>>11714850>everything just appeared from nothing for no reason >trust us bro we're scientistsBut what you just described was not science nor approachable in a scientific manner.
>so why do so many scientists keep repeating this memeBecause peer review. You have to agree, even if it's pants-on-head retarded or flat out wrong.
>>11714863>no reason>I don't see why you think that could be an issue.You're a faggot and I'm going to use absolutely no proof for this claim. What? You disagree? Why? Oh wait you're not allowed to tell me why because that would be a reason/justification. No see, you're just a faggot because I conjured up the idea and if enough people in this thread simply agree with me then it must make it true. I described you as a faggot, that must make you one. No issues right?
>>11714913>Please actually read up on the Big Bang before you post about it and sound like an idiot.>Please learn and study a thought experiment before talking about it in a stupid bannerShut the fuck up you pinhead. I bet you take the Schrodinger's cat seriously too,
>It merely states that everything was that everything was at one point condensed in to a tiny spot before the universe expanded.And it doesn't explain why.
>It doesn't try to explain how the "everything" came in to existence and has never tried to.>dog barks, wind blowsSo can we stop talking about it then? It is literally not science.
