### Author:  [@WallyM7](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WallyM7)
#### Post date: [April 27, 2000, 6:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-universe-is-flat-evidence-for-the-big-bang/18139/2 "2000-04-27T18:10:00Z")
jab, your optomism is admirable, but if you think this is going to change even one creationist’s mind, you’re completely crazy.
Tons of evidence for the big bang has accumulated over the years, and the fundies are in denial as much as ever.
Good try.
---
### Author:  [@The\_Peyote\_Coyote](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Peyote_Coyote)
#### Post date: [April 27, 2000, 6:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-universe-is-flat-evidence-for-the-big-bang/18139/3 "2000-04-27T18:30:00Z")
I would also note, jab1, that is another blow against the Steady State Hypothesis.
---
### Author:  [@hardcore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hardcore)
#### Post date: [April 27, 2000, 6:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-universe-is-flat-evidence-for-the-big-bang/18139/4 "2000-04-27T18:39:00Z")
I dunno, WallyM7. I’ve said this before, but it bears repeating. People do change their views, it just doesn’t happen overnight. A gradual transition has to take place in order to ease the burden on the mind. I was raised in a staunchly creationist family, yet slowly I succumbed to the ravages of intellect. Granted, my worldview shift occurred early in life (during high school), but my mother, though still devoutly religious, now accepts evolution and the Big Bang. However, I will readily admit that it takes a strong thirst for knowledge to overcome a creationist indoctrination.
---
### Author:  [@manhattan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/manhattan)
#### Post date: [April 27, 2000, 7:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-universe-is-flat-evidence-for-the-big-bang/18139/5 "2000-04-27T19:06:00Z")
> [@](#):
>
> the universe is flat
You, uh, didn’t happen to read that in the paper, did you?
::flees::
---
### Author:  [@Spiritus\_Mundi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spiritus_Mundi)
#### Post date: [April 27, 2000, 7:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-universe-is-flat-evidence-for-the-big-bang/18139/6 "2000-04-27T19:31:00Z")
> [@](#):
>
> I would also note, jab1, that is another blow against the Steady State Hypothesis.
True, and I have long since consoled myself to the idea that teh Big Bang is far more likely as a cosmological model. But the Staedy State Hypothesis is elegant and beautiful and I once plotted a novel based upon it, so it will always have a special place in my heart.
And anyone who doesn’t like it can go Big Bang themselves. 😉
* * *
-
The best lack all conviction
The worst are full of passionate intensity.
\*
---
### Author:  [@jab1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jab1)
#### Post date: [April 27, 2000, 7:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-universe-is-flat-evidence-for-the-big-bang/18139/7 "2000-04-27T19:43:00Z")
I must admit that SSH never even occurred to me.
Oh, and I DID read about it in the Los Angeles _Times_\*, **manhattan** , but their website is notorious for being difficult to link to\*, so I linked to the CNN version instead.
(For the newbies, **manhattan** is referring to “The Earth is Flat, I Read it in the Paper,” a evolution vs. creation thread that reached **1000 posts** before it was put out of OUR misery. It was a mercy killing, but WE were the ones who benefitted.)
\*Their addresses are long and complicated and they keep their articles online for only two weeks. [CNN.com](http://CNN.com) uses easy-to-remember words in the URLs and their articles are there FOREVER. You can still search for and read stories that were posted years ago.
* * *
\>\
\_ **L\_\_\_L**
He’s _back!_
---
### Author:  [@David\_B](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David_B)
#### Post date: [April 28, 2000, 3:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-universe-is-flat-evidence-for-the-big-bang/18139/8 "2000-04-28T03:00:00Z")
Dangit, **I** was gonna start a thread about this. I cut the article out of the paper and everything!
Ah well. Great minds and all that… 😉
---
### Author:  [@DSYoungEsq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSYoungEsq)
#### Post date: [April 28, 2000, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-universe-is-flat-evidence-for-the-big-bang/18139/9 "2000-04-28T16:20:00Z")
Warning: I am not a fundamental christian, and I don’t believe that God created the universe in 4004 B.C.
Disprove the following: God created the Universe in 4004 B.C. and, being able to do anything (just ask Ohio, where the state motto is “With God, all things are possible” (well, it is until they lose the appeal of a recent 6th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling)), has created the universe to appear to have been created by a Big Bang, in order to test for true believers, who will be admitted to the Kingdom of Heaven when the End arrives.
I long since gave up trying to combat belief regarding an unprovable occurrence with observational data. Arguing the point is silly; instead, just believe what YOU wish to believe about the beginning of the Universe.
And as a side note, I hear there is a movement to rename the famous group of denial specialists from Flatlanders to Flatuniversians. The just got the scale wrong. 😉
---
### Author:  [@John\_Kentzel-Griffin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Kentzel-Griffin)
#### Post date: [April 28, 2000, 7:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-universe-is-flat-evidence-for-the-big-bang/18139/10 "2000-04-28T19:30:00Z")
**DSYoungEsq**
What is wrong with the “theory” that the Universe was created 4004 years ago (or at 9:00am this morning) with the appearance of being old is that it makes no testable predictions and so cannot be disproven. Therefore, it is _not_ a valid theory.
…Although, if the Universe was created at 9:00am this morning, that could explain why I can’t remember a good portion of the 70’s…
* * *
Virtually yours,
DrMatrix
If I’ve told you once, I’ve told you 0.99999999… times.
---
### Author:  [@mrblue92](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mrblue92)
#### Post date: [April 28, 2000, 8:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-universe-is-flat-evidence-for-the-big-bang/18139/11 "2000-04-28T20:09:00Z")
Boy, we better tell the astronauts about this, lest they sail off the edge of the universe 😉
---
### Author:  [@JUSTUS](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JUSTUS)
#### Post date: [April 30, 2000, 11:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-universe-is-flat-evidence-for-the-big-bang/18139/12 "2000-04-30T23:07:56Z")
\*\*DSYoungEsq
What is wrong with the “theory” that the Universe was created 4004 years ago (or at 9:00am this morning) with the appearance of being old is that it makes no testable predictions and so cannot be disproven. Therefore, it is not a valid theory. \*\*
For those who underestimate the ability to ignore science when it contradicts deeply held religious belief I give the following.
1 - Popes Message on evolution 😃 🆒
[http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-god.html](http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-god.html)
2- Analysis of the Message and it’s impact
[http://www.cin.org/jp2evolu.html](http://www.cin.org/jp2evolu.html)
3- Fundamentalist Reaction :rolleyes: 😛
[http://www.cuttingedge.org/n1034.html](http://www.cuttingedge.org/n1034.html)
However I would like to ask as an interested bystander
OK some guys with lots of grant money send up a balloon with really fancy instruments. Now they say they have made measurements of things way way beyond my understanding that “PROVE” some theories about numbers (age / dimensions / rate of expansion … of the universe). Just what practical use is this information. 😕 Also the scale on which they are talking is well frankly ridiculous (a fraction of time so small that I can’t help but shake my head in amusement)
---
### Author:  [@UWmite](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UWmite)
#### Post date: [May 1, 2000, 2:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-universe-is-flat-evidence-for-the-big-bang/18139/13 "2000-05-01T02:11:20Z")
::minor hijack::
Jackel, my take on research that seems silly or unproductive or altogether useless is to look at historical examples of the same. Marie Curie looked at funny rocks, Flemming(sp?) studied mold that grew in a dish accidently. You can’t predict the outcome of research while the data is being accumulated, or even years afterward.
---
### Author:  [@JUSTUS](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JUSTUS)
#### Post date: [May 1, 2000, 3:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-universe-is-flat-evidence-for-the-big-bang/18139/14 "2000-05-01T03:24:41Z")
> [@](#):
>
> \*\*
> ::minor hijack::
>
> Jackel, …
> You can’t predict the outcome of research while the data is being accumulated, or even years afterward.
> \*\*
- \*\*All I can say is TRUE … Just a random dig (trying to be somewhat humorus) to get a response … I hope that does not qualify as being a TROLL …
---
### Author:  [@RM\_Mentock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RM_Mentock)
#### Post date: [May 1, 2000, 4:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-universe-is-flat-evidence-for-the-big-bang/18139/15 "2000-05-01T04:50:38Z")
Jackel
Of course that would be a troll. But that doesn’t stop anybody from taking it seriously.
For instance, in your three links above…aren’t the first two switched? The Pope’s message (that evolution does not conflict with religion) is referred to in the talk.origins faq–which should be the second link, not the first, right? So, your point is that the fundamentalists (third link) are upset that the Pope might be reasonable?
---
### Author:  [@RM\_Mentock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RM_Mentock)
#### Post date: [May 1, 2000, 4:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-universe-is-flat-evidence-for-the-big-bang/18139/16 "2000-05-01T04:54:13Z")
Science and religion don’t overlap–that’s one of the reasons that religious believers find science so unconvincing. And that aspect of skepticism is a good thing for science.
---
### Author:  [@DSYoungEsq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSYoungEsq)
#### Post date: [May 1, 2000, 3:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-universe-is-flat-evidence-for-the-big-bang/18139/17 "2000-05-01T15:04:06Z")
> [@](#):
>
> DSYoungEsq
> What is wrong with the “theory” that the Universe was created 4004 years ago (or at 9:00am this morning) with the appearance of being old is that it makes no testable predictions and so cannot be disproven. Therefore, it is not a valid theory.
Point one: It is just as ‘provable’ as the ‘theory’ that the universe started without supernatural help. Neither can be ascertained as accurate without the existence of evidence that remains unobtainable. This was my point.
Point two: For those who believe that it is a correct theory, and if it is, they may well find out the truth when they die. You can’t disprove that, either.
The point to my post was to once again remind those who enjoy science and what it can show us that they must seperate knowledge from belief. Showing that there is evidence consistent with a model of the universe that has it starting with a bang and increasing in size forever does nothing to ‘disprove’ the belief that the whole thing is an attempt by God to lead the faithful astray. Debating belief with science is like fencing with slinkies; the wrong tool for the job.
---
### Author:  [@jab1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jab1)
#### Post date: [May 2, 2000, 2:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-universe-is-flat-evidence-for-the-big-bang/18139/18 "2000-05-02T02:34:53Z")
I’ve forgotten the name of the man, but he demonstrated electromagnets to an audience of scientists and engineers in the 19th century. Someone wanted to know what use such a toy would be and he gave the above reply.
Does that answer your question, **Jackel**?
(BTW, it’s “Jackal”.)
---
### Author:  [@David\_B](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David_B)
#### Post date: [May 2, 2000, 12:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-universe-is-flat-evidence-for-the-big-bang/18139/19 "2000-05-02T12:45:43Z")
DSYoung said:
> [@](#):
>
> The point to my post was to once again remind those who enjoy science and what it can show us that they must seperate knowledge from belief. Showing that there is evidence consistent with a model of the universe that has it starting with a bang and increasing in size forever does nothing to ‘disprove’ the belief that the whole thing is an attempt by God to lead the faithful astray. Debating belief with science is like fencing with slinkies; the wrong tool for the job.
If that was your point, I have to wonder why you decided to make it here, since I don’t recall seeing anybody say anything that contradicts what you said…
---
### Author:  [@DSYoungEsq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSYoungEsq)
#### Post date: [May 2, 2000, 4:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-universe-is-flat-evidence-for-the-big-bang/18139/20 "2000-05-02T16:47:04Z")
David, I was responding to the statement of **jab1** wherein he said: “Read it and weep, Creationists; …”
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-universe-is-flat-evidence-for-the-big-bang/18139.md?page=2)