Store up for yourselves treasures in Heaven
where moth and rust cannot destroy and thieves cannot break in and steal

Monday, December 17, 2012

So long as the universe had a beginning, we could suppose it had a creator.
Stephen Hawking

That is why it is imperative for atheists to believe Sagan's refuted but deeply held atheist dogma that the cosmos is all that is or ever was and ever will be.

This is essentially the long discredited Steady State model which is still upheld by modern atheists since the only alternative is Creator God. 


  1. The idea that space and time may form a closed surface without boundary also has profound implications for the role of God in the affairs of the universe. With the success of scientific theories in describing events, most people have come to believe that God allows the universe to evolve according to a set of laws and does not intervene in the universe to break these laws. However, the laws do not tell us what the universe should have looked like when it started -- it would still be up to God to wind up the clockwork and choose how to start it off. So long as the universe had a beginning, we could suppose it had a creator. But if the universe is really completely self-contained, having no boundary or edge, it would have neither beginning nor end: it would simply be. What place, then, for a creator?
    [Stephen Hawking, A Brief History of Time (New York: Bantam, 1988), p. 140-41.]


    For most cosmologists, the refutation of the steady-state theory came with the discovery of the cosmic microwave background radiation in 1965, which was predicted by the Big Bang theory. Stephen Hawking said that the fact that microwave radiation had been found, and that it was thought to be left over from the Big Bang, was "the final nail in the coffin of the steady-state theory."


    Steven Weinberg wrote in 1972,
    The steady state model does not appear to agree with the observed dL versus z relation or with source counts ... In a sense, the disagreement is a credit to the model; alone among all cosmologies, the steady state model makes such definite predictions that it can be disproved even with the limited observational evidence at our disposal. The steady-state model is so attractive that many of its adherents still retain hope that the evidence against it will disappear as observations improve. However, if the cosmic microwave background radiation ... is really black-body radiation, it will be difficult to doubt that the universe has evolved from a hotter, denser early stage.
    Since that time, the Big Bang theory has been considered to be the best description of the origin of the universe. In most astrophysical publications, the Big Bang is implicitly accepted and is used as the basis of more complete theories.



    Instead of calling you stupid right away, I want to give you a chance to look at the quote you posted, with it's full context shown above, and the other quotes regarding the "Steady State model" which you claim is "still upheld by modern atheists".

    Can you spot and correct your own error?

    1. As hard as it may be for honest and inquiring minds to understand, Rod simply does not care about what is true. He cares only about what he believes to be true and will not crack his mind open even after making and becoming aware of the most egregious errors to anything contrary to his certainty in his own belief. His mind cannot deal with his own lack of intellectual integrity so he will just pretend its a small sacrifice on the alter of his beliefs... approved as they are by no less an august body than the creator of the universe Himself. Under this umbrella, nothing - especially nothing true - can compete with his belief. It makes him feel very important... in a humble kind of way.... to have the inside track, a privileged access others can share if they would but give in to the truth of his beliefs, you see, to access The Big Guy who's greater than what's true. And so on and so forth.

      Bottom line? When someone doesn't care about what's true, one cannot have a grown up discussion about anything. And Rod reveals this with his lying, misrepresentations, false accusations and childish blaming of atheists who will never yield to his certainty in his beliefs. That's why we're now - the ones still capable of respecting what's true - and always shall be the Bad Guy in Rod's world. We remind him of the unpleasant reality that his beliefs do not accurately represent reality.

    2. I think that's an accurate summary tildeb.

      When it comes to something like Astrophysics, which does not even directly clash with Rod's religion, I am amazed every time he writes blatant lies that serve one purpose alone: insult a group of people he despises.

      Regarding the current post specifically, the Steady State model of the universe has been rejected so long ago that one has to be lying on purpose to even suggest that some credible scientists still accept it. This goes in line with what you just said... 'When someone doesn't care about what's true, one cannot have a grown up discussion about anything'.