Nothing Before The Bing Bang

[Bazile]

The big bang was the start of everything , so we have been told

Except for dark matter

https://news-sky-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/news.sky.com/story/amp/dark-matter-could-predate-the-big-bang-study-suggests-11779892?amp_js_v=a2&amp_gsa=1#referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&;ampshare=https%3A%2F%2Fnews.sky.com%2Fstory%2Fdark-matter-could-predate-the-big-bang-study-suggests-11779892

[pixie374]

To me, spirituality has nothing whatsoever to do with paranormal.

[Theland]

There are doorways into the spirit world, some good, most evil.
God is not a tourist attraction, and you cannot examine it like being on a tourist bus in Hollywood checking out the homes of the film stars.

[pixie374]

How very convenient lol. I am sure it will stand up to general common sense and science though, if there is any truth in it?
I have no objection, obviously, in people believing whatever they choose. But in the end, we all want to find out the actual truth if we can.

[Old_Geezer]

Ah proof is only what you deem it to be. For evidence get to associate with mediums. Maybe try out a ouija session with friends/family. You need your own experiences to mull over, not other people's accounts.

But this started as a science thread.

[pixie374]

Science and faith are opposites though.
Faith starts with the conclusion you prefer and goes backwards from there. Science starts with the questions and goes forward from there. You need Jim if you want total confusion.

[Deskdiary]

Theland - I was on the way to the market today with my family's cow and managed to swap it for some magic beans. I haven't used them yet - do you want them?

I know I shouldn't mock, but you make it very difficult to not do so.

I am constantly amazed the way the permantly deluded believe in a magic man in the sky.

[Old_Geezer]

Faith is simply a hypothesis of how things work that is proving inpossibe to test.
Science is about hypothesis of how things work that is is subject to testing.

[jim360]

Well gee, thanks, Pix. :/

[pixie374]

Nothing is impossible to test, og.
Some things we prove with science, so we know.. At least until proved otherwise. Science doesn't pretend to know everything. It can rule out some things, yes, but keeps looking until there is a definite answer.
Faith is purely what people like to believe- in spite of truth.

[pixie374]

Welcome Jim:-). You are the most confused person I know between science and faith. But of course, I am only going by your AB posts, so it may not be accurate x

[jim360]

You'd have to give an example, because I honestly don't know what you're talking about. Again.

[Theland]

Pixie- there is a considerable amount of faith in the realms of science sadly.
The scientific establishment can be very dogmatic and conservative when faced with challenging truths.

[pixie374]

Jim, I am sure you are a great scientist- I wouldn't know, as I am not one. But I have also seen your posts on different subjects... eg transexualism and Brexit, where I can clearly see you go with what you prefer over what you actually know.
I'm sure you aren't worried about it and certainly shouldn't be, but I have less faith in your scientific posts now as well and although I am not a scientist... I no longer believe everything you say about it either. I very much doubt you care! Xx

[Old_Geezer]

Nothing impossible to test ? Try testing whether there's an invisible, untouchable pixie sitting on your head. It may be the cause of your headache.

[pixie374]

That may well be true, theland... I have realised that scientists do have their own agenda, however, I like proof and truth before I go with anything. I don't mind being wrong myself, as long as we get to the truth between us. I would be surprised if anyone thought differently...

[pixie374]

There isn't, og :-) and I don't have a headache :-)

[Old_Geezer]

Or test whether the universe is infinite.

[pixie374]

I don't know, og... I will believe the scientists over religionists any day, though.

[jim360]

Hmm. The first thing is that I do care, perhaps more than I should, about what you think of me. So you're already wrong there. That I'm even bothering to post should prove that.

As to the rest -- I have no desire to drag Brexit, or any other issue unrelated to the OP, into this, but as far as I'm concerned on both matters I consider solid evidence (for and against my point) and do my best to present it fairly. No doubt I come up short from time to time, but who doesn't? Are you sure, therefore, that your own judgement of my posts isn't influenced by what *you* prefer? I can source them more if you'd like, but in each case I'm not making stuff up and it's carefully considered.

My scientific posts can be judged on their own merits. I'll do my best to correct errors I've made in the past, and believe me they are many. But I'm sad that you seem

[jim360]

It's I'm that you seem to have so completely lost, for want of a better word, "faith" in my judgement on one issue that you've lost faith in everything else I write (and then take the time to tell everybody else about it).

As to the idea of scientific dogma. It's true but only up to a point. The dogma is at least partly based on what works and what is producing results and new discoveries. So it's not completely unreasonable to follow fruitful lines of enquiry as far as they will go. Moreover the dogma can also be helpful to progress -- ideas that survive the rigours of dogma are clearly good ones; those that do not tend to fail on reasonable grounds, ie not matching with present observation or experiment.