Talk About Irony

In a desperate search for ways to avoid the Big Bang Creation Event, and its distasteful metaphysical implications (An Immaterial Creator Exists), atheists have devolved into creating Atheist Origin Of The Universe Mythologies (See below).

I have tried to point out that science itself has shut the door on ANY of these mythologies. They simply are not workable. So desperate are atheists to rid the universe of God as Cause, these mythologies are only a small example of what atheists are willing to believe (more examples below). For example, Atheist High Priest, Richard Dawkins is on record as saying that nothing - literally nothing - “evolved.” Many atheists of course can’t admit that at one time nothing existed. So powerful is this denial that one atheist told me, “The molecules that existed before the Big Bang evolved and changed.”

That just makes me cringe with embarrassment for atheists.

An atheist told me yesterday that a “concept” something like the concept of infinity is what brought energy / matter into existence.

That is no less embarrassing.

Here are the facts: Borde, Guth and Vilenkin have been able to extend the conclusion of the past-incomplete cyclic universe to the following atheist Origin Of The Universe Mythologies.
Oscillating universe -

Baby universes -

Multi verses -

The Cyclic Ekpyrotic Scenario -

The Chaotic Inflationary universe -

Brane-cosmology -

Inflationary multi-verse -

Bubble universes floating in a sea of false vacuum -

The many worlds hypothesis -

The black hole hypothesis -

Quantum gravity models -

Vacuum fluctuation models -

Imaginary time and imaginary space -

The conclusion they reached is that ANY model of an expanding universe, be it theoretical like the ones just mentioned, or real, such as our own, is geodesically incomplete, or past-incomplete without a past finite space / time boundary. What the atheists who are challenged in this area don’t understand is that the phrase, “past-incomplete implies the need for an initial singularity. That means that ANY model of an expanding universe cannot be past-eternal.

The material infinite does not exist:
Even if you believe that there were a bzillion universes prior to our own, or that there are a bzillion other universes besides our own, because there cannot be a material infinite there had to have been a FIRST universe and that first universe began with a singularity, a creation event, a beginning, a definitive space / time boundary.

Now it used to be the case that those atheists who were rightly terrified of the implications of a universe with a beginning could hide behind our ignorance of pre Planck time events. In fact, those who remain ignorant regarding this theorem continue to say, “We just don’t know,” as though that somehow makes universes extending into the eternal past possible. It does not.

The Borde-Guth-Vilenkin Theorem does not depend upon any physical description or knowledge of the pre Plank time era. This theorem rids atheists of any hope of avoiding a singularity, a beginning, a Big Bang Creation Event. This is true PARTICULARLY for Dawkins’ favourite myth, the eternal inflationary multi-verse.

“It is said that an Argument is what convinces reasonable men, and a Proof is what it takes to convince an unreasonable man. With the proof now in place, cosmologists can no longer hide behind the possibility of a past-eternal universe. There is no escape, they have to face the problem of the cosmic beginning.” Alex Vilenkin, “Many Worlds In One - The Search for Other Universes,” 11

At some level, atheists know that Everything coming from Nothing by Nothing is impossible.

At some level, atheists know that matter cannot create itself or bring itself into being.

At some level, atheists know that the material infinite does not exist.

Yet, an a priori decision to rule out everything but the material, causes atheists to repeat their “material cause” theories over and over and over again, ad nauseam. Like someone repeatedly checking their pockets for keys that haven’t been there during the previous eight times they checked, atheists go on repeating, It was a material cause, the universe has always existed and other absurdities unique to atheism.

Hence the atheist’s deliberate misunderstanding regarding - nothing.
The divide that separates Something from Nothing, is greater than infinity itself. Yet that fact seems to be beyond the ability of the average atheist to understand. Atheists have described the "nothing" from which the Big Bang arose as everything from:

. An intensely hot and dense speck of energy (They don’t say where the speck was) - to

. A Quantum event - that came out of “nothing”
The atheist who said that the Big Bang was a Quantum Event says of his proposal, "I think the way I look at it has merit."

To be fair, atheists really are caught in a true dilemma. We know from science that from literally nothing, everything came. But how? The most logical conclusion is that "something" existed outside of matter, space, time and energy and that "something" had to be the cause of the universe. After all, the Law of Causality is the defining Law of science (What is science if not a search for cause?)

But when we begin to examine what that cause must have been like we wind up with a Greatest Conceivable Being or what we call God. Even though an immaterial creator, or immaterial first cause meets the criteria for where the evidence is pointing, it is just not allowed in the atheist world view. So what’s an atheist to do? Atheists have backed themselves into a corner where they are forced to make the most absurd comments to ever come out of this illogical, incoherent and absurd belief system -
“Nothing caused the beginning of the universe.”

“Some things don’t need a cause to begin to exist.”

“Everything has always existed.”

“Nothing has ever been created.”

“Nothing has ever begun to exist.”

Just yesterday, out of the same mouth came, "The material infinite cannot exist. The material infinite exists."

Since we also know that the material infinite cannot exist, every one of the above statements are atheists checking their pockets for keys that aren’t there, haven’t been there and never will be there.

It’s at this point that some atheists try to introduce Quantum Mechanics or the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. Why? Certainly not because they’re applicable. Atheists will bring up anything to see if it might help them in their plight to avoid the obvious. They’ll say anything if it might at least change the subject so they don’t have to think about the obvious. Let’s entertain them for a moment.

First, quantum mechanics is not going to save the atheist. In QM, virtual particles come into being IN A VACUUM.

A vacuum is not NOTHING.

In fact it is a sea of fluctuating energy. The energy in a vacuum is endowed with a rich structure and subject to physical laws.

Second, the vacuum in which QE's are studied is sparked BY A SCIENTIST. There is only one possible Being that could have existed prior to or outside of BB.

Third, The particles that exist in a Quantum Event do so for a period of time INVERSELY PROPORTIONAL TO THEIR MASS. The greater the mass, the less time they exist. So much for the 14 billion year old universe being a Quantum Event.

Fourth, In the case of the Big Bang, there wasn't even a vacuum - THERE WAS NOTHING. No scientist, No particles - Nothing.

Fifth, As stated above, the universe is far too massive to last 14 billion years as a virtual particle.

Sixth, While it’s well known that atheists as a group are easily confused, it is wrong to confuse causality with predictability. Just because the Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle describes our inability to predict the location and speed of subatomic particles, i.e., where an electron will appear, that is NOT a case of an electron appearing out of nothing.

There is no QM model that involves a true origination ex nihilo.

Finally, atheists will say that the Big Bang is speculative physics that could change at any moment. Reality is, the ongoing and ever increasing trend or pattern of evidence is in favour of an absolute beginning out of nothing.

"It can be said with absolute confidence that no cosmogonic model has been:
. As repeatedly verified in its predictions,
. As corroborated by attempts at its falsification,
. As concordant with empirical discoveries, and
. As philosophically coherent as the Standard Big Bang Creation Event Model."

Yet, because of the metaphysical implications of a universe that came from literally nothing, atheists find themselves rejecting the findings of science.

Talk about irony!