A dog has consciousness. Man is unique in having a volitional consciousness that can create and manipulate concepts.

If the Objectivist position is that there is no non-existence, then the Objectivist position is that the Big Bang Theory is wrong. As Peikoff stated, philosophy has veto power over scientific theories.

After Atlas Shrugged, Rand spent her whole life creating definitive Objectivist non-fiction, and so did Peikoff.

Science is a methodology. Observation leads to a hypothesis which is then tested for consistency.

There is no definitive Objectivist scripture or book of doctrines I am aware of, but Rand believed that reason was the route to all knowlege and everyone should figure out things for themself. That is the scientific method.

The real big bang is the mind's awakening to consciousness. Rand believed reality is what we perceive through our senses.

Ipso facto, regardless of big bang theories, your existence begins with you.

Cheers.

Yes, but you asked if there is an objectivist position, so for the sake of clarity I explicitly stated that objectivism doesn't answer science questions.

"In all seriousness, that is a science question." ? You realize I posted on the SCIENCE category, right?

The Big Bang Theory is an awesome show. That's the Objectivist position.

In all seriousness, that is a science question. Objectivism is a philosophy. Philosophically though, it is impossible for there to be no existence.