Quote:
Originally posted by Taz's Master
Porsche-O, I'm not saying our understanding is not improving, nor am I saying that it is useless to use science to understand nature because it doesn't provide all the answers right now. I'm just saying that to me God is more believable than Dark Matter, but either way you got to have faith. When our mathematical understanding of our universe's origins depends on a premise like that, acting like we know with certainty the process, timeline, really much of anything about the origins of life or the solar system or the universe is being a bit dishonest.
You're saying when we understand it, it will all make sense. All I'm saying is that when we understand it, it's very possible much of what we believe (have faith in) to be true today won't be, and there is no garuntee the Big Bang will continue to be a viable theory.
|
To use dark matter as an example, no dark matter has ever been observed on the Earth, and we have no idea what it really is, and we simply infer its presence based on derivative observations. Sounds alot like religion to me. And I'm a professional scientist.
Like you I find it far more absurd to believe that the universe just popped into existence for no reason. When you consider the vastness of the universe and our miniscule role in it, why is it unrealistic to accept that there may be a being on scale with the universe? Is string or M theory, or a curved or infinite universe really more believable than a supreme being? Not to me.
Personally, the more I learn about biochemistry the more I think that evolution had help.