Big Bang? - Now Scientists Must Evolve

[Proud_Muslimah2]

Assalamu Alaikum,Peace to any Non-Muslim

 

Author: Yusuf Estes

 

There is a popular theory referred to as the 'Big Bang' theory. It tries to explain the existence of the universe in an evolutionary manner having an initial beginning with an immense explosion of some gases or solid mass. Some say there first was a void or a 'nothingness', or perhaps, some gases which exploded then from this everything in the universe simply began to evolve to the stage that we see now. There has never really been any solid evidence for this idea of 'something out of nothing' concept. Nor for that matter, the evolutionary theory itself.

 

We would like to explore the idea of creation from a purely logical standpoint using simple terminology without religious hype, emotional pre-convictions or superstitions.

What if someone called a 'scientist' tells you his 'theory' of how cars are made is like this:

A salvage yard on the south side of town blows up and all the metal pieces fly into the air and fall back down in one place forming a brand new Chevrolet Caprice automobile . . with no left over parts . . and the motor is running . .

Or what if his theory for how a chair is made is:

An explosion occurs in a forest and the trees go flying into the air and then suddenly they combine with some flying cloth to make a beautiful chair . . . and then it lands in a furniture showroom complete with matching table and lamp . . .

He further explains that:

An earthquake in California's 'Silicon Valley' causes the computer chips and circuit boards and other various parts to fall out of their boxes and off of their shelves and just come in place together as they are rolling around on the floor and form the most advanced technical computers existing on the earth? . . .

Or what of his 'Medicine Theory'? He now claims that:

A gas leak in a pharmacy warehouse causes a terrific explosion. All the different chemicals and substances just smash into each other in exactly the correct amounts to produce a miracle drug which cures everything form cancer to heart and liver disease, old age and warts? . . .

Wait . . . there's more to this one:

It is all in one formula, packaged in the bottles with labels and ready to sell with no mess left on the floor? . . .

Now after all this exploding and excitement this 'scientist' tells you of a great place to relax and have something to eat. It is his favorite place and he calls it: "Burger Blast"!

He says:

You just go in and sit down and suddenly a 'blast' from the kitchen occurs and immediately a burger lands right in front of you with all the trimmings.. just the way you like it complete with fries, a drink and even your favorite dessert? . . .

AND . . .

No one works at "Burger Blast", it just runs itself, automatically cleaning itself and as you leave it scans your billfold for a valid credit card and charges your bank account for what you have eaten? . . .

 

Now the question is: "Are you really going to accept any of this as 'fact'?

 

Of course not!

 

We wouldn't believe a new car is made from flying junk; chairs don't fall down from exploding trees; earthquakes do not produce computers and blasting burgers don't rain down on us from above.

 

Question: So how come we don't challenge a theory of something coming from nothing and then colliding in the cosmos to make the universe? Is it because of its tremendous magnitude that we have so little comprehension about it, that we are willing to accept any theory from a few telescope 'peeping Toms' to tell us that it came from 'nothingness'? Or just some gases colliding and then. . . 'Poof'!? Instant Universe? How?

 

Let us now come to our main subject:

 

Creation or Explosion?

 

We can turn our attention to the earth and the heavens and make observations on our own without a 'genius' scientist telling us what we are seeing.

And then the idea that nothing is sustaining the heavens and the earth! - 'It just runs itself'? How?

 

Think about the stars, the sun, the moon and the countless solar systems and galaxies in the universe.

Who or What created them in the first place?

They continue to function and move with the utmost precision and accuracy.

Who does this? Who keeps them gliding along on their courses and orbits preordained for them?

The Qur'an on the Origin of the Universe

 

Look closer to the heaven surrounding the earth. We call it the 'sky'. Notice the clouds? What are they?

The Qur'an on Clouds

 

Let us now bring our gaze a bit closer to earth. Consider the mountains and their majesty. Is there anything about these massive formations that may give us a clue as to the origin of creation?

The Qur'an on Mountains

 

What about the water covering the earth? Is there another clue hiding beneath the seas?

The Qur'an on Deep Seas and Internal Waves

 

Water covers so much of the earth and even mixes with the land in rivers and streams. Yet is there something keeping it from mixing with itself? What is contained in this mystery of separation of waters?

The Qur'an on Seas and Rivers

 

What about us? Are we are part of creation? How did we begin? What develops us and causes us to live and die? How are we sustained?

The Qur'an on Human Embryonic Development

 

Think about the humans. How did we all get here? What is the nature of mankind? What causes us to act as we do? Are we ungrateful to the One who created us and sustains us? What is this clue? Think about yourself. Did you create yourself?

The Qur'an on the Cerebrum (forehead area of the brain in humans)

 

Who or What created all this? Who is sustaining everything? How do organisms reproduce themselves? How can a tree grow up out of a seed?

[BonaFied_CriTic]

My favorite book in the whole world - my beloved story book as a kid - my guidance - my knowledge keeper - can answer all these question with simplicity as well as deep-based wisdom - a scientist would have to have faith to understand and accept my beloved book - it is called the Quran - and i would like to introduce it to him - and if he likes it enough - i will let him borrow it -

[Johnny B]

Proud one,nice to see ya again!

This looks like a template , and u seem to have forgotten filling in the quranic verses.

 

where is your view? if u dnt have any, a link would have been sufficient.

[Socod_badne]

Originally posted by *Proud_Muslimah*:

Question: So how come we don't challenge a theory of something coming from nothing and then colliding in the cosmos to make the universe?

Because such theory doesn't exist. The Big Bang theory says nothing about the creation of the universe, only this universe. The one we're experiencing NOW. And it surely doesn't speculate this universe came from nothing. That would violate the cause and effect relationship which is the mainstay of science.

 

This author is clearly speaking from ignorance.

[Johnny B]

People like Proud_Muslimah apparently can only copy from others, being unable to construct their own arguments and attempted proofs. Perhaps if they had to sit down and work through the issues themselves, they might begin to see some of the flaws in the arguments they use. By simply copying and pasting the flawed work of others, though, they can avoid all the hard thinking and reasoning that might cause them to question their assumptions. Can’t have that, now can we?

 

A person that goes to such an extent to defend a supposedly pure ,self-explanatory and compationate faith needs HELP.

[Castro]

^ If you think formulating an idea or argument in one's head is such a feat, try having two clearly contradictory thoughts in your head, at once.

[Jawaazay]

Asalaamu Calaykum

 

First, good article may Allah reward for the sister/brother for their effort. Secondly, His/her examples are not very good. How a car is made, and how a chair comes together is every different than how the Cosmos were created. We(humans) know exactly how the car and the chair were made and can repeat the duplication over and over as many times as we wish. Cars and chairs are entities that require a maker, and someone can remake them as a proof. So, while these are good examples of a man made objects, one can't use them as a proof of creationism. A better way would be to analyze what caused the big bang itself?

[ElPunto]

Good post - Proud Muslimah. Although the author wasn't as rigourous as he could have been - what he was saying makes intuitive sense.

 

Big Bang states that the 'Bang' occurred at random - thus the author's statment - 'something coming out of nothing'. Now if the statement is Allah has made the command 'Be' and the process started, which is how I look at it, then perfectly fine. But this idea of general randomness in terms of the universe/humans etc. is unsupportable.

 

At the end of the day, humans will believe what they want to believe. I was watching Charlie Rose a oouple of weeks ago and he had on two eminent scientists, one of them was Crick I believe, one of the discoverers of DNA. Both were lambasting the Abrahamic religions and their statements about the origin of man. And both kept praising Darwin's work on evolution and referred to it as their Bible. Nothing could convince them otherwise and their arrogant dismissals of revelation was breath-taking. Those are the moments you realize as is said in the Quran(paraphrased) - There are some whose Hearts, Minds, Eyes, Ears we've closed and nothing will convince them otherwise.

[ElPunto]

Originally posted by J B:

People like Proud_Muslimah apparently can only copy from others, being unable to construct their own arguments and attempted proofs. Perhaps if they had to sit down and work through the issues themselves, they might begin to see some of the flaws in the arguments they use. By simply copying and pasting the flawed work of others, though, they can avoid all the hard thinking and reasoning that might cause them to question their assumptions. Can’t have that, now can we?

 

A person that goes to such an extent to defend a supposedly pure ,self-explanatory and compationate faith needs HELP.

How interesting! So if I were to copy down Big Bang/Theory of Evolution - your post would be the same??! Would I similarly be "unable to construct their own arguments and attempted proofs"? "By simply copying and pasting the flawed work of others, though, they can avoid all the hard thinking and reasoning" - apparently, magically enough, this doesn't apply to Big Bang/Evolution!!

 

Islam needs no defence - God is its ultimate defender. Maybe you are unaware but Dawa'a and education are fundamental components of this religion. Thus, the post. Just as Big Bang/Evolution tries to educate so do we. Islam is pure and compassionate. As to it being self-explanatory, that is based on the individual's heart. If it not self-explanatory to you, you, my friend, are the one in need of help.

[Johnny B]

ThePoint, If u read again you´ll understand that i´m not against the article beeing copied and pasted per se, if u again read the article you´ll see that it is a prepared template that has the words "The Qur'an on the Origin of the Universe ", "The Qur'an on Clouds ","The Qur'an on Mountains " etc etc.

 

It´s using this kind of template with a preset format that i´m against.

And worse it gives the false impression that it is coined for the defence of creationism.

 

Even worse , Proud_Muslimah forgot to fill the blank with the intended verses of the Quran.

 

And yes i beleive TRUTH should be straight forward and self explanatory than beeing served as template with preset format and fallacious argumentation.

[ElPunto]

Originally posted by J B:

ThePoint, If u read again you´ll understand that i´m not against the article beeing copied and pasted per se, if u again read the article you´ll see that it is a prepared template that has the words "The Qur'an on the Origin of the Universe ", "The Qur'an on Clouds ","The Qur'an on Mountains " etc etc.

 

It´s using this kind of template with a preset format that i´m against.

And worse it gives the false impression that it is coined for the defence of creationism.

 

Even worse , Proud_Muslimah forgot to fill the blank with the intended verses of the Quran.

 

And yes i beleive TRUTH should be straight forward and self explanatory than beeing served as template with preset format and fallacious argumentation.

Your direct words gave the distinct impression that you were against her copying/pasting. I did not impute anything extra at all. However, if you have clarified your language - I understand. Whatever the template, if it is an accurate and truthful presentation - then it really doesn't matter. Truth is indeed straight forward and self-explanatory but, again, whether your heart/mind will accept it is an entirely different matter altogether.

[Johnny B]

Originally posted by ThePoint:

I understand. Whatever the template, if it is an accurate and truthful presentation - then it really doesn't matter.

Yet worse , it is not !!

 

that is why i´d like her/him to have gone through the argumentations and have them examined.

[ElPunto]

Originally posted by J B:

quote:Originally posted by ThePoint:

I understand. Whatever the template, if it is an accurate and truthful presentation - then it really doesn't matter.

Yet worse , it is not !!

 

that is why i´d like her/him to have gone through the argumentations and have them examined.

This is where you state the inaccuracies and falsehoods my friend. The ball is in your court.

[Johnny B]

Originally posted by ThePoint:

This is where you state the inaccuracies and falsehoods my friend. The ball is in your court.

Not exactly my freind !!

 

The issue of the subject matter can and has been presented before in a much better phrased argumentations than this unfilled template.

I personally have seen it, debated it, etc etc.

 

It´d be too trivial to refute such elemntry claims. I´d be intrested though if it atleast contained some personal views, argumentations and stand points than these empty claims.

[ElPunto]

Originally posted by J B:

quote:Originally posted by ThePoint:

This is where you state the inaccuracies and falsehoods my friend. The ball is in your court.

Not exactly my freind !!

 

The issue of the subject matter can and has been presented before in a much better phrased argumentations than this unfilled template.

I personally have seen it, debated it, etc etc.

 

It´d be too trivial to refute such elemntry claims. I´d be intrested though if it atleast contained some personal views, argumentations and stand points than these empty claims.

Hitting below the belt here. You lambast these views as trivial, elementary and empty and yet make no attempt at showing how they are so. By posting one would assume these are, in fact, the poster's 'personal view, argumentations and stand points'. That is a rather superfulous statement on your part.

 

With regard to the refutation, the least you can do, saxiib, is point me to a thread if I am to take you seriously.