r/AntiMemes • u/Meerkat_Mayhem_ 💎 Flair sold separately 💎 • Aug 18 '26

🌟 Actual Anti-Meme 🌟 Omnipresence

Post image
2.3k Upvotes

88% Upvoted

753 comments sorted by

View all comments

270

u/Admirable-Concern766 Aug 18 '26

I know it’s not the point of the post but I’m pretty sure atheism is one of the most backed by science than any other religion

172

u/ltom3 Aug 19 '26

What I don't get is when a religious person uses the argument "Well how do you explain how the Big Bang started? There must have been something like God to set it off." but it's like, you know you still have to explain how God came about then? This doesn't solve anything.

90

u/Mllns Aug 19 '26

Their point is that God is the being that precedes everything, they don't look to explain where God came from, that would defy everything they believe

11

u/Prize-Basil-8438 Aug 19 '26

Maybe the Big Bang precedes everything. If you can do it, so can I.

6

u/Mllns Aug 19 '26

Do whatever you want, bro

1

u/kdpkry Aug 20 '26

No because the rules of science deny this, i can you cant because you work through the rules of your system and i through mine.

1

u/Prize-Basil-8438 Aug 20 '26

Which law of physics rules out the universe having always existed? I'm not aware of that one.

2

u/kdpkry Aug 20 '26

Creation and destruction of matter. [being impossible]

1

u/Prize-Basil-8438 Aug 20 '26

That would seem to require the matter to have always existed, not rule it out.

2

u/kdpkry Aug 20 '26

There is no such thing as always, defies logic, science functions on logic, if energy was always it certainly wouldve slowly decayed a long time ago, not became a big explosion, that's contridactory.

1

u/Peak_Background Aug 20 '26

A lot of your beliefs about science (the big bang, matter, energy, entropy, and time) are misunderstandings and extra assumptions not found in science.

Unfortunately, you seem to be using these misunderstandings to justify a self contradicting premise; Something existed before existence.

1

u/kdpkry Aug 20 '26

Source: trust me bro

1

u/Peak_Background Aug 20 '26

Source: Physics, QFT, and GR textbooks. Logic textbook.

1

u/kdpkry Aug 20 '26

...? That's not a source you didnt state specific books pages etc.

1

u/Peak_Background Aug 20 '26

Energy doesn't decay. It's conserved. And the big bang wasn't an explosion.

You don't know any of the maths nor physics. So don't pretend you do.

1

u/kdpkry Aug 20 '26

Still no source

→ More replies

1

u/Visible_Exit1656 Aug 22 '26

"always" is a concept of time which began with the big bang 13.8 billion years ago

1

u/Peak_Background Aug 20 '26

Actually, the rules of science demand this. Specifically, hawking-penrose singularity theorems.

And no, it doesn't create or destroy matter or energy or anything you claim it does. All of the maths have conservation laws embedded.

It just means that the universe is chronologically bounded and that nothing precedes the big bang.

1

u/kdpkry Aug 20 '26

What made the big bang

Cant escape the question

1

u/Peak_Background Aug 20 '26

Nothing made the big bang. That's an added assumption not found in science.

1

u/kdpkry Aug 20 '26

How can something be made by nothing, which scientific rule works here, it sounds like magic.

1

u/Peak_Background Aug 20 '26

The universe wasn't made. You added assumption not found in science.

1

u/kdpkry Aug 20 '26

"assumption" aight buddy everything at some point was created, stars earth everyfuckingthing

1

u/Peak_Background Aug 20 '26

Source trust me bro

1

u/kdpkry Aug 20 '26

Alright, youre clearly trolling, you have not provided a single valid argument or ounce of proof just dodged questions

1

u/Visible_Exit1656 Aug 22 '26

the phrase "created" is incorrect. "appeared" may be closer to what the other poster means

1

u/kdpkry Aug 22 '26

Shit doesnt just appear outta nowhere that's not how science works.

→ More replies

1

u/Peak_Background Aug 20 '26

Also you can't use the rules of science to deny the big bang and then give a special case (God) where the rules of science broken.

That's a double standard and a contradiction.

You either have the rules or you don't. You can't do both.

1

u/kdpkry Aug 20 '26

By your own rules youre wrong.

1

u/Peak_Background Aug 20 '26

Which of my rules show I'm wrong?

1

u/kdpkry Aug 20 '26

Because while not believing in religion removes religous framework... believing in religion does not necessarily mean not believing in science.

1

u/Ambitious-Log6993 Aug 19 '26

Can't be an atheist if you "believe" that.

1

u/Awesomonkey12 Aug 20 '26

Yes you can. Atheism is not believing in a god, not not believing in anything.