leov
Well-Known Member
Ex nihilo does not mean nothing, but nothing material, visible, what about energy?
Last edited:
-
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!
Big Bang: Whodunit?
- Thread starter usfan
- Start date
usfan
Well-Known Member
Ah, so very similar to the forced Indoctrination from State Mandated institutions.. who fund THEIR religious beliefs through forced taxation, and present common ancestry as 'settled science!', through constant propaganda, until all nod like bobbleheads.
ImmortalFlame
Woke gremlin
The studies are detailed in the paper referenced by your link from 2013:
NINE-YEAR WILKINSON MICROWAVE ANISOTROPY PROBE (WMAP) OBSERVATIONS: FINAL MAPS AND RESULTS - IOPscience
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
Terry Sampson, I counted 5 things in this paragraph which will be disputed by science.
ImmortalFlame
Woke gremlin
The difference being that things like common ancestry are supported by the evidence, and a proper science education leads people to understand this and understand why.
Terry Sampson
Well-Known Member
Excuse me? It's been about 40 years but I was a Latin major for about 2.5 year at San Francisco State University, ... and a pretty good one, I might add. ex nihilo nihil fit. Out of nothing, nothing is made. Ex nihilo means nothing, nada, zip.... unless and until folks start taking a saw and a hammer to it. Then it can mean anything you want it to mean. BTW: "energy" is "something" for reasonable folks.
Terry Sampson
Well-Known Member
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
Why? I think 'void' has nothing to stop light with? You mean there is no ether?
leov
Well-Known Member
Did ancients have notion of energy ?
"It followed from the special theory of relativity that mass and energy are both but different manifestations of the same thing..." Einstein
Last edited:
Who or what is not required
And the mechanism you describe shows a complete lack of understanding
Depends who is speaking, a creation event is simply the process of something coming into existence, but some few people claim it as god magic. This bastardising of a word causes confusion
Light does not appear to us, the frequency of light it far to high to be seen with anything as slow as the eye. What we see is the effects light has on matter. It does not matter where those effects are, so long as the matter is not receding faster than the speed of light, they will be visible at some time.
Here is more recent authoritative work, published yesterday
Putting the ‘bang’ in Big Bang | EarthSky.org
It gets far closer to the event than the CMB
ratiocinator
Lightly seared on the reality grill.
That's nice for you but are you actually trying to claim the evidence doesn't exist or, for that matter, that the GPS system doesn't use both special and general relativity?
Go right ahead...
Well, perhaps not that similar, since taxes are also used for essential public services. But at least the people have a say in deciding how their money is spent, so it's not as if we're living under a dictatorship.
It's certainly not "forced indoctrination." No one is forced to believe it. It's not like religion where they burn heretics at the stake.
In the context of government funding of science, I suppose a case could be made regarding priorities. Someone might ask "Why are we spending money trying to find out the secrets of the Big Bang, when there are starving millions to feed, and a cure for cancer that has yet to be discovered?"
Those are legitimate political questions that society will have to figure out, but it doesn't require indoctrination or propaganda. It requires clear, rational thinking.
I'm quite comfortable with both SR and GR. Let's see what you got.
Howard Is
Lucky Mud
Hang on while I get the popcorn !
usfan
Well-Known Member
No. Common ancestry is a belief, with no empirical evidence. It is pounded as an Indoctrination meme, so people THINK there is, 'all this evidence!', but if pressed to present it, they can't do it.
Most of what you call, 'proper science education!', is just memorized dogma.. belief presented as fact, to gullible indoctrinees.
That is why many modern graduates from our illustrious Indoctrination institutions, cannot read, spell, balance checkbooks, or critically think at all, but can dutifully spout all the tenets of good progressive Indoctrination.. global warming, common descent, choose your biological identity, the Glories of socialism, and a few other crucial tenets of the progressive faith.. those are memorized dogma, but the critical thinking skills needed for actual INQUIRY, are not there.
Skepticism has no place, in Progresso World.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
in the sciences it is the testing of a model that needs to be repeatable, not the event itself.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Now you have confirmed that you do not understand the concept of evidence. Empirical evidence is evidence that can be seen or measured. For the amateur fossils are the easiest things to see. We can see and touch fossils. That makes them empirical evidence. They support the theory of evolution therefore they are empirical evidence for the theory of evolution.
usfan
Well-Known Member
Great! But it does not answer the question:
How did the universe expand trillions-fold, in trillionths of a second? This violates all laws of physics. There is no mechanism that can account for this conjecture.
And if it did suddenly expand in such a short time, how can you extrapolate back, via some calculated expansion rate, that IS based on uniformity and laws of physics, and arrive at an age of the universe? Would not the phenomena of instantaneous expansion nullify the assumptions of uniformity?