• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

What is your life based on?

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
Mate. Hoyles initial theory was that through gradational or if you like, gradual gathering of additional matter or accretion of nucleons was the process. He found that the beryllium and Helium fusion would only take place if a higher state of the carbon atom existed. That blew a lot of previous ideas in his face. But that was the initial finding of his.

You seem to have a lot of faith in something and you make theories into facts in your belief system. Then you are speaking of fusion being a cause and pressure and heat mass and stars having lots of it etc etc for which I dont understand why. Not necessary.
I'm not your mate. What you are describing is what Hoyle posited in the 1940s. Observations in the 1950s showed that Hoyle's steady-state universe could not be correct.

One of the great things about learning is that you can keep doing it! And if you do, you will also find that you may very well have to modify what you thought you learned before. And that is never going to stop -- except for religion, of course, because religions hold that their dogma is already perfect and complete. Religions don't like learning that changes what they thought they knew before.

And I most certainly did not state that fusion is a cause - I very clearly said that it was a process, the result (not cause) of heat and pressure, and that even heat and pressure are not in themselves causes, but effects of a concentration of mass due to the force of gravity, which tends to draw mass together, in a relationship directly proportional to those masses, and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
I'm not your mate.

Please complain to the Admins. ;)

And I most certainly did not state that fusion is a cause - I very clearly said that it was a process, the result (not cause) of heat and pressure, and that even heat and pressure are not in themselves causes, but effects of a concentration of mass due to the force of gravity, which tends to draw mass together, in a relationship directly proportional to those masses, and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them.

Now can you prove that Carbon was made in the stars is a fact? Try and prove the process as a fact.

Go ahead please.
 

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
Now can you prove that Carbon was made in the stars is a fact? Try and prove the process as a fact.

Go ahead please.
Why? You can't go to a library and find a physics text? There are no schools where you live? You don't know how to spell "g-o-o-g-l-e?"

I'm not your teacher -- do your own work.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
Why? You can't go to a library and find a physics text? There are no schools where you live? You don't know how to spell "g-o-o-g-l-e?"

I'm not your teacher -- do your own work.

Lol. You should know that science itself does not work for facts. So googling, schooling, libraries, physics texts, all teach you that you are fundamentally flawed.

Also, I have given you specific information just for YOU to do some of that reading.

Ciao.
 

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
Lol. You should know that science itself does not work for facts. So googling, schooling, libraries, physics texts, all teach you that you are fundamentally flawed.

Also, I have given you specific information just for YOU to do some of that reading.

Ciao.
Oh, no. For facts, you need things like flying horses and jinn. :p
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
Oh, no. For facts, you need things like flying horses and jinn. :p

Ah. When you are errors in your own religion, do a tu quoque as a tactic. A lot of dogmatic missionaries are like that. ;) Lovely. You should read up on your own dogmas and your tactics. Its better to be more aware of your own. Then your preaching will seem a little better.
 
Top