Have you heard of the Law of Conservation? “Energy cannot be created nor destroyed”. This suggests to us that the universe always existed. If you are into philosophy you have heard the term Occam’s Razor. This suggests the simpilest explaination is the most plausable. In this case, no god created the universe, it always existed.

Dr. Lee Smolin has also discovered that the universe is actually a giant black hole generator. This shows the universe wasn’t created for us, but the production of black holes! (The complete opposite of life). During this process, every so often the universe will create a microscopic amount of life through molecules. Most biologists agree that life originated through a series of chemical events in Earth’s early history. During these events, complex organic molecules were generated from simpler ones. Eventually, simple metabolic pathways developed. Such pathways alloud molecules to be synthesized or broken down more efficiently. These pathways may have led to the first emergance of life.

If the God of the Bible really existed, the universe would be simple and the Earth would be in the center of it, just like Apollo and everyone back then thought it was. Because they thought Earth was God’s main focus. The world would also be flat just as they thought it was. And the universe would be build to create life.

The real universe couldn’t be more different. We got this bizzare complex black hole generator that is 999999.9% lethal to life. For every microscopic portion of life that exists, there are trillions of black holes. And Earth is in a complete random microscopic part of the Universe. Completely random.

So all in all, the universe always existed as a Law of Science says, and it was not even close to have been built for us. All this is backed up by pure science and no god (which we dont have any proof for) is needed to explain it.

Here are some intelligent FAQ posed by theists.

“How big was the Universe at the beginning?

The Universe was in a singularity condition “before” the Big Bang (notice the quotes), meaning that it was infinitesimally small. All distance separations were zero, meaning that there was no space. Since there was no space in the Universe’s singularity condition, it is impossible to accurately express how small it was. As a consequence of the absence of space, there was no time, either.

Did the Big Bang create everything in the Universe?

The law of conservation of energy prohibits the spontaneous formation from nothing. You cannot create or destroy energy or momentum. There is a finite amount of energy (matter and energy are two forms of the same thing by E=mc2) in the Universe that is always the same. If the Big Bang theory proposed that everything was created in an explosion, it would violate the most fundamental law of physics. The only reason science can even exist is if we make the assumption that the laws of physics are constant anywhere and everywhere at all times, and this is a quite reasonable assumption. There’s no evidence of a period when the laws of physics were not in effect. However, it is impossible to say for sure, because our current physics does not take us back past 10-43s after the big bang. In that small amount of time, virtually anything can happen.

What caused the explosion in the Big Bang? Something must have created all that matter and energy and caused it to explode.

No one really knows what caused the explosion, but that’s certainly no reason to defer to some sort of divine intervention. The early Universe could have existed as a very unstable, very massive particle that underwent its decay with the Big Bang as its mechanism. The other common question that everyone has is, “Where did the mass in the Universe come from?” The answer, simply, is nowhere. The mass in the Universe has always existed. General relativity postulates that the Big Bang would have begun time because, in a singularity state (like what the Universe was in just before the Big Bang), there is no time. The Universe has, quite literally, existed for all time. The relativity of time and its consequences is by far one of the most difficult concepts for the scientific layman to grasp. Most people say that they know time is relative, but they have no idea what that implies for the early Universe. The relativity of time means that there was no “before” the Big Bang. Time is not a straight line concept. Time on the sun passes at a different rate than it does here on Earth due to the difference in the gravitational disturbance that it creates. There is a reason why we call it “spacetime.” Space and time are interconnected. Since we know that mass creates warps in space, it creates warps in time, as well. There is no “absolute time.” In other words, there is no “correct” timeline. As such, there is no correct spot to watch an event take place from. So, in a way, Einstein’s Relativity disallows for the existence of God. If there was an omniscient God, he’d be in an absolute frame of reference, on an absolute timeline. According to Relativity, this cannot exist. Time’s existence really can’t even be accurately described. Time simply exists, as does the universe. There was no point where the Universe’s mass just popped into existence. The Universe is infinitely existing. It has always existed, and will always exist.

If the universe has always existed and will always exist, how do we get to this point in time? How am I living in the present? Shouldn’t it have taken the universe an infinite amount of time to get to this point? And, if it takes an infinite amount of time to get to this point, we should have never gotten to this point, right? I can’t get to infinity. In an infinite aged universe I suspect that “the present” is impossible.

The Universe has always existed, but time hasn’t. You can’t view time as one timeline. Time is relative, meaning that it depends on your frame of reference. Without multiple frames of reference, there is no time. That’s why time began with the Big Bang, because it created multiple frames of reference. Also, I’d like to point those really curious about this question to our friend, Calculus. Specifically, derivation. For those of you who haven’t taken Calculus, or have simply forgotten, derivation is finding the exact rate of change on a line at one given point. How big is a point on a graph? Infinitesimally small. When you want to find a car’s acceleration on a line graph of its velocity at one, single point, you must derive it. Thus, you are dividing the line up into an infinite number straight lines, and finding the slope of the straight line at a given point. This should show that it is possible to work finitely in an infinite world.

As yet another aside, you can’t divide the Universal “timeline” up into units smaller than 10-43 of a second. This is known as Plank Time, and it is the smallest possible unit of time that observable event can take place in.

But, something must have created the mass in the Universe!

There is no reason to think that. We have no evidence of a time when the Universe did not exist, because it has existed for all time. Stop trying to rationalize your belief in God. You won’t get very far.

You’re just being stubborn! You atheists are just trying to find ways to get around the crystal-clear explanation that God created everything!

Yes, that’s exactly what we’re doing! God is the worst possible explanation for physical phenemomena! Saying that “God did it” doesn’t help science advance at all, since it describes no working mechanisms, makes no predictions and therefore is not testable. Just because the physics of the present cannot answer your questions doesn’t mean that they can’t be answered. Newtonian physics couldn’t explain the working mechanisms of the sun, but then particle physics came along and answered that question. Relativity and quantum physics cannot take us back to further than 10-43 of a second after the Big Bang occured, but someone in the future might. The bottom line is this: If we’d left the sun to “God’s work” then we’d have no knowledge of nuclear physics, and a great deal of technology (like this computer) would be impossible. God is an unacceptable answer in science, as well as logic. This is why faith in God is irrational.

Since entropy exists, and all energy is slowly becoming less useful, and someday in the future all energy will be completely evenly spread out over the cosmos and of no use to anyone, doesn’t your statement imply that, in the universe’s infinite past, energy/mass must have been infinitely the other way around? And, how is that possible?

Entropy started with the Big Bang. “Before” the Big Bang (and I use that term loosely), the Universe was in a singularity condition. There was no space, no time and no distance. All mass existed at exactly one point, defined by its own existence, because there was no volume around it (confused yet?). Because of this, all reactions taking place took place instantaneously, in zero time, because there was no time, because there was no distance, because there was no space. Without any of these, entropy doesn’t happen. The Big Bang is responsible for the Universe’s current incarnation, that is all. It has always existed, according to the most basic assumption in physics and of science”
Darwin’s theory of evolution by natural selection is the only scientific explanation for the spectacular diversity of life on Earth. It provides a powerful framework for understanding nature and is one of the essential theories at the very core of science.

Source: http://daltonator.net/durandal/creationism/faq.shtml

After the Big Bang, Natural Selection through evolution occured.

“Darwin’s theory of evolution by natural selection is the only scientific explanation for the spectacular diversity of life on Earth. It provides a powerful framework for understanding nature and is one of the essential theories at the very core of science.

Yet from the moment it was first published, Darwin’s theory of evolution has been engulfed in controversies, some of which persist to this day. Indeed the current controversy is strongly rooted in the objections first expressed 150 years ago. As Darwin himself anticipated, some people have held to the conviction that species are the result of special creation through the action of a Creator. Some find incompatible with their religious beliefs the concept that humans share a common ancestry with earlier primates, and that humans and other species evolved over immense spans of time.

Others see the process of evolution itself as one of the qualities of a universe created by a God. Some also embrace the notion, as expressed for example in a statement by Pope John Paul II, that evolution may be a valid scientific explanation for the origins of body form and other aspects of the material world, but that God alone is responsible for the origin of the human soul.

Certain expressions of Creationism—for example, the view known as Intelligent Design—hold that Darwinian evolution is not sufficient to explain the origins of complex structures, such as the eye, or complex organisms, such as humans. They assert that such innovations must be the act of an Intelligent Designer.

Creationism, including Intelligent Design, does not offer a scientific alternative to the theory of evolution. By invoking the act of a Creator or an Intelligent Designer as the explanation for life’s diversity, Creationism invokes a cause that lies outside our powers of observation and thus outside the realm of scientific inquiry.

Many people, including prominent religious leaders and scientists, view the search for understanding as one that embraces both scientific explorations into the material world and a spiritual search for the meaning of human existence, with no inherent conflict between the two.

Social controversy over Darwin’s theory is long-standing and will doubtless persist. Yet, objections to the theory based on spiritual or philosophical perspectives do not undermine its scientific validity, importance, and impact. For 150 years since the publication of Darwin’s “Origins of Species”, the theory of evolution by natural selection has not been seriously challenged by any other scientific explanation. Evolution serves as the foundation for all of modern biology, including research critical to human welfare, medicine and the fight against disease”

Source: http://www.fieldmuseum.org/darwin/about_evolution_19.asp

The overwhelming majority of science also disbelieves in a god.

Scientific American, September 1999

“Scientists and Religion in America”
“Whereas 90% of the general population has a distinct belief in a personal god and a life after death, only 40% of scientists on the B.S. level favor this belief in religion and merely 10 % of those who are considered ‘eminent’ scientists believe in a personal god or in an afterlife”.

Source: http://kspark.kaist.ac.kr/Jesus/Inte…20religion.htm

My whole point is, why believe in miraculous claims, without ANY evidence to support them at all? Just curious. Thanks!