As you may know, I'm a theist. I'm also a scientist.
Untrue.
"The time before the big bang" is as meaningless a concept as "The space into which the Universe is expanding." Time and space are part of the Universe, not externals against which the Universe is measured. I'm not a good enough physicist to do the math myself, but as I understand it, time curves asymptotically back towards the "moment" of the big bang.
If your position is "there was no intelligent force involved," then you're an atheist, it seems to me. If your position is "I don't know what was involved," you're an agnostic.
It's ironic, but you're making a classic philosophical mistake that creationists make when they posit creation and evolution as an either/or choice, and act as if disproving evolution[1] proves creationism: the two are orthogonal to one another, and can even coexist peacefully.
"There was no intelligent force involved" is nothing more than a perfectly reasonable inference from the utter and consistent failure to demonstrate theoretically or empirically that the hypothesis "There was an intelligent force involved." Believing in divinity therefore has no more scientific basis than believing in phlogiston, aether, or polka-dotted unicorns dancing the macarena in your bathroom only disappear any time you look."
Also, "I don't know what was involved" can exist perfectly well alongside "There was no intelligent force involved." There are tons of phenomena we do not fully understand that have had several explanations ruled out.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2007-12-04 01:04 am (UTC)As you may know, I'm a theist. I'm also a scientist.
Untrue.
"The time before the big bang" is as meaningless a concept as "The space into which the Universe is expanding." Time and space are part of the Universe, not externals against which the Universe is measured. I'm not a good enough physicist to do the math myself, but as I understand it, time curves asymptotically back towards the "moment" of the big bang.
If your position is "there was no intelligent force involved," then you're an atheist, it seems to me. If your position is "I don't know what was involved," you're an agnostic.
It's ironic, but you're making a classic philosophical mistake that creationists make when they posit creation and evolution as an either/or choice, and act as if disproving evolution[1] proves creationism: the two are orthogonal to one another, and can even coexist peacefully.
"There was no intelligent force involved" is nothing more than a perfectly reasonable inference from the utter and consistent failure to demonstrate theoretically or empirically that the hypothesis "There was an intelligent force involved." Believing in divinity therefore has no more scientific basis than believing in phlogiston, aether, or polka-dotted unicorns dancing the macarena in your bathroom only disappear any time you look."
Also, "I don't know what was involved" can exist perfectly well alongside "There was no intelligent force involved." There are tons of phenomena we do not fully understand that have had several explanations ruled out.
[1] Or casting it into doubt