Belief in God 'childish,' Jews not chosen people:

[This_person]

Originally Posted by fuzzywzhe

Yes, this may be true, that Einstein didn't originally believe LeMaite was correct, people are often wrong in discovering new things in nature. LeMaitre has absolutely no evidence when he first proposed the idea, and there was no observable data when LeMaitre first came up with the idea to support LeMaitre's theory.

Yet, Albert saw the math was correct. Hmmm.

But Einstein didn't originally dismiss it because of religious reasons.

Did he tell you this? Did he write all of his reasons down to read? If so, please link.

Einstein dismissed it for the same reason I dismiss the concept of god - there wasn't any hard evidence of it. The very second hard evidence showed up Einstein was forced by the very discipline of science to admit he was wrong and LeMaitre was probably right.

Well, except he STILL didn't believe it when the red shift was demonstrated. It took him some time AFTER that to accept it. Hmmmmm.

It's still quite possible through that LeMaitre was wrong.

I agree. It's a hypothesis that is untestable and unprovable. There's merely evidence that supports the hypothesis. However, that evidence could support another hypothesis, and be no less true than it is now (as would that other hypothesis).

To state that Einstein dismissed LeMatire's idea on religious grounds is absurd.

Why? Because of his strong religious beliefs? Because he referred to it as "creation", implying that the theory implied a creator (as opposed to "sh!t happens" theory of science)? What makes it absurd, other than you don't agree?

To be strictly fair, LeMaitre actually jumped the gun because his theory of a creation event of the universe had no observable evidence at the time LeMaitre first suggested the idea.

That's what hypotheses are for.

If you want to believe you're informed, when it's clear to me that you are not, that's your business.

Golly, thanks.

I frequently find myself wrong,

and when I discover I am wrong, I see to it that I correct myself. Over time, I become more correct and as a result I grow as an individual. It is a humbling experience to learn.

In my personal opinion, misleading people, that would seem quite wrong to me. Your statements about why Einstein initially didn't believe in the big bang theory is either based off from ignorance, or it's based off from dishonesty, I see no other possibility.

That YOU can see no other possibility does not mean there is not another possibility

I'd like to point out that before you right now is the most powerful research tool ever made by mankind. Go ahead and put it to use and do it with an open mind.

And, I do. I also use those "book" things.

[This_person]

Originally Posted by fuzzywzhe

That's a link back to this forum. Again, I would very much like to see Einstein using religion to justify his position on science from a reputable source.

I got some really good advice recently, to help you in that quest:

Originally Posted by fuzzywzhe

I'd like to point out that before you right now is the most powerful research tool ever made by mankind. Go ahead and put it to use and do it with an open mind.

[fuzzywzhe]

Originally Posted by This_person

Yet, Albert saw the math was correct. Hmmm.

Math is nothing more than a tool, it doesn't describe absolute reality.

Nearly all theories, if not all theories, are wrong, strictly speaking. Newton's laws are wrong because it makes the statement there is no such thing as relativity, so relatively is a refinement of the Newton's theory, but relativity is also wrong, because quantum mechanics isn't part of it. QM has been shown to be good predictor at a atomic scale, but it doesn't predict relativity.

Einstein spent the end of his life looking to bring together both QM and Relativity in search of the Theory of Everything, or TOE. Recently, string theory has become this possible theory but string theory is so complicated that maybe a dozen people on the planet it understand it and it's far from proven.

Originally Posted by This_person

Did he tell you this? Did he write all of his reasons down to read?

I know how the scientific discipline advances. It's a humiliating endeavor where almost all the ideas you come up with prove to be incorrect over time. Do you think Galileo was happy to go up against the church? Do you think Bruno was happy to be burned at the stake?

When you practice the scientific discipline you have to abandon personal prejudices simply because science necessitates it. Galileo risked his own safety to do it, Bruno died for it.

Originally Posted by This_person

If so, please link.Well, except he STILL didn't believe it when the red shift was demonstrated.

No, this is not true.

When the red shift was observed, the only conclusion that anybody was able to make was that the universe was expanding, and that's when Einstein became the champion of the big bang theory. Of course it took some time to formulate an explanation of why red shift was seen everywhere, but it didn't take long. Today, there is still only one explanation that anybody can reasonably come up with - that the universe is expanding.

With this new evidence, today known as Hubble's Law, Einstein had to admit his initial error, and not only admitted he was wrong, but promoted the idea from that point forward. It was Einstein's acceptance of the big bang theory that advanced it's acceptance widely throughout the scientific community.

When Hubble's Law was published, Einstein very quickly endorsed LeMaitre's concept of the big bang.

Originally Posted by This_person

However, that evidence could support another hypothesis

Really?

What other hypothesis could this be?

[fuzzywzhe]

Originally Posted by This_person

I got some really good advice recently, to help you in that quest:

I am, of course, using the internet.

Georges Lemaître - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Einstein at first dismissed Friedman and then (privately) Lemaître out of hand, saying that not all mathematics leads to correct theories. After Hubble's discovery was published, Einstein quickly and publicly endorsed Lemaître's theory, helping both the theory and priest get fast recognition. [4]"

Big Bang (book) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[This_person]

Originally Posted by fuzzywzhe

When you practice the scientific discipline you have to abandon personal prejudices simply because science necessitates it.

And, AE didn't do that. He clung to his theory, regardless of the information provided, and ridiculed the person and idea of dissent from HIS opinion.

When the red shift was observed, the only conclusion that anybody was able to make was that the universe was expanding, and that's when Einstein became the champion of the big bang theory.

Reluctantly, eventually had to agree. How very open minded of him.

Really?

What other hypothesis could this be?

You already know my answer will be ID. However, an enterprising writer could certainly come up with others.

[Nucklesack]

Originally Posted by This_person

I actually wasn't talking to you, unless you've become Nucklesack recently.

he/she isnt me

Originally Posted by This_person

What you've said is only partially true. Einstein did not originally embrace the Big Bang theory, he strongly critisized it. He EVENTUALLY embraced it.

aha but the reason he criticized it is in discussion

Originally Posted by This_person

We can debate why he originally thought it wrong. Was it religion? Was it ego for his own pet theory? Was it both (this is my belief based on the reading I've done)?

Your belief based on subjecture.

Originally Posted by This_person

As an atheist, your views on what constitute sinful behavior are really kind of silly, don't you think? However, my understandings are not dishonest, as you suggest. They're merely informed.

But if an atheist sins, does it count?

[Nucklesack]

Originally Posted by This_person

Link

He/She asked for proof that EINSTEIN refuted the Big Bang because of Creationism.

We're all still waiting for you to prove that

[Nucklesack]

Originally Posted by This_person

Did he tell you this? Did he write all of his reasons down to read? If so, please link.

Originally Posted by This_person

I got some really good advice recently, to help you in that quest:

You made the claim that Einstein was against the Big Bang due to creationism, it is up to you to prove it

[This_person]

Originally Posted by Nucklesack

He/She asked for proof that EINSTEIN refuted the Big Bang because of Creationism.

We're all still waiting for you to prove that

My answer in that link was to state that I cannot prove it through non-biased sites, but only through his beliefs.

[Nucklesack]

Originally Posted by This_person

OKay, I'll restate my claim, since you seeem to think it really, really, really really matters.

YOU made the claim that Einstein was against the Big Bang due to Creationism.

Originally Posted by This_person

He was originally against the big bang theory.

But why? it wasnt for the reasons you purpoted

Originally Posted by This_person

He stated the big bang theory sounded like creation.

No Eddington made this claim not Einstein.

Originally Posted by This_person

He was against religious concepts guiding scientific exploration.

Thats because one belief is based on the Fantastical, kinda makes sense when your a 1 and 0 guy.

Originally Posted by This_person

He claimed the math was good, but that the math didn't mean anything in this case.

Originally Posted by This_person

Only when forced to acknowledge that his theory was not as strong as the other through peer review did he even begin to acknowledge the possibility.

And your any different? is anyone? Einstein had a theory, and he stood by his theory (but not because the other sounded like Creationism, that was Eddington).

Thats why there is a Peer Review, the whole reason behind it is to Vet a theory.

Originally Posted by This_person

At the time the big bang theory was originally discussed openly, the pope claimed it "proved" Genesis. The theological side of the discussion was all about the big bang.

So now the Big Bang was a religious theory? make up your mind

Originally Posted by This_person

Did I mention he hated theology getting in the way of scientific exploits?

And you feel Creationism and Science are similiar, doesnt make it so.

Originally Posted by This_person

From this, draw your conclusions (I can only find religious sources, which admittedly may be biased, that support my claim, which is why I don't cite them).

So you have nothing to back your claim that Einstein was against the Big Bang theory due to creationism. there are plenty of Einstein quotes but none claim the Big Bang theory is wrong because it smacks of Creationism