As posted by myself at http://dreamsforsale.net
Cosmology and the Laws of Science.
The universe is defined as all matter and energy, including the earth, the galaxies, and the contents of intergalactic space, regarded as a whole. The desk you are sitting at, the earth you stand on, the solar system we are a part of, and every solar system beyond it.
"Scientists have traditionally rejected the thought of a natural phenomenon which cannot be explained, even with unlimited time and money. There is a kind of religion in science; every event can be explained in a rational way as the product of some previous event; every effect must have its cause. Now science has proven that the universe exploded into existence at a specific moment. It asks, "What cause produced this effect? Who or what put the mater and energy into our universe?" And science does not answer these questions."
- Dr. Robert Jastrow, founder of NASA's Institute for Space Studies, and a proclaimed agnostic.
Nothing can come about unless caused by something
. We see this proven time and time again in everyday life; a picture hangs on the wall because someone put it there; the grass grows because there is sunlight. Everything has this matter of "because", also known as the Law of Cause and Effect.
Then again, what makes a law? If a scientific law is defined as a generalization based on consistent experiences or results, whoâ€™s to say that such a thing didnâ€™t evolve
? We simply assume that science now was the same at the beginning of the universe, and will be the same at its end.
It is because of this, that I dare say science is blind
. We do not know that our laws are scientific truths, only that at this point in time, at this location in the universe, such a thing cannot be disproved
It is not my intentions that this thread raises the question of creationism and evolution (We have a thread for that at the moment), or whether or not there is a God. It is a given that either way â€“ whether the universe is an effect without a cause, or if it came about through divine intervention â€“ both options evade commonly accepted laws of science.
Expounding on such an idea, if both options evade scientific law, then isnâ€™t that at least one infringement of the commonly accepted laws? The only way(s)
this universe could have ever come about, is if it had broken the laws of science as we know it today. Isnâ€™t that enough of an exception to at least bring doubt to our so called â€œAbsoluteâ€ laws of science? Why do we, as humanity, judge everything according to these laws, even the lawâ€™s exceptions! How foolish are we to hold the exceptions
to the standards of our laws!
Science is intentionally blind; shedding light on its laws, which by their very existence reveal the repudiations, all the while covering its eyes to those very same exceptions, which beg to challenge long-acknowledged prevarications.