The Study of the Origin and Chronology of the Universe

I was not planning to write a blog on this subject so soon but one of the first videos in my YouTube feed this morning changed my mind. If you can i would like you to watch this video of what modern "science" is currently teaching on the subject of cosmology then I would like to comment and give my thoughts about this visually stunning video and the less than stunning audio (In my opinion) that accompanies it.

I will attempt to make my points in sequence from the beginning of the video to the end, but keep in mind that this is a one sided discussion unless one of the readers comments below. I'm giving my opinions and observations on what is said in the video and the speaker has not been given an opportunity for immediate rebuttal, for that they will have to join Scorum and write their own replies and comments themselves.

The first thing I notice is that we are told the story being given us goes beyond the imagination (Is more incredible, hard to believe?) than any cosmology story that came before it. It is also mentioned that all matter was "created" when this big bang occurred. I also want you to notice that no explanation is given about how space was created, nor will they tell us what exploded or what caused the explosion.
Science teaches us that energy can not be created nor destroyed only converted from one form to another. So where did this first energy come from and what form was in in?
Science also teaches us that mass can neither be created nor destroyed, so what exploded and how did it get there?
One last lesson from real science is that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. In other words, if there was an explosion then there had to be a cause, there had to be something that made some thing explode (react to the action).

For me this theory is totally blown before it ever gets started because they are already violating some of the most fundamental laws of science. This then is acceptable only as a story and not as science as we know it. The author can postulate that this event happened prior to the existence of these laws, but laws indicate order and how are they going to explain how order formed out of chaos and give examples from nature? But let's shrug these things off and continue with the story.

It is interesting to me that the speaker categorizes the revelation that the universe had a beginning as one of the signature discoveries of modern day science. Why is it so interesting to me? Because when I was just a child I knew and understood that the universe had a beginning and so do thousands of other children around the world. The fact that everything has a beginning and an ending is not new to the casual observer.
"Every civilization has a creation story and this story has a lot in common with those stories, it conjurs..." To me this is an admittance that what we are hearing is not science at all, it is just a story that they have conjured up. But they are also quick to state that their story is backed up by evidence. His tone is clear in that he leaves you thinking that none of the other stories are backed by any evidence at all or that they have all been debunked. That is why this particular story that has already broken the known laws of science is superior? I believe that there is at least one story that breaks none of the laws of science and has loads of available evidence in existence, but we will get to that later.
We are told that modern science is going to look back into the past billions of years to the very beginning to observe what the universe looked like right after the big bang. Really? Exactly how far have we and our modern science traveled out into space? How many assumptions do you think must be made in order to proffer such a claim? The very first assumption that they will make is that they know the exact speed of light, and unless something has changed as far as I know they have only determined for sure the reflected speed of light. How can you precisely measure the beginning of the source of light and the moment it reached it's destination? No device that I know of is that precise, that is why they measure the reflected speed of light instead as the measuring device and the source are in the same location and triggered at the same time. You hear them talking about light from the moon right away, but this too is reflected light, not light produced by the moon. They are also going to assume that the speed of light has always remained constant, do they still believe that? They will make many more assumptions but lets continue.
They mention the planet Saturn and show it's rings, but are they going to tell you that those rings are expanding and that they could not have been there for the billions of years that they are about to tell you about. We also just passed the moon in their video, since it is slowly moving away from earth they have some explaining to do about that also.
Seeing billions of years into the past is pretty impressive I must say, especially for people who have barely reached the limits of our own solar system, much less our galaxy. To me, this requires a great deal of suspension of disbelief. Or another way to say it is that it takes a huge leap of faith to believe these assertions. We have started off by saying that nothing, sitting in the middle of nowhere, exploded for no reason, and then became all of the stars and planets that stretch across billions of light years of an ever expanding space. Okay, lets see what's next.
Who knew that there was a record of the temperatures recorded across the universe billions of years ago, and so accurate also! Wow, now this is science, right? Can I get an amen, these guys are certainly good at something but I'm not sure if it has anything to do with science or not. What if I took a photo of a frogs butt and derived my cosmological evidence from that, I know, I know, it wouldn't have quite the wow factor. It is all about your interpretation of the data that you receive from a photograph or from any recording instrument. Anyone can look at this data and speculate as to what it all means, but nobody can go back thirteen billion years and measure the data to see if you were correct.
Wait, I just realized that we are talking about time and periods of time. But, when and how did time begin? Who measured it and what was the standard? has it always remained a constant? Time is a funny concept, I would explain it but I just don't know where to begin!
Let's talk about colors. A lot of what is said in this video depends on other theories, most notably about red shifts, blue shifts, dark matter, dark energy and black holes. At this point there is as much or more empirical data to debunk all of these theories as there is to support them. The whole dark matter and dark energy thing is something else that just seems like a stretch to provide a plausible answer to, and a type of cover over the obvious holes in their theory (Pun Intended). Many of the people supporting this theory will acknowledge these major discrepancies and problems, but the fact is they don't have a better answer without acknowledging the unthinkable, which we are rapidly coming to.
A trillion trillion trillionth of a second for the big bang to create the universe and all the matter within it? And these are the same people who think that six days was too short a time frame? They are also the same people who took that tiny fraction of time and stretched it out to almost 14 billion years without a single other similar event despite starting out with something instead of nothing.

Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

In the very first sentence of the Bible God solves all of the problems seen above and many more. First of all there must be a cause and this cause must be greater than the universe. And for there actually to be a beginning of the universe this cause must be an entity that is outside of time and space. You will notice that God created time with the beginning and next he created space and then first manifestation of matter, Earth. I believe that God created everything that exists in our universe in just six literal days and that God is the one who defined what a day is. I believe that this assertion can be backed up with the science that is evident in our daily lives.

If one of you can make any scientific sense or logic out a statement that proclaims that there was a beginning where nothing existed and for no reason at all and without a causation there was an explosion that created this vast universe, then I would love to hear your arguments. Such a theory evokes pure magic only without a magician necessary in my opinion, but I'm just one opinion and this blog is to provide a space for us to discuss and or have a civil debate over the issue.

The first graph that I posted was from the people that believe in the plasma universe, they also have several YouTube videos and I believe that their science is much better than what the mainstream scientists are producing. Not that I'm necessarily endorsing them, but I do think that they may be on the right track.

Those are my thoughts, now let me hear from you. What do you think and what do you believe when it comes to cosmology?

Philosophy / science

Cosmology

Cosmology

Cosmology