An expanding singularity is just one out of many possible explanations for what was going on at the big bang. We still don't know if singularities even exist. But that's why such things are calles theories. For the big bang it doesn't matter so much. Technically it didn't evolve from a singularity, because a singularity would require the existance of something in some form. Some say the big bang formed out of vacuum fluctuations, which at first thought makes a lot of sense. Given an infinite amount if time, the probability for a whole universe developing out of nothing lies at 100 %. The only problem is that the big bang very likely cannot have appeared because of vacuum fluctuations, because you need space and time for that. For all we know, the existing of that stuff started right with the big bang. So there was no space where vacuum fluctuations could have happened. Not even a little. 

Of course there are other explanations. Some suggest that space and time are infinite and the big bang happens over and over. Some say there are multiverses and we are just one out of many. I personally like the idea of us living inside a black hole. For anyone inside a black hole, the forming of it would look pretty much like what we think of the big bang today. Inside a black hole you come to believe that this black hole is everything there is and there ever will be, as any form of information will never leave it and any form of information entering it will look like something appearing out of nowhere - like vacuum fluctuations for example. But of course that would open a whole lot of new quetions we can't probably ever answer.

It's fun to think about stuff like this. But yeah, science can't prove it and no one ever said that it could. That doesn't mean that we need other explanations from religion or something though. We just don't know what happened back then and have to deal with that. End of story.

Oh, and just a little fun fact: The big bang theory was first introduced by a catholic priest by the name of Georges Lemaître. Which really shows you that science and religion do not neccessarily exclude each other. Everyone is free in what he decides to believe in. Be it god or the flying spaghetti monster. I believe in the latter and I am looking forward to endless spaghetti goodness after I die. However, those things don't have a place in science. It's also pointless to try and compare the two. Religion and science are two completely different things. You can choose to take part in both, no problem, but you should not mix them up. Science does not even try to explain everything. It only solves one problem at a time. And for the most part, the solution to one problem brings up a bunch of new problems. But it's importan to be as objective as possible, as that's the only way we can ever describe what the hell is going on around us. For the most part we don't have a clue. Compared to the middle ages we seem so advanced and knowing. But in reality we know next to nothing about the universe we live in. So we and our children still have a lot to do in the future. But in the end, science showed itself as a very successful technique to understand the world around us. Without Einstein we wouldn't sit at our computers or smartphones right now and talk about that kind of stuff, as computers directly use the theory of relativity. And that's just one of many and very practical examples that show the advantages of science and why we should continue to follow that path.

At this point I don't even know where I'm going with this so I'll just stop. But I felt like writing down my thoughts and whatnot. So yeah. 

tl;dr: Believe what you will, but there is no place for believing in science. Complete objectivity is impossible of course, as Heinz von Förster once said: "Objectivity is the mad assumption that there can be an observation without an observer". But yeah, science is as close as it gets.

Like pointed out by numerous other posters here, with each post you prove to have a very flawed understanding of science. So either you are trolling, lying or your education has failed you greatly.

I have a masters degree in social psychology with a minor in sociology and philosophy.

An era of good morals and values? Which time are you talking about? I'm sure it was a time where racism, sexism, homophobia and transphobia were even worse than they are now. Of course, it's not really religion that is entirely to blame for that, but I think you're talking about some mythical age and time period.

"An expanding singularity is just one out of many possible explanations..."

yeah... which is my point, which is to say that its not something we have put together as concretely as other theories

why are people so offended about me saying that?

"Which really shows you that science and religion do not neccessarily exclude each other. "

i never made the claim that i thought this was the case

"You can choose to take part in both, no problem, but you should not mix them up."

the funny thing is that i'm edit:not religious and never have been

"For the most part we don't have a clue. Compared to the middle ages we seem so advanced and knowing. But in reality we know next to nothing about the universe we live in."

yeah this is pretty much what my overall point was

I don't know, but quite often people aren't so much offended by what someone says but how they say it. If you know what I mean.

"Like pointed out by numerous other posters here, with each post you prove to have a very flawed understanding of science. "

it helps when you don't strawman my posts lol

and hinging whether someone has done sciences or not entirely on whether they can properly define a couple words... lol that's the funniest shit i've heard for a while tbh

don't most people doubt whether sociology even is a science btw? i've heard people refer to it as a soft science

No, i'm the opposite of an idiot. I am not a grown man that believes in fairy tales and discriminates others based on it. I'm not the one seeing holy wars in movie characters due to who produces them.

Alot of people say that due to ignorance. The world is a better place to live than it was in the past.

Morals are not made by God. God is a story for fools. Morals were made by humans based on empathy because they increase your chances of survival and security. Morals have been changed by humans. The world is becoming a better place with less religion because people become more accepting and less murderous because they learn to value life.

Your own case is just made on "people say". See how much child death there was before, how much hunger there was in civilized countries last century compared to today. How the last century had 2 world wars and now we get alot less wars. Use facts to base your opinion on, not whatever nonsense you heard someone spew out. Think for yourself man. Get educated and think for yourself. Don't just believe what people are saying. Open a book aside from the bible and get born into reality.

Would you stop perpetuating this utter nonsense? People don't Kill 'in the name of atheism', it just doesn't happen (At least not to a level that's worth discussing; I'm sure it happens, but I'm also sure someone's been stabbed because they forgot to add the sixth chicken mcnugget). 

Religion is NOT the only source of morality, and if you genuinely think it is, then you are ignorant, dangerous, and oblivious to the world around you. That's just too inane to argue against, but put that argument to rest. IT doesn't hold any weight or water. 

No, most religions just teach fear. People living by those standards, like they are common in islam or christianity, avoid doing bad things because they are afraid of going to hell or not getting to paradise or just displeasing their god or something. I remember how I was scared shitless when my grandma told my 5-year old me what things happen to me if I am not a perfect person in the eyes of god. Thankfully I later found out that it's all bollocks. Something like that hasn't anything to do with morals. Morals have developed by evolution. A species that hasn't morals to a certain degree and just kills each other would not be able to survive very long so natural selection would take care of those. 

Of course there are some things you are not getting born with. But you do not need a god to explain to me that I shouldn't steal or something. Seriously that makes perfect sense to me without any god whatsoever.

The problem with people like you, is that you base religion or the concept of God based on what others say or do to you.have you ever read the bible or parts of it and thought for yourself what to interpret or what it means? You do realise you don't have to accept everything that was written, since there is so many books compressed into one. And i love how people have built up this idea of what God is due to what they percieve is in the bible. Sadly a alot of people are mislead into religion. They are shown fear, the wrath of hell if they sin etc etc. But the smart person can think for themselves and not let others dictate what their faith and interpretation should be. Like i said earlier there are around 1.3 billion catholics, just cathiolics, out of christians. So if the bible or the main message ( the gospel) were bad, i think this whole world would be at war or we'd be dead. Alot of people like you and the posts before you turn to religion when they see what it really is about, not what they perceive. And as a christian, i will also stick up for muslims and jews. All that terrorism crap isnt about religion, is all cause of political bullshit, fighting over land, oil, past conflicts. Look at china and the millions of muslims, not one word of crime and terror. So if you think the world would be better of think again. Long before these religions, tribes were fighting and conquering lands.