| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Pahu" |
| Date: |
03 Jul 2007 05:23:52 PM |
| Object: |
Science Disproves Evolution |
Big Bang?
"We know little about that sea. The terms we use to describe its
components, 'dark matter' and 'dark energy,' serve mainly as
expressions of our ignorance." David B. Cline, "The Search for Dark
Matter," Scientific American, Vol. 288, March 2003, p. 52.
"It's clear to most people that you can't be older than your mother.
Astronomers understand this, too, which is why they're so
uncomfortable these days. The oldest stars in globular clusters seem
to date back 15 billion years. The universe appears to be only 9
billion to 12 billion years old. At least one of those conclusions is
wrong." William J. Cook, "How Old Is the Universe?" U.S. News & World
Report, 18-25 August 1997, p. 34.
"I have little hesitation in saying that a sickly pall now hangs over
the big-bang theory. When a pattern of facts becomes set against a
theory, experience shows that the theory rarely recovers." Fred Hoyle,
"The Big Bang Under Attack," Science Digest, May 1984, p. 84.
For decades, big bang theorists said that the amount of mass in the
universe must be enough to prevent all matter from flying apart,
otherwise stars and galaxies could not form. Estimates of the
universe's actual mass always fell far short of that minimum amount.
The "missing mass" is often called "dark matter," because no one could
see it or even detect it. Actually, something had to be "created" to
preserve the big bang theory. The media's constant reference to "dark
matter" enshrined it in public consciousness, much like the supposed
"missing link" between apes and man.
The big bang has struck again. The big bang theory also predicts that
the universe's expansion must be slowing, just as a ball thrown up
must slow as it moves away from the Earth. For decades, cosmologists
have tried to measure this deceleration. The shocking result is now in-
and the answer has been checked and rechecked in many ways. The
universe's expansion is not decelerating; it is accelerating!i To
preserve the theory something must again be invented. Some energy
source that overcomes gravity must continuously push stars and
galaxies away from the center of the universe. This energy, naturally
enough, is called "dark energy."
Neither "dark matter" (created to hold the universe together) nor
"dark energy" (created to push the universe apart) can be seen,
measured, or tested. Each is imagined to preserve the big bang
theory.
Rather than cluttering textbooks and the public's imagination with
statements about things that don't exist, wouldn't it be better to
admit that the big bang is a faulty theory? Of course. But big bang
theorists want to avoid something even worse than damaging their
reputations and careers. If the big bang is discarded, only one
credible explanation remains for the creation of the universe and
everything in it. That thought sends shudders down the spines of many
evolutionists.
Theories for the Evolution of the Solar System and Universe Are
Unscientific and Hopelessly Inadequate.
http://www.creationscience.com/
.
|
|
| User: "johac" |
|
| Title: Re: Science Disproves Evolution |
04 Jul 2007 11:35:17 PM |
|
|
In article <1183501432.553798.262010@n60g2000hse.googlegroups.com>,
Pahu <pahu70@yahoo.com> wrote:
Big Bang?
Has nothing to do with evolution.
--
John #1782
"We should always be disposed to believe that which appears to us to be
white is really black, if the hierarchy of the church so decides."
- Saint Ignatius Loyola (1491-1556) Founder of the Jesuit Order.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Carl Wilson" |
|
| Title: Re: Science Disproves Evolution |
10 Jul 2007 10:25:07 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 03 Jul 2007 15:23:52 -0700, Pahu <pahu70@yahoo.com> wrote the
following in alt.atheism:
Big Bang?
Which has nothing to do with evolution.
PS: If you want to get your views across, do it from a position of
knowledge, not total ignorance.
Just a helpful hint...
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Don Martin" |
|
| Title: Re: Science Disproves Evolution |
03 Jul 2007 06:44:39 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 03 Jul 2007 15:23:52 -0700, Pahu <pahu70@yahoo.com> wrote:
Theories for the Evolution of the Solar System and Universe Are
Unscientific and Hopelessly Inadequate.
People who post this sort of ***** on a public echo are too fucking
ignorant to be capable of correction. They would do better to return
to thumping their Bibles, as thumping involves neither reading nor
comprehension of the bloody things.
Through a jaundiced eye darkly--rheum with a view.
The Squeeky Wheel
http://home.comcast.net/~drdonmartin/
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michelle Malkin" |
|
| Title: Re: Science Disproves Evolution |
04 Jul 2007 05:55:59 AM |
|
|
"Don Martin" <drdonmartin@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:8lnl831i1gpk1ftr0t3acj08em5fj62smv@4ax.com...
On Tue, 03 Jul 2007 15:23:52 -0700, Pahu <pahu70@yahoo.com> wrote:
Theories for the Evolution of the Solar System and Universe Are
Unscientific and Hopelessly Inadequate.
People who post this sort of ***** on a public echo are too fucking
ignorant to be capable of correction. They would do better to return
to thumping their Bibles, as thumping involves neither reading nor
comprehension of the bloody things.
I just plonked Wolfie and left him standing in the
water of his ignorance.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Don Martin" |
|
| Title: Re: Science Disproves Evolution |
04 Jul 2007 08:37:43 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 4 Jul 2007 06:55:59 -0400, "Michelle Malkin"
<hypatiab7@comcast.net> wrote:
"Don Martin" <drdonmartin@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:8lnl831i1gpk1ftr0t3acj08em5fj62smv@4ax.com...
On Tue, 03 Jul 2007 15:23:52 -0700, Pahu <pahu70@yahoo.com> wrote:
Theories for the Evolution of the Solar System and Universe Are
Unscientific and Hopelessly Inadequate.
People who post this sort of ***** on a public echo are too fucking
ignorant to be capable of correction. They would do better to return
to thumping their Bibles, as thumping involves neither reading nor
comprehension of the bloody things.
I just plonked Wolfie and left him standing in the
water of his ignorance.
That fluid smells stronger than water.
..
Through a jaundiced eye darkly--rheum with a view.
The Squeeky Wheel
http://home.comcast.net/~drdonmartin/
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Science Disproves Evolution |
03 Jul 2007 08:26:32 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 03 Jul 2007 15:23:52 -0700, Pahu wrote:
Big Bang?
Is not evolution.
--
Mark K. Bilbo a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
------------------------------------------------------------
"You believe in a book that has talking animals, wizards,
witches, demons, sticks turning into snakes, food falling
from the sky, people walking on water, and all sorts of magical,
absurd and primitive stories, and you say that *we* are the
ones that need help?" - Jon Stoll
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Thurisaz, Germanic barbarian" |
|
| Title: Re: Science Disproves Evolution |
03 Jul 2007 10:19:33 PM |
|
|
Pahu:
Big Bang?
Braindead?
Of course we all know the answer already... it's "***** yeah!".
--
"To his friend a man a friend shall prove, and gifts with gifts requite;
But men shall mocking with mockery answer, and fraud with falsehood meet."
(The Poetic Edda)
Must have been written with fundies in mind...
My personal judgment of monotheism:
http://www.carcosa.de/nojebus
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
