The Whole Shebang by Timothy Ferris. It might help to get a better idea of what science is and how it works, as well as a better understanding of what the scientists in the field think. As I mentioned, any knowledgeable person will tell you that there is more than one theory and none is claimed to be Truth. Only creationists claim to know the absolute unchanging Truth. One problem with that is they keep changing the unchanging Truth.

But when it comes down to it, it is not a scientifically provable solution because it does not include key pieces of the puzzle.

Science does not prove anything. Anytime you hear someone talking about what science does or doesn't prove, they probably don't know what they are talking about. Science is in the business of explaining. That's what I said above. The theories of science offer explanations based on the known facts. They offer a basis for further predictions and testing. That's how theories become more complete.

How did the original energy or the original matter come into existence?

Actually, the question of the source of the energy isn't part of the big bang theory. And the matter didn't exist until after the big bang. Read the books I mentioned.

What explains where the first chunk of rock or space dust came from?

The big bang theory does, for one.

I mean yes someone is going to throw some "scientific explanation" at me in a minute - but I can tell you without a doubt that it is not an explanation, it is a theory, for, in reality, there is no absolute explanation.

But a theory is an explanation. Go and learn what science is and how it works. In science, a theory is the best that it gets.

If there is no absolute, provable explanation, how can we come to a reasonable conclusion?

You have a weird idea of what reasonable means. Do you mean that it isn't reasonable to recognize that the evidence indicates that the earth orbits the sun?

I am the type of person kind of stuck in the middle when it comes to religion and how I believe we came into existence.

But that doesn't have anything to do with what you have been discussing.

We really must take a step back and realize that in every time period even the most educated scholars have been found to be completely wrong about the concepts that were accepted as fact.

You mean things like lightning coming from an angry god? In fact, educated scholars havn't been shown to be completely wrong. If so, when was Newton shown to be completely wrong?

This is the point where most people after ragging on the big bang theory would start doing a sphill on religion - but I don't believe in religion either.

So you don't know much about either side of the question is what you are saying.

I can not imagine a one-man entity capable of doing such supernatural things. If you do, then just remember that just like everything else - you are using unprovable ideas and concepts (a man creating earth, matter, water, humane life, forces, etc.).

Are you misrepresenting on purpose?

So, as a more general question that kind of falls into a philosophical argument and not one of science, how do you explain the unexplainable?

Is this another statement like you made above? A theory is a theory. Here you ask how to explain the unexplainable.