>in the beginning there was nothing, which then exploded???I must be missing something here. How is this more believable and require you to assume less, than believing God created the universe? Why did the nothing explode? What happened before that?
>>16543167>I must be missing something here.You are, no cosmologist actually thinks there was "nothing" before the Big Bang, its just that we don't actually know what it is. The Big Bang is the earliest event we can measure, anything before this is passed an information horizon. Many cosmologists do have theories though, which mostly points to there simply being another universe before the big bang, that universe could've either have been dominated by matter like this one, or simple quantum fluctuations. From this framing, asking what created the universe is kind of like asking what created God. Its a nonesensical question
The big bang is just a projection of the CMB back in time. It's likely there was a pre big bang state since relativity is not some sort of source code of the universe and breaks down at singularities.Although you are a retarded coping christtranny.
>>16543167What about the argument that the universe didn't need creation because the universe always existed?
>>16543187>christtrannyWhat's the deal with this when trannies are overwhelmingly atheistic or, sorry, "humanist"?
>>16543187>It's likely there was a pre big bang state since relativity is not some sort of source code of the universe and breaks down at singularities.I like to imagine that to an observer within this pre-big bang state it actually wasn't a singularity, and what we call the big bang was just the universe moving into a larger scale relative to before the big bang. The universe is always expanding because of time in the same way that it causes gravity, because of the relative difference of motion between two different bodies with different masses. This means we don't need autistic shit like Dark Energy. I think Roger Penrose kind of touches upon this idea with his cyclic cosmology theories.
>>16543200True, a "-schizo" suffix would be more apt
>>16543167>>16543200>>16543238>the universe has to be created>......>..........>therefore, snakes can talk and a Jew walked on waterEmbarrassing
