I don't have to claim that it doesn't exist, I can assume it doesn't since there is no proof for it. Likewise, I can assume there is no god that created the big bang since there is no proof of it. I can assume however, that there is a scientific explanation since it has shown to be an excellent method of explaining the world around us. This is a completely other matter than knowing what that explanation is. For example, the earths rotation around the sun. If we would have had this conversation a thousand years ago, I would claim that we can assume a scientific explanation for its rotation around the sun, even if I didnt know what that explanation is. There is no need for a hypothesis of a god in that case, since science has shown to be quite adequate.

You're trying to imply that science is opposed to God? Do you even know what science is? Science could very well prove the existence of God. You're only saying that you know there is a reason. What if God created it and it was simple as that? Science is knowing and proving something. If it can't be proved it is not science; therefore, there is no scientific explanation for the Big Bang. Also for the Sun example, you would have made a blind guess. One intellectual actually hypothesized this, but the SCIENTIFIC community ignored him because he had no proof.

Where did I write that science is opposed to the concept of a god? Btw, science is not knowing something, it is the constant search for knowledge, but you must always be prepared to question your own conclusions. And regarding the example with the heliocentric world view... well it was actually the church that opposed the geocentric world view, since it opposed their concept of God...

Some people has simply chosen not to believe in god cause the concept itself sounds ridiculous, why can't you guys deal with it? Why does everyone have to believe the exact same thing?

Hundreds of years ago, yes the church would be opposed to the idea. Thousands of years ago( that has to be at least 2000) people had no proof or even a reason to believe the earth traveled around the sun. The "church" back then did not really mean religion. It was honestly more of a way to control people. They came to illogical conclusions that can't be found anywhere in the Bible. I agree that science should search for knowledge,but science is really about proving things to be true. This can be and usually is a search for knowledge. According to that logic, the periodic table is not science because we already know about it, only the undiscovered elements are science.

I answered underlined question with underlined answer.

I don't think this was supposed to go to you. It was a reply to Puppyroach. I know the Big Bang has proof. I was talking about how it was created. There is no scientific evidence of how it happened. 

The last sentence he used the heliocentric model to say that if he thought this a thousand years ago, he would be right. I was just saying that it would have been a lucky guess.

Why can't there have been something before Time? How would we know? 

Humanity has created hundreds of religons too ... the "creator" of the Abrhamic "God" is likely the same creator of Zues and any number of other deities ... just some dude or a group of dudes. 

Can you see how annoying that answer is to someone scietifically minded though?  Basically everything has to follow logic except when it gets to a religious answer.  You follow the rules of logical debate right up until you can't without losing and then you simply define god in a way that "wins" you the argument.  It's like we're playing checkers and when I make my move you grab the gameboard, smash it on the table, and say god created the big bang.  

Truth is, scientist don't even know that the big bang happened.

It is just the best theory they have for the Orgin of our universe other than 'in the beginning God".

Some scientist even believe that before the big bang there was absolutely nothing, and that the big bang literally created everything (both matter, and all the laws of Physics and Time) from nothing.  The problem is that they don't really have that much proof for it other than that the galexys seem to be moving away from each other for some reason.

There are also many countless other problems with the theory such as how we got all of the elements on the periodic table from just hydrogen.  Some scientist have tried to say that fusion (happens in stars) can explain this, but the problem with that is you can't fuse new elements past Iron.

Another problem with is is that the big bang theory defys the law of entropy (2nd law of therodynamics) which states that the universe, and everything in it naturally tends towards chaos, and that order cannot arise on it's own from chaos unless thier is an inteligent system or creature to harnass that energy.  Raw energy alone (like with the big bang) can only destroy things (just like how the sun causes erosion, or the energy from an atomic bomb is destructive).  To have order, you need a organism/system such as a plant to harness the energy (like sunlight) and use it to create order.

Scientist are still unsure how an explosion that they think happened billions of years ago could have possibly created the immensely orderly systems such as solar systems and even galaxys that we see today.

I understand where religion came from though ...

People need to have an answer to where we came from, where our place in the universe is, and what happens after death.

We needed an answer and thousands of religions/folk stories over time filled the gap and brought great comfort to people.

I get it. There is a need for it.