Is there a scientific case for an Intelligent Designer?

[JohnB]

I prefer to avoid treating a book that says the world is flat or that light was created before the sun (among other things) as valid in a scientific discussion.

 

Point of order Madam Moderator.

 

As energy formed before suns did in the time after after the Big Bang, and given that some of that energy must have been in the EM spectrum, could one not argue that there was indeed light before suns?

[insane_alien]

JohnB does have a point there. the CMB is light and it was the first thing in the universe before there was any matter and hence stellar objects.

[mooeypoo]

Point of order Madam Moderator.

 

As energy formed before suns did in the time after after the Big Bang, and given that some of that energy must have been in the EM spectrum, could one not argue that there was indeed light before suns?

Nice, nice, point taken, kudos for trying.

 

Of course, that only solves the single "issue" of light existing before the sun (btw - three days before.. quite a long time to build everything to starlight). There are quite a number of other issues and inconsistencies.

 

But then again, one of the most intriguing things about the bible is that one can argue whatever one desires to argue by twisttwaggle the biblical interpretations to fit reality.

 

For that matter, I can also argue that the entire chapter is, in fact, utterly symbolic and therefore the word 'light' does not mean EM spectrum but rather love, and the word "sun" does not mean our closest star but rather the joy of learning. Easy peezy.

 

~moo