Big Bang "Theory"

I got into a heated debate with someone today because I told them the Big Bang Theory was not a theory anymore, because evidence suggests it did not happen (there are countless other possibilities, look up some of them), and a theory cannot have any evidence that disproves it or supports another hypothesis. What do you guys think? Is the Big Bang Theory a theory at all?

Other urls found in this thread:

Veeky
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Bazinga

>90000000000 golden globes

>I got into a heated debate with someone today because I told them the Big Bang Theory was not a theory anymore, because evidence suggests it did not happen (there are countless other possibilities, look up some of them), and a theory cannot have any evidence that disproves it or supports another hypothesis. What do you guys think? Is the Big Bang Theory a theory at all?

I think you confused well researched evidence for shit some asshole said on the internet somewhere when you concluded that there were other serious competing theories for origin of the universe.

not OP, but I do remember reading something about how physics in some parts of the universe are different than others, which means there is most likely another explanation. Then again, that's one piece of evidence against millions.

literally confusing something some asshole said on the internet somewhere for well researched evidence in your post.

[spoiler]physics in other parts of the universe could be different but there is nothing to support it being true. also did you know that there might be a planet inhabited by rainbow unicorn ponies too?[/spoiler]

actually, I believe it was Michael Brooks who wrote a book about this, the Edge of Uncertainty. It's a good read.

It's a Vatican - Jesuit pet meme, the ancient theory stolen from heretics long since crucified has a gaping back door in that manbearpig god in Rome created the big bang. It's popularity only a testament to the sheer enormity of the Vatican propaganda machine today.

>From a correspondence between Ensign Guy H. Raner and Albert Einstein in 1945 and 1949. Einstein responds to the accusation that he was converted by a Jesuit priest: "I have never talked to a Jesuit prest in my life. I am astonished by the audacity to tell such lies about me. From the viewpoint of a Jesuit priest I am, of course, and have always been an atheist."

>Edge of Uncertainty
literally like saying that beyond the radius where light could have reached us by now that things we can not ever see or verify might be different and we cant ever know for sure.

You need to define your terms better, people confuse what they think the Big Bang actually is. As far as mainstream cosmology goes the hot Big Bang describes the expansion of the universe from a much denser state to the modern universe. Nowhere in that standard explanation is there any mention of a singularity. Unfortunately there is a wide misconception that the Big Bang = a singularity which just isn't true. This is how you end up with news articles which say "new theory suggests the big bang never happened!" when really it's just yet another pre-inflationary hypothesis, which takes place before the standard-model Big Bang.

There are no seriously alternative cosmologies anymore. Ever since the measurements which showed the incredible isotropy of the cosmic microwave background and it's precise blackbody spectrum every other explanation of the CMB without a hot big bang has died. There is also no robust cosmological evidence which is inconsistent with the standard hot Big Bang. Whether or not it's a theory is a completely arbitrary distinction.