Jesus

Discussion in 'Religion' started by davewhite04, May 5, 2019.

  1. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,502
    And what is so crazy about humans...each Sunday in stead of a religious service put on a science lesson supported with experimental demonstrations and examples how the principle being demonstrated plays out in application to the benefit of humans...you can bet due to the initial brainwashing most all are subjected to..that they will not attend...but imagine if there was no brain washing...I expect attendances would be high.

    I know Sunday services are about cheering folk up...I know what that is like as I have listened to sales motivation tapes..just crap telling you will sucess, you are great...whatever...so give these folk sales training tapes and tell them motivation is now in their hands.

    Alex
    Time for another flood.
    Alex
     
    Truck Captain Stumpy likes this.
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Jeeves Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,089
    You are correct. We're working on it.
    Feet. Run for the hills!
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Truck Captain Stumpy The Right Honourable Reverend Truck Captain Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,263
    well, Georges Henri Joseph Édouard Lemaître may have been a Jesuit, but the BB was suggested because "If the observed conditions are extrapolated backwards in time using the known laws of physics" (wiki) then we get to a point of high density. I don't think it was a matter of preconceived notions leading to a solution so much as it was a solution that religious leaders grabbed hold of and ran with. (Big Band was originally a term used to denigrate the "hypothesis of the primeval atom". One of the things I like about the BB when it was hypothesized was that they took the time to give methods to test it, like CMBR
    to me this demonstrated that LeMaitre was indeed a practitioner of the Scientific principles and applied them rather than assume diety control. He may well have been religious but the BB is actually a decent example of science following the evidence, IMHO.


    this I can wholeheartedly agree with ... but in all honesty, I don't think it will cure us of "religion" any more than it will cure us of the need to believe in anything sans evidence.
    A story I heard brings light to the problem, IMHO:
    Two humans were walking on the savannah one day. They each observed some grass moving in the distance. The first wondered what made the grass move and checked the wind, tested the theory by approaching the moving grass and sought answers. The second human was more paranoid and ran for cover believing the movement was a potential threat, like a predator.
    We are the descendents of the second human.

    this is likely told far better by the original source, but I can't remember who said it. It may well have been Dr. Neil deGrasse Tyson, but I can't find any reference for it and I'm tired... meh


    yeah... but these are artefacts of religion, not the faith. (using my definitions, that is)
    the faith isn't a bad thing as I honestly believe it's what makes humans so creative, tapping into untested or unknown areas so we can do things with our tools that we originally didn't think of when they were formed. Sure there are negatives (using a stick as a war club against other people, for instance) but there are positives that also apply (using the same analogy: the stick/war club protected the humans from dangerous predators). What was the original use of the stick, one wonders? We see ape's using a stick to eat (linked) so the creative mind used it for war as well (sound familiar?).

    we need the ability to dream or believe in something, even if it's not true, IMHO. We do it a lot daily with self-deception and denial, which is a part of what makes a faith real to a person. I believe, IMHO, that these human frailties are what create the leaps of intuition, logic and new ideas, so taking them away may stagnate the species into oblivion much like the current state of affairs of threatened or endangered animals who can't adapt fast enough to current global conditions, predation, habitat loss, etc.

    I'm honestly not sure we have "plenty of evidence" for any of the outlandish claims from the bible. They only evidence the bible actually supports is the "begatting" (and possibly some of the historical cities, nations, etc).
    Of course, I don't know if you were being sarcastic either, so I answered ... personally, I think the typical jesus sects are selective in their adherence to the bible. but then again, all religions go through the same BS fractioning into sects of selective adherence.


    you're welcome.
    I think it offers much as it provides a window into your psyche allowing people to comprehend your position as well as justifications for specifics.

    personally, I hate religion (as I have defined it). its one reason I sought ordination. It shows the completely arbitrary logical applied to nonsensical situations in order to assert leadership and authority over a mass group for the purpose of control.

    I did it so I can have a private jet, air conditioned dog house for my seeing-eye dog (I only need her for driving or reading) and all the hot women who love rich, fat, lazy men [satirical hyperbole - just in case certain people who shall remain unnamed, read it]
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,502
    So they say but I have not tried to do that but I do wonder where you would start..where do we conduct this extrapolation?.outter edge?.one asks where is the edge?...reply...there is none...ok let's extrapolate backwards from there.

    I would like to go over the detail. Did someone do the sums or is it a mere statement that seems reasonable and folk nod and accept the proposition with nothing coming in support... And there seems no consensus as to the universe being finite or infinite so no doubt my ignorance is causing my disbelief..which one do we extrapolate?. Also the adding, when under the threat the theory would be rejected, of inflation leaves me feeling uncomfortable as really that aspect seems like patching a tire that should be replaced. The sums work but what evidence is offered that the sums reflect reality...can inflation be falsified?
    For me ,perhaps everyone, the question always is "is what I am reading the truth?"..I have read that the notion of the cosmic egg was a subject of discussion in the church for some twenty years prior to any formalisation...if true how does one interpreted that...and as we know few ideas are original...the cosmic egg idea was the cosmology of many cultures (interesting subject) and one could view the Bible as embracing the idea when referencing the firmament above and below...so I am the first to admit that I really don't know what conversations took place after dinner between the priests ...I must add...wondering if what you read is true...something I read told that old mate was very happy his idea matched the church account ... In private conversations with fellow priests...and if true I guess there are various interpretations that could be put upon it.

    But for me I just don't believe that all there is can be made fit in a shoe box..I don't care what the sums say... I really think folk do not stop and think about such a proposition. I can't imagine the Earth alone fitting into a shoe box, ...so when I think about fitting our galaxy in and just those in the local group I can do no more than say to myself "there is no way that can happen"... I mean take one galaxy.. ours..100 to 300 billion Sun's and countless planets I expect...how can anyone conceive that all that could fit in a shoe box...does anyone think about it or do they just parrot what they are told...now the observable universe (and there is presumably much more outside that) is some 90 billion light years diameter and contains billions of galaxies ...so many my brain really can not comprehend the magnitude...and we are told that all of it at some point would fit in a shoe box...no way...unless god did it...and is that not the conclusion even a rational non believer is forced to live with. And how nice...science offers no cause for the start and humbly points out it deals only with the evolution of the universe...that is so much like intelligent designers saying they can only point to a designer but it would be unscientific of them to declare who the designer may be...
    Oh but it is established science...mmm no it is cosmology that uses science to support its cosmology.
    Get a shoe box, sit with it, and imagine the Sun fitting in it...continue until you extrapolate the whole observable universe in there...
    If you are trained as a scientist it would not make much sense to argue your case as a priest. I think there is a decent case to suggest the cosmology came first and the science employed in support.
    I may be old fashion but I believe one should make observations first then work up a hypothesis to explain the observations rather than making up the hypothesis then digging up observations in support. Even now observations are made with the expectation they will support the theory...I could be wrong but that is my impression...wait me wrong? sorry I am being too humble ..of course I can't be wrong.
    Moreover I think extrapolation is dangerous..an alien observed the rate of growth for a human from five year to fifteen years and is then able to extrapolate that humans must grow to 40 feet in their life time.
    I regard myself as "cured".
    I always had a tendency to question things as it seems most humans do...I think many folk pay religion lip service and don't believe any of it...they are in it for the various benefits and absolute truth is really not high on their list I guess.
    I am from both.
    I don't believe such.
    I am considered over the top creative by anyone who knows me, hyper active, I draw, paint, play my own tunes, and invent something each week .....and yet I am bone headed practical...I just think about stuff..get an idea and draw it and build it..see a problem and build something to manage the problem..I don't see the faith aspect...Unless it is the belief that I can do whatever I decide to do.
    I think always being alone causes creativity...if not to include stuff in your life to at least setting up to never be bored.
    The evidence to which I refer is that evidence pointing out that JC was a knock off, following many before him who drew upon astrology for their story. You must know of the long list of human gods..each with more or less characteristics found with the Sun...12 followers a parallel to the 12 constalations of the zodiac, death and resurrection after three days paralleling the Sun's behaviour mid winter ...it is interesting history.... it does not take much to find the many other JC types or to work out the astrology relationship as there is plenty of evidence...I don't think there is any evidence in the Bible of anything really...and I have read it cover to cover thinking hard about each line I read...it gets to me that ..well it seems this way and I recognise I generalise...believers do not read all their Bible...preachers are so extrodinarily selective...if you put together just the parts preachers use and compared it to an unedited version...miles apart. Folk get tied up with the scholarship of the Bible but such is irrelevant when you step outside the time frame and include all histories rather than confine things to biblical events...further that allows one to realise much of the Bible came from other places a reasonable indication that inspiration came from earlier cultures rather than Devine inspiration. The flood is not original nor is the garden or Adam etc...

    And you could think we could expect just something a bit more special for the book that is the key stone of all this religious stuff....you know something Devine and free of error and credible in its entirety.
    Alex
    I am confused ...perhaps you can explain this ..fact or joke?

    Again thanks for the chat.
    Have a great day.
    Alex
     
  8. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,502
    Irony..or BS...one of the champions of climate change out here (some time ago now) purchased a nice little place on the water front...I guess he was planning short term and not worried about the money he would lose as the water invaded his house.
    But his purchase was absolutely inconsistent with everything I have ever heard him say.
    My impression is he really does not believe what he points out as the future...maybe he is convinced humans will curb their consumption etc and his house will be safe from any rise in sea level...but you see things like that, and Al Gores energy approach at home and you really wonder...
    I guess my point is who can you believe..I trust no one..not even myself..heck just think of the lies you tell yourself in order to justify buying a new car..a new anything really.
    Alex
     
  9. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,502
    And for those thinking of taking me out save yourself the worry I am just an old man dieing slowly with too much information to process.
    Alex
     
  10. Jeeves Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,089
    I have a short list - tested and proved over time.
    Everybody needs such a list, because you simply cannot cope with life without some interdependence and some reliable sources of practical information.
     
  11. Truck Captain Stumpy The Right Honourable Reverend Truck Captain Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,263
    https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aso/databank/entries/dp27bi.html
    well, TBH, I am always this way, especially with anything on the internet or any media outlet, especially since I've seen how popular a lie can become (the 1976 New York magazine article by British writer Nik Cohn, "Tribal Rites of the New Saturday Night" comes to mind here).

    some simple steps that can be adapted to just about anything:
    1- validate that it is a legitimate statement by checking the source (I was recently banned from farcebook because I reported a CBS ad that published blatantly false claims that were literally proven false by its own cited source)
    2- check to see if any other sources report the same thing.
    3- check all sources to see if it's different sources or the same source (47 reports of [x] that all come from a singular source, like AP, isn't the same thing as 47 separate sources)
    4- Hierarchy of evidence: how reliable are the sources?
    5- is there validation?
    remember: it's OK to not know. A singular study is a point of interest, not gospel truth. It has a higher ranking compared to, say, eye-witness testimony, but until it's validated, it's just interesting. that's it, IMHO

    You can have sources that you consider reliable, but the best thing to do for anything is to stick to the Investigators mantra: check everything. then check it again.

    there will always be someone who is happy that [x] was found because it matches their faith. this reminds me of an article I once read
    from: The ironclad logic of conspiracy theories and how to break it
    by Peter Ellerton, The Conversation

    erm... cosmology is science.
    The problem most people have is that they can't be specialists in every field. This lends to the ignorance people have on subjects because they can't know if [x] is legitimately scientific or it's crap (like the pseudoscience belief of the electric universe). The best thing to do is to get enough of an education to differentiate between crap and science. you can start that here for free: https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/find-by-topic/


    then learn how to research information. more importantly, learn how to research source material and interpret it when it's too technical. more often than not, you can contact the authors listed in a study and get a breakdown as they're more than happy to explain it to people (at least, I've never once had a problem. I've only ever had two people not reply to my request for clarification, and both of those were because of classified information).

    he absolutely was a knock off, and many "gods" before him died and were ressurected - Krishna and Horus come to mind here

    yup.
    and your self-assurance

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    well... it is a fact that I am ordained. it is with the church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, and it is literally a huge joke and a point made about the farcical nature of ordination in general as it's just an arbitrary selection of elevation for the purpose of nonsensical delusional prostylization. The elite of any random delusional religious system are still just a bunch of nutters, eh?
     
  12. Truck Captain Stumpy The Right Honourable Reverend Truck Captain Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,263
    to piggyback on this:
    sources for scientific information should be peer-reviewed journals that have an impact in the subject matter. Don't expect groundbreaking psychology or medicine in an engineering journal.
    for everything else: determine if it's subjective material. if it is, what is the perspective of the topic (political, social, cultural, etc). determine if you care enough to consider the implications of the material.
    if it's not subjective material then relegate it to it's field and find the primary sources for information in that field. eg: Blacks Law dictionary is used by England and the US, as well as a few other countries, so it's a good source for legal definitions and explanations of what those definitions mean.

    lastly: when it's political, find the source first, then determine if the interpretation is legitimate. you can look up most nations laws in various places.
    for instance, in the US you can look up federal laws in congress (House or Senate will publish laws that are being reviewed, etc), at https://www.ecfr.gov/, https://www.law.cornell.edu , https://www.govtrack.us/ or at the specific site where a law applies- the FDA will explain some of the code and link its source. State laws are similar.
     
  13. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,502
    What way?
    Thanks for the link. I have read more extensively but say that is a neat summary for the many out there.

    What I was asking was how the extrapolation worked..as I said from the non existent edge? Or is this one of those statements all nod and never ask for specifics...I have never seen any..doesn't mean they are not there but only that I have never found the extrapolation specifics.
    Is there any?
    Great method..but you left out something important I feel...that is how do you feel about the current best supported proposition...have you tried my shoe box suggestion yet? Honestly look at the box and look and think what is out there and ask ...could it all fit in this?
    That publication is part of the conspiracy to marginalised folk who seek the truth.
    That feeling special could apply to folk..I don't know..but not to me..I spent my life at the top of the pile..I was the special one..any problems ask me..I was it..I had no one to ask..I got very sick of being special..so please understand my dislike of the big bang is not founded in such crap..I think my reasoning is ok and certainly don't care if I am ignored..I would rather that..certainly don't want to have a mic in my face explains to the world why current cosmology is wrong...I don't care you see..not in the least..I don't accept that everything could fit in a shoe box and given the lies those above give to those below see now reason to think the idea was invented for reasons of philosophy..if not I am wrong...that would be novel and enjoyable..being wrong was I luxury I could never afford.
    I disagree.
    The idea came first..the suggested cosmology..and then..and only then was science employed.
    That in my view is not science..then there still remains the question of falsibility..can the big bang be falsified? That determines what is science and what is not...nothing more I think.
    Look it's a great theory and certainly is a little better than some entity comes out of eternity to make it all for humans his look alike pets...not much better in my view for the reasons I laid out. I can't get past the shoe box..and I know pressure temperature and all that..sums..but my shoe box makes more sense..to me
    Sure...just because I project a casual persona (it's who I could never be once) dont think that I have not read a great deal on all this..I can't do the maths sure..but I assume all the math is correct in what it says so the math is not a problem...I know that the math supports an inflation epoc, I know the math can take us almost back to a singularity..well sortta no..thats really saying that we accept at this boundary the math appears not to work..so inflation..there are no observations in support so far...and the closest observation is background radiation...years after so I expect although it fits the theory there may well be another theory, in the past, present or future that has its take on the background radiation...could you fit just that radiation into a shoe box? Maybe it would be pretty bright. I understand the math says at high temp and pressure it can all fit in the shoe box..maybe extrapolating too far is my point.
    And humility, and patience and recognition that humans can do most anything if they just try and are not put off by all those around saying that won't work..or more particularly..that is our best current idea you are are just a mug and could not be right... Maybe thats faith? ..no it's confidence. Confidence usually relies on building on past personal experience ..I don't think of faith that way.
    Why is it that so few know this...why does the church exist when the lie is so obvious?
    I am still curious...you have actually been involved in such a ceremony..I have heard about it and understand the idea..but did you take it that far?
    When I hear Blacks Law Dictionary I cringe because the only time I have heard of it (unless I had a copy that I never used in my law library) is when sovereign citizens cite it as law..it is not..you do not get law from a dictionary or a cook book even..From all I have heard it seems useless...You don't get up in court and say to the beak..the law is clear look on page X in the law dictionary...it don't work like that...in any event I was in the game for a long time and never used or saw any other lawyer use one...law goes on what the statute says, ( ever rarely if ever law does common law figure in the game), and how previous cases have interpreted the statue or applied penalties.
    Please tell me you are not taken in by the sovereign citizens crap...it is nonsense and I can prove that in a blink.
    If you don't have a shoe box you can use any box...as big as you can manage
    Alex
     
  14. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,502
    I have never had anyone except my father..in a legal office you can never appear to know less than the others...even the boss..he has you there to do what he can't do...thinking about all this helps me understand why I am the way I am...I had to always be right, be strong and be tuff..but that was everyone's lot in the office..I mean people come to you because you know everything..thats thy they pay you.
    Alex
     
  15. Jeeves Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,089
    Forgive me if I pull a Rainbow stunt here: time is precious
    That is invariably the case and unavoidable. People had ideas about things for some 50,000 years before they invented science. Only then could they begin to apply scientific methodology to all the guesses, conjectures, theories, hypotheses, assumptions and assertions they had accumulated over prehistory. That doesn't men nobody knew anything about the world before 500BC or that peoples who had no concept of science didn't apply scientific principles to their exploration of it.
    In a legal office, nobody is likely to expect reliable information about powdery mildew or fabric glue or toddler's tantrums or tractor engines or the atmosphere of Venus.
    In real life, nobody can - or needs to - know everything about everything all the time.
    And normal people have a limited range of interests as well as limited time to spend on fact-checking. Mostly, they don't look for verification, and mostly they don't need to.
    Did the nail fungus clear up? No. Try the next cure.
    Did the stain come out? Yep. OK, that's the detergent we'll use.
    How'd you get the lawnmower working? I gave it a kick. Aha! That's the answer!
    Unfortunately, we tend to apply the same hit-and-miss methodology to matters beyond our sphere of influence.
    Does anything he said make sense to you? Nope, it sounds like gibberish. He must be real smart! That's what he says. Does he have a face that invites lemon meringue? Oh, yeah! Let's elect him. What's the worst that could happen?
     
  16. Truck Captain Stumpy The Right Honourable Reverend Truck Captain Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,263
    I thought some were linked in the wiki article, but I'll have to check back.
    I don't usually let my feelings enter into it when I'm trying to determine what is factual and what isn't - it's just not relevant.
    I've not tried the shoe box suggestion.
    depends on how much space you remove and if there is a state of matter (or reality?) that is different once compression of subatomic particles reaches a certain point. Can you imagine a teaspoon full of matter weighing tons? as a generic example: taking a neutron star into consideration, do a back of the envelope calculation on it's compressed matter. We can measure the mass of a neutron, which is 1.674 927 498 04(95) x 10-27 kg - https://physics.nist.gov/cgi-bin/cuu/Value?mn|search_for=neuton mass
    and you can roughly determine how many would fit in a level teaspoon, so you can make a rough estimate as to the weight of the volume of a teaspoon without space between the neutrons, and that is the weight of a volume of a neutron star.
    If you're unsure as to why the measurements are what they are, you can follow the experiments that determined the information and try them yourself. if you consistently do exactly the same experiment and get different results, it's something to consider (assuming you didn't make mistakes, etc)

    not really. the publication part will take any study as long as it meets the scientific principles and passes peer review.
    you keep using the shoe box analogy but I don't think you understand the physics of a black hole. hit up this site: https://www.universetoday.com/33697/physics/

    they have black hole articles, videos and you can ask questions. Also, if you're interested, you can hit up some of the scientists that help the site, like Dr. Pam, Dr. Matt or Dr. Kimberly. they'll be able to either explain it or point you to a source of information that you can use.


    Cosmology is a branch of astronomy concerned with the studies of the origin and evolution of the universe (wiki). if you want to make a point of origins, then technically speaking, all of science was just an idea (and controlled by religion at one point) and it was millennia before "science" was employed, and by science I mean the current scientific principles of evidentiary support and validation.

    there are probably hundreds, if not thousands. but testing the known has narrowed the field.

    so few know it because so few choose to find answers. they want a short, pat, twitter styled blurb so they can concentrate on what is important to them.
    the church exists because people selectively choose to ignore the lie - then use that information to show the attack on the church vindicating their conspiracist ideation, which then leads to refusal to accept negative information in any form against the church (like paedophile preists).

    I'm the same way with pizza - is there really a bad pizza?
    did I take it that far? as in: actually becoming ordained? yes
    why? as an intentional poke in the snoot to the religious

    LMFAO
    it's not law, it just defines legal terms. the idiot "sovereign" movement saying it's law would be like saying the OED is Britian. it's nonsensical.
    no. it's useful as a dictionary of legal terms. for instance: dangerous weapon
    https://thelawdictionary.org/dangerous-weapon/

    Personally, I agree with you on this, but there are people on this site who would tell you this is not true. even when something is explicitly stated as being illegal, it's legal according to them because some people have gotten away with it.
    I think they're idiots. but they are good for a laugh when body cam and other video evidence of their stupidity hits the web.





     
  17. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,502
    I understand a neutron star.
    I understand how the physics can lead to the hot dense state.
    There are no experiments that I know of that produces conditions at the big bang...I could be wrong.
    Neutron stars are observed but conditions as suggested at the big bang are not...as far as I know the first observation we can call upon is the CBR.
    So let's take all the neutron stars in the observable universe...how many can you fit in a shoe box?
    I think I do. The reality is we have a construct built from math that suggests there is no physicality past the event horizon which is accepted as absolutely correct yet as we know observation is limited to the event horizon...no one knows what is below the event horizon via observation...that is impossible...but I very much doubt the theoretical model will match reality... heck you could find a sphere of matter half the diameter for example...even the andmath by use of the term singularity recognises that at a point they must have gone too far.... I know how folk point to the math but without observation in support we really don't know. Obviously the concept is critical for the theory as is inflation but we have no observation to tell us exactly what is there.
    Anyways it can only ever be a matter of opinion irrespective of the math etc as we can not observe past the CBR. It fits the theory I know that...I simply express my opinion, I don't need to be right...I simply do not buy it...
    Thanks for the chat.
    Probably won't be around for a while I have so much to do I can't see setting aside the time...as you can tell with these posts they are very rushed.
    Alex
     
  18. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,502
    I should be doing important things..unpack the car, install an air conditioner in the van, set up the astro imaging rigs...but after yesterday's long dive it all seems too much...and how can I work with crazy thoughts running around in my head...well get them out is the answer...my crazy thoughts today are....
    Why do folk believe in Jesus when logic and historical facts strongly suggest they can only be mistaken...why do they focus on the aspects of the presentation that supports the myth?
    I conclude they believe for no other reason than they want to believe, they believe because the story, for whatever reason, appeals to them. They do not want to take into account the link between Sun worship and the myth, they do not want to take into account the link to astrology, they do not want to face the horrors committed in the effort to eliminate those who would not follow or the fact there have been many human gods all similar..

    I see a parallel with the big bang... Folk reject the possibility that everything probably will never fit in a shoe box, folk ignore the failed predictions of the big bang, most notably the observation that the presence of lithium is nowhere near the rates predicted, or that the predicted absence of large scale structure does not fit the recent observations, ... And in fact any failure is not met with rejection but with attempts to "refine" the model. I could be wrong but that judgement will be made dependant on what one believes...and for folk like me I am told..but the math, the math...sure the math...that math will support an infinite and eternal universe..it was formulated to include a dial to allow the universe to be infinite and eternal...we know what it is...the biggest blunder ever made by the man who put it in there..but there it is and as I understand things is still there but given a different value...so it seems the math can support the opposite of a big bang.... Folk want to believe in a big bang...well it certainly must make 80% of humans happy as it offers a hint of creation... something they want in their story even if the laws of thermo dynamics need to be set aside...the big bang certainly makes the church happy and the Muslims and the Jews...in fact even the atheist feels comfortable knowing it all had a start...who could accept that there was no start something that would further underline our insignificance.
    I can. Not a problem and I don't feel any more insignificant than I did before I adopted the belief that the universe is eternal.
    Where would any of these folk be if science presented an eternal universe...would science really get funded to support a cosmology that promotes an eternal universe? I bet..no way ever.

    The big bang needs dark matter, something so plentiful one wonders why none can be found or that something of its nature be identified ... if there was the amount of dark matter required gallaxies must travel faster than observed you could think in their "local" groups.

    Then the background radiation...is there no other reason we could observe what we observe. Could it not just be remnants of radiation from very distant objects?
    Red shift is how we determine expansion and tired light is rejected...if a phenomenon akin to tired light was operative our observation of expansion would be flawed. Can we be certain the universe is indeed expanding?

    Now I feel better. Now I don't care...because I now realise humans are driven by their belief...do facts really matter ... Let's face it you could present a theist with facts until both of you die and any change in position would be rare...you can not change belief with facts..I don't believe the big bang..and I know the facts at least I have spent decades reading about it...follow the science news..those facts don't help me past my belief that is fundamentally a proposition put forward by and supported by folk who want science to support creation and hence their creator.

    But how absolutely wonderful that we as humans can think about this stuff. Done one edit no time left please forgive my rushed effort...
    Alex
     
  19. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,502
    Car is unpacked but yet to install the air con...and it just occurred to me...we can only advance by pursuing the big bang theory because at least research is being done. I realised it is beneficial to do something rather than nothing...that is what science delivers..think of all the folk addressing the theory ..on both sides..that has to be much more productive than holding up a two thousand year old book and proclaiming it holds all the answers.
    Anyways while you all sleep I will get back to work.
    Thanks to all for being tolerant of my strange often unsupported views.
    Alex
     
  20. Truck Captain Stumpy The Right Honourable Reverend Truck Captain Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,263
    I don't sleep much. I'm just not on here much.
    well... they're opinions. no one can tell you how to think or feel.

    no. our understanding of gravity needs Dark Matter [DM]. as such, it leads to something testable - that we should see vestiges of DM influence in the CMBR.
    from wiki
    true that
     
  21. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,502
    I tend to sleep when I am not awake.
    I don't know how to grab hold of your dark matter and gravity observation...but am I correct to follow this logic...General Relativity is our current best theory upon gravity and General Relativity is perhaps the key stone of the Big Bang Theory....and is it not by applying General Relativity to our observations of galaxy rotation curves that creates the necessity to introduce dark matter to make the sums work...you have got me thinking but I can not move from my position that you say "no" to.
    Anyways time for a nap.
    Alex
     
  22. Truck Captain Stumpy The Right Honourable Reverend Truck Captain Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,263
    I'll have to try that sometime.
    I'm not saying NO to anything. I'm just supplying some information.
    Whether you take it or leave it is entirely up to you.
    I guess it boils down to the Hierarchy of evidence and how you want to apply the hard-won knowledge gleaned thus far.
     
  23. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,502
    I thank you for taking your time to help me.
    Alex
     

Share This Page