Where we created by Religion or Evolution (353)

Or what caused the cause of the big bang? Does the creator have a creator etc. etc.?
What did the big bang take place in? And when did that begin? Is there something that did not begin? If so how could it be? If the universe really has limits then what is outside of that?
It seems to me that there is a big? mystery to it all. It is rather miraculous that there is such a thing as existance at all. It would be equally as miraculous if there were no such thing as existance.
Science has been discovering and explaining the things that exist within this mystery much to the dismay of religion which has had and continues to have a very shaky explanation of it all.
However I cannot see where science will ever be able to explain the unexplainable, the mystery.

And what side do the non-creationist scientists err on?

Another thing I find very mysterious is that I am aware of awareness and that that did begin and it seems that it will end. That somewhere along the line I will not exist just as it was before I was conceived.
Did awareness evolve? And what might it's purpose be?

The field is too vast to try to address comprehensively.
It has to be broken down into bite sized pieces.

I'd like to look just at one little point here.

The "evolution" camp inevitably traces creation back to a "big bang" when nothingness first imploded upon itself and then exploded into light, that quckly condensed into matter from which everything else was created.

Sounds really scientific doesn't it?

But it's not.
It's religious.
It's basic Kabbalist doctrine.

The whole big bang theory is nothing in the world but kabbalist myth disguised as science.

The same is true for Freud's "id" "ego" and "super-ego" and a lot of other supposed "science" including the modern scam that calls itself quantum-physics.

Religion is being sold as science.
And it's not just any religion.
It's religion who's very purpose is to supplant belief in God and replace it with the belief that the "self" is God.

It's going to take a lot of explaining to support all that so I'll start with just the part about the big bang.

Did it originate from scientific study, or was it just kabbalist doctrine painted over with a scientific veneer?

First lets see where the BB theory "officially" came from.

As always in such scams, it is pretended that the Big Bang theory was derived from sound science.
Opening statement from the Wikipedia article Big Bang:

The Big Bang is the cosmological model of the initial conditions and subsequent development of the Universe that is supported by the most comprehensive and accurate explanations from current scientific evidence and observation.

They don't leave any room for personal analysis do they.
The first statement is that all debate is closed.
Big Bang wins.
Like Al Gore declaring that the debate is closed on Global Warming.
You know you're being scammed when "science" is closed to debate.
True science depends on always questioning supposed "truths".

Closer inspection of the Big Bang theory shows that even among the bang-gang there is no consensus of how it all took place. In fact there is so much diversity of thought that it's hard to even say that the theory has any substance whatsoever.

From the very same Wikipedia article that, in its first paragraph, pretended a unquestionable consensus among scientists for the Big Bang theory.

"All ideas concerning the very early universe (cosmogony) are speculative. As of today no accelerator experiments probe energies of sufficient magnitude to provide any insight into the period. All proposed scenarios differ radically, some examples being: the Hartle-Hawking initial state, string landscape, brane inflation, string gas cosmology, and the ekpyrotic universe. Some of these are mutually compatible, while others are not."

Doesn't seem like such a consensus after all does it?
About all they agree on is the name.
And there's a reason for that.

Running out of space and time here.
I'll continue this later.