Atheism

While the scientific community was once divided between supporters of two different expanding universe theories—the Big Bang and the Steady State theory,[8] observational confirmation of the Big Bang scenario came with the discovery of the cosmic microwave background radiation in 1964, and later when its spectrum (i.e., the amount of radiation measured at each wavelength) was found to match that of thermal radiation from a black body. Since then, astrophysicists have incorporated observational and theoretical additions into the Big Bang model, and its parametrization as the Lambda-CDM model serves as the framework for current investigations of theoretical cosmology.

Big Bang breakthrough announced; gravitational waves detected
By Elizabeth Landau, CNN
updated 10:37 AM EDT, Tue March 18, 2014 | Filed under: Innovations
Watch this video
Ripples in space-time revealed

Gravitational waves were predicted by Albert Einstein
New results from BICEP2 are 'smoking gun for inflation'
During inflation, the universe expanded faster than the speed of light

(CNN) -- There's no way for us to know exactly what happened some 13.8 billion years ago, when our universe burst onto the scene. But scientists announced Monday a breakthrough in understanding how our world as we know it came to be.
If the discovery holds up to scrutiny, it's evidence of how the universe rapidly expanded less than a trillionth of a second after the Big Bang.
"It teaches us something crucial about how our universe began," said Sean Carroll, a physicist at California Institute of Technology, who was not involved in the study. "It's an amazing achievement that we humans, doing science systematically for just a few hundred years, can extend our understanding that far."
What's more, researchers discovered direct evidence for the first time of what Albert Einstein predicted in his general theory of relativity: Gravitational waves.
These are essentially ripples in space-time, which have been thought of as the "first tremors of the Big Bang," according to the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics.
A telescope at the South Pole called BICEP2 -- Background Imaging of Cosmic Extragalactic Polarization 2 -- was critical to the discovery. The telescope allowed scientists to analyze the polarization of light left over from the early universe, leading to Monday's landmark announcement.

From wiki.

Quote:

While the scientific community was once divided between supporters of two different expanding universe theories—the Big Bang and the Steady State theory,[8] observational confirmation of the Big Bang scenario came with the discovery of the cosmic microwave background radiation in 1964, and later when its spectrum (i.e., the amount of radiation measured at each wavelength) was found to match that of thermal radiation from a black body. Since then, astrophysicists have incorporated observational and theoretical additions into the Big Bang model, and its parametrization as the Lambda-CDM model serves as the framework for current investigations of theoretical cosmology.

And more recent discoveries that supports the big bang theory.quote]Big Bang breakthrough announced; gravitational waves detected
By Elizabeth Landau, CNN
updated 10:37 AM EDT, Tue March 18, 2014 | Filed under: Innovations
Watch this video
Ripples in space-time reveal
Gravitational waves were predicted by Albert Einstein
New results from BICEP2 are 'smoking gun for inflation'
During inflation, the universe expanded faster than the speed of light

(CNN) -- There's no way for us to know exactly what happened some 13.8 billion years ago, when our universe burst onto the scene. But scientists
announced Monday a breakthrough in understanding how our world as we know it came to be.
If the discovery holds up to scrutiny, it's evidence of how the universe rapidly expanded less than a trillionth of a second after the Big Bang.
"It teaches us something crucial about how our universe began," said Sean Carroll, a physicist at California Institute of Technology, who was not involved in the study. "It's an amazing achievement that we humans, doing science systematically for just a few hundred years, can extend our understanding that

far."
What's more, researchers discovered direct evidence for the first time of what Albert Einstein predicted in his general theory of relativity: Gravitational waves.
These are essentially ripples in space-time, which have been thought of as the "first tremors of the Big Bang," according to the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics.
A telescope at the South Pole called BICEP2 -- Background Imaging of Cosmic Extragalactic Polarization 2 -- was critical to the discovery. The telescope allowed scientists to analyze the polarization of light left over from the early universe, leading to Monday's landmark announcement.

Either your English sucks, or our conprehension is poor. Scientists, in a body, may constitute a social institution. Science itself, however is functionally indifferent to such social bodies. A recluse can be a scientist. An "amateur" without formal education and no association with professional organizations can be a scientists. Science can be practiced by anyone who understands the methodology. Frankly, i see you as just arguing for argument's sake.

Apparently, though, you are so obtuse as not to understand that i consider your "principle" to be a load of horsie poop. Being systematically organized does not make anything an institution.

the·o·ry
ˈTHēərē,ˈTHi(ə)rē/
noun
a supposition or a system of ideas intended to explain something, especially one based on general principles independent of the thing to be explained.
"Darwin's theory of evolution"
synonyms: hypothesis, thesis, conjecture, supposition, speculation, postulation, postulate, proposition, premise, surmise, assumption, presupposition; More
a set of principles on which the practice of an activity is based.
"a theory of education"
an idea used to account for a situation or justify a course of action.
"my theory would be that the place has been seriously mismanaged"

Yes, thus far THE BEST THEORY.

Quote:

the·o·ry
ˈTHēərē,ˈTHi(ə)rē/
noun
a supposition or a system of ideas intended to explain something, especially one based on general principles independent of the thing to be explained.
"Darwin's theory of evolution"
synonyms: hypothesis, thesis, conjecture, supposition, speculation, postulation, postulate, proposition, premise, surmise, assumption, presupposition; More
a set of principles on which the practice of an activity is based.
"a theory of education"
an idea used to account for a situation or justify a course of action.
"my theory would be that the place has been seriously mismanaged"

It's the BEST us humans have NOW in understanding our environment.

Whether or not something is an institution does not depend upon empirical evidence. I "get it," i just don't agree with it. Two horses can be hitched to a wagon to pull it. That doesn't make the horses a wagon. You silly speculation about what i studied at university have nothing to do with your complete failure to demonstrate that science is an institution.

Yes, thus far THE BEST THEORY.

Quote:

the·o·ry
ˈTHēərē,ˈTHi(ə)rē/
noun
a supposition or a system of ideas intended to explain something, especially one based on general principles independent of the thing to be explained.
"Darwin's theory of evolution"
synonyms: hypothesis, thesis, conjecture, supposition, speculation, postulation, postulate, proposition, premise, surmise, assumption, presupposition; More
a set of principles on which the practice of an activity is based.
"a theory of education"
an idea used to account for a situation or justify a course of action.
"my theory would be that the place has been seriously mismanaged"

It's the BEST us humans have NOW in understanding our environment.

Upon what basis do you assert that scientific societies, groups and associations consider science to be an institution? They can be described as institution, but that doesn't make science an institution. That you are not able to understand that (apparently) is not evidence that i have not made my objection to your tortured use of the English language evident.

It's a theory that fits with the evidence.

Note that some of the evidence came first, then a theory was postulated to explain the evidence.

Then people used the theory to make predictions.

So..you stayed at the Holiday Inn Express and that makes you an expert.

I'd have a lot more respect for your evidence if you published some papers rather than rant on a pissy Internet forum in the wrong topic. You seem somewhat apoplectic on this. Why won't you come clean and tell us what your bugbear is?

Anyway, here's some theoretical answers to your points.

Mass/energy and the Big Bang
http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/phy05/phy05329.htm
Boyle-Mariotte
See above

All the predictions were based on mathematics is a bad thing?
That cosmic background radiation was mathematically inferred before there
was a Big Bang theory, let alone a way to detect them seems pretty cool to me.