The Instigator
Cooldudebro
Pro (for)
Losing
2 Points
The Contender
black_squirrel
Con (against)
Winning
16 Points

The Big Bang Theory Never Happened

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
black_squirrel
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/3/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,014 times Debate No: 43362
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (8)
Votes (3)

 

Cooldudebro

Pro

First round is for acceptance. Thanks!
black_squirrel

Con

I accept.
I will argue that "The Big Bang Theory" happened.
Good luck, Pro Bro.
Debate Round No. 1
Cooldudebro

Pro

Lol! Thanks! Good luck to you too!

Case 1: Where did all our elements come from?

Our neighboring planets do not have even half the elements we have on earth today. How can science explain that. We would have to have so many different neighboring planets. More than our solar system can possibly imagine!

Case 2: Things the Big Bang Theory got wrong.

http://rense.com...

If you read this link, any atheist will convert to a religion that involves god. It proves that elements like dark matter, dark energy, and inflation anyone has ever observed. The density is greatly off.

Case 3 : Life

Life would not be here, even if the Big Bang Theory would have happened. Think, all living life on other planets would have died on neighboring planets due to no air, no or frozen water, or not a stable atmosphere! If the cells would have even come from planets, wouldn't they have burnt up in our atmosphere?

Case 4: Where did the planets come from.

For you to view the big bang theory possible, it is more than likely you do not believe in god. Without god, how did the planets come to be? How did all the elements come to be? There is too much the Big Bang Theory can not explain!

Thank you for your time. BOP is on me! Which means, you have to prove most or everything I say wrong! Good luck!
black_squirrel

Con

Let us Google “The Big Bang Theory”

The first 3 web sites that come up are

http://www.cbs.com...

http://the-big-bang-theory.com...

http://en.wikipedia.org...

These are all dedicated to a TV series. Let us click on the Wikipedia page:

“The Big Bang Theory is an American sitcom created by Chuck Lorre and Bill Prady, both of whom serve as executive producers on the show along with Steven Molaro. All three also serve as head writers. It premiered on CBS on September 24, 2007.[5] The seventh season premiered on September 26, 2013.[6]”

(See the Wikipedia page for the citations [5] and [6]. The other two webpages confirm that “The Big Bang Theory” happened as well.)

Apparently, “The Big Bang Theory” happened on September 24,2007 for the first time.

My burden of proof is to show that some “The Big Bang Theory” happened.

I have proved that the most popular “The Big Bang Theory” did indeed happen. Pro may wish to concede at this point.

Pro has argued in this round that the less popular “The Big Bang Theory”, a theory that describes the early stages of the universe as we know it, did not happen. By that I understand that he claims that the core thesis of this theory,

that the universe is expanding because of some kind of giant explosion, is false.

This Big Bang Theory has been accepted by mainstream scientists.

The Big Bang Theory (BBT) was first proposed by Georges Limiter, and then other scientists built upon this model. Edwin Hubble discovered, that there is a correlation between the distance of galaxies and their redshift. The speed at which the galaxies move away from us can be measured by the redshift. Looking at all the distances and velocities of the galaxies, we see that, interpolating backward in time, that all matter in the universe seems to originate from one point in space and time. The idea is in essence very simply and convincing. If at some point and time we see circular waves in a pond, we can deduce that something happened at a certain point in time at a certain position in the pond that caused a splash.

Alternative explanations such as the “steady state model” and “plasma cosmology” for some of the observations have been dismissed by the scientific communities.

Let me rebut pro’s arguments.

“Case 3: Life would not be here, even if the Big Bang Theory would have happened. Think, all living life on other planets would have died on neighboring planets due to no air, no or frozen water, or not a stable atmosphere! If the cells would have even come from planets, wouldn't they have burnt up in our atmosphere?”

First of all, The Big Bang Theory does not explain everything. For example, the origins of life are hardly explained by BBT. Instead, you should look at Evolution Theory. But I do not see how BBT contradicts life on earth. If you DO think that BBT contradicts life, please explain further.

“Case 1: Where did all our elements come from?”

This is explained here:

http://www.einstein-online.info...

We would have to have so many different neighboring planets. More than our solar system can possibly imagine!”

How that so? Can you explain?

“Case 4: Where did the planets come from.”

About a billion years after the Big Bang, gravity caused these atoms to gather in huge clouds of gas, forming collections of stars known as galaxies. Gravity is the force that pulls any objects with mass towards one another -- the same force, for example, that causes a ball thrown in the air to fall to the earth. R32;R32;Where do planets like earth come from? Over billions of years, stars "cook" hydrogen and helium atoms in their hot cores to make heavier elements like carbon and oxygen. Large stars explode over time, blasting these elements into space. This matter then condenses into the stars, planets, and satellites that make up solar systems like our own.”

Source: http://www.exploratorium.edu...

“Case 2: http://rense.com...;

33 scientists suggest that the big bang theory is wrong and they support the conspiracy theory that tens of thousands of theoretical physicists would trade in their integrity for financial gain in the form of funding. And what about these 33 scientists?

For example, Lerner, wrote a popular book “The Big Bang Never Happened”. Would his book have been as successful, if it had supported the “Big Bang Theory” and it had to compete with hundreds of other books that support Big Bang Theory? May he have a financial gain? Just sayin’. Anyway, his book, and the arguments in the link, have been debunked:

Stenger, Victor J. (Summer 1992). "Is the Big Bang a Bust?". Skeptical Inquirer 16 (412).

Wright, Edward L. "Errors in "The Big Bang Never Happened"

http://www.astro.ucla.edu...

"Big Bang Theory Makes Sense of Cosmic Facts; No Contradiction", New York Times, June 18, 1991

"Did the Big Bang Happen?", New York Times, September 1, 1991

Finally:

GOD AND THE BIG BANG THEORY

Statement from my opponent:

“For you to view the big bang theory possible, it is more than likely you do not believe in god.”

Pro is correct in assuming that I am an atheist. But then again, it is also written in my profile. I am an atheist despite I support the Big Bang Theory!!

Remember, George Lemaitre, the one who came up with the idea of the Big Bang? Besides being a scientist, he is also a catholic priest. But like any good scientist, he did not let his religion interfere with science.

Besides, Catholicism is compatible with the Big Bang Theory. Pope Pius XII declared in 1951 that Big Bang theory does not conflict with the Catholic concept of creation.

The Big Bang theory is also compatible with Islam. In fact, the Quran even predicted the Big Bang according to Quran scholars:

http://quran-m.com...



In order to proof his case, PRO must prove that the TV series "The Big Bang Theory" never happened, as well as show that the Big Bang, as an explanation of the early universe, never happend.

Debate Round No. 2
Cooldudebro

Pro

1st, we are talking about a theory, not a T.V show! I render that invalid.

Where did the atoms come from?

You also failed to refute we would needed dark matter that no one has observed to render it possible.

Sorry this is so short.
black_squirrel

Con

When I accepted the challenge, I could not know what PRO meant with "The Big Bang Theory", because it was not defined.
The TV series "The Big Bang Theory" is more popular than the theory of the Big Bang (according to Google), so it is not unreasonable to win the debate by showing that the TV series "The Big Bang Theory" did indeed happen. I understand that it is not PRO's
intention to refute this.

PRO: "Where did the atoms come from?"

This is by a process called Nucleosynthesis. It is explained here.
http://www.einstein-online.info...

"Nuclear physics in an expanding universe

As the universe cools, the matter content changes - new particles are formed out of the preexisting ones, such as protons and neutrons forming out of quarks. From about one second to a few minutes cosmic time, when the temperature has fallen below 10 billion Kelvin, the conditions are just right for protons and neutrons to combine and form certain species of atomic nuclei. This phase is called Big Bang Nucleosynthesis."

(I already provided this link before. I just copied and pasted a small part of it.)

PRO: "You also failed to refute we would needed dark matter that no one has observed to render it possible."

As the Big Bang theory grows, and we try to explain more and more with it, the theory itself also needs to be refined.
"Dark matter" is indeed used to explain some of the observations. But:

"It should be noted that dark matter was not invoked simply as a “fudge factor” to rescue the Big Bang from perceived difficulties. "
http://www.icr.org...




(BTW: I think the spell-checker accidentally changed "Lemaitre" into "Limiter" in a second round. My apologies. For S&G, this should cancel out with the highlighted grammar mistake of my opponent.)
Debate Round No. 3
Cooldudebro

Pro

Nice loop hole. For that reason I concede.
black_squirrel

Con

My opponent already conceded so I keep the final argument short.

1. I have shown, without a doubt, that the TV series "The Big Bang Theory" happened.
2. The "Big Bang" is a theory about the early stages of the universe that is widely accepted within the scientific communities.
My opponent had some arguments against it like "where do the elements come from?" and "what about dark matter?".
But he never articulated why these questions would undermine the assertion that the Big Bang happened.
3. My opponent suggests that the Big Bang theory is not compatible with religion, but nothing is further from the truth.
The Big Bang Theory was first formulated by Georges Lemaitre, a catholic priest. Even Pope Pius XII declared that the Big
Bang theory is compatible with the Catholic faith.
Debate Round No. 4
8 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Posted by badbob 3 years ago
badbob
What a ridiculous debate. You conceded because this moron actually references a stupid television show. Oh my word!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by FluffyCactus 3 years ago
FluffyCactus
It's kind of silly to refute the big bang... Especially from a religious perspective. I mean, the Pope did say in the 50's that the Big Bang was an idea in accordance with the holy scriptures. Science and Religion are two sides of the same coin. Never the twain shall meet.

Pro showed a lack of understanding concerning the subject matter. Con was gracious til the end. There are too many trolls on the religion section of Debate.org.
Posted by theta_pinch 3 years ago
theta_pinch
@cooldudebro

Dark Matter, Dark energy and inflation are NOT problems for the big bang theory.
Posted by CynicalDiogenes 3 years ago
CynicalDiogenes
Pro got Punked.....the Big Bang theory the TV show definitely happened.
Posted by theta_pinch 3 years ago
theta_pinch
cooldudebro;

Most of what you said has already been explained; and dark matter, dark energy, and inflation have been know to exist for decades and the search for dark matter has been underway for decades, and there haven't been any atheists converting to religions because of those.
Posted by dtaylor971 3 years ago
dtaylor971
Why is there more matter than anti-matter if the big bang really happened?
Posted by wildpuffin 3 years ago
wildpuffin
There is too much proof for the Big Bang theory to say it didnt happen the real question is what caused it.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Ramshutu 3 years ago
Ramshutu
Cooldudebroblack_squirrelTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:16 
Reasons for voting decision: Pedantry from con on the terms gave conduct to con. Sources to con, as they provided far more than pro (and of better quality). Con refuted most of pros arguments (and pointed out he had not logically reasoned his justifications) arguments to con. Despite minor spelling, pro generally had worse grammar.
Vote Placed by DudeStop 3 years ago
DudeStop
Cooldudebroblack_squirrelTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro conceded.
Vote Placed by Wylted 3 years ago
Wylted
Cooldudebroblack_squirrelTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:15 
Reasons for voting decision: Con loses conduct points due to not sticking with the spirit of the debate. Pro did concede the argument so he loses that. Even if pro did not concede he would still lose because con did enough to prove the show entitled The Big Bang Theory does exist. Besides proving the show exists con did do a good job of proving that the theory of the big bang exists as well.