| THEORIES WITH PROBLEMS - THE BIG BANG THEORY -> Big Bang? | Start A New Topic | Reply |
| Post Info | TOPIC: Big Bang? |
| Posted By: Oliver Wong Posted On: Nov 4, 2002 Views: 1105 | Enquiry Hi Keith, Just like to ask you. Am I allowed to post writings from other people (i.e. copying-and-pasting) on this message board? I'm asking because I'd like to reply to Amanda and William's question/remark about what Katie said on the 'Young Earth' theory (i.e. Earth being about 6000 years old); by using an article from the AiG website. This article may prove interesting to you too (I hope). However, if it's not okay, then I'll just put up the link to that page here. The article is about 2 1/2 'screen' of texts so it might be a bit long. But if it's not posted here, then people may not click on the link to go and read it. But then again, it's up to you. I'll check back this message board soon. Thank you very much! |
| Posted By: Keith Mayes Posted On: Nov 5, 2002 Views: 1102 | RE: RE: Big Bang? Hi Oliver, Yes, sure, go ahead. Keith |
| Posted By: Keith Mayes Posted On: Nov 5, 2002 Views: 1101 | RE: Big Bang? Hi Oliver, I have no objection to URL's being posted on this message board, its for you to use as you wish, not for me to preside over like a fussy school teacher. Put in whatever you want. Keith |
| Posted By: Adolf Hitler Posted On: Nov 8, 2002 Views: 1093 | RE: RE: RE: Big Bang? oh christ, its bound to be some other god-bothering load of rubbish from the flat earthers ! |
| Posted By: Katie Posted On: Nov 8, 2002 Views: 1090 | RE: Big Bang? Actually, we never mentioned that we believe that the earth is flat (which it isn't)...just to clear things up for you. |
| Posted By: Neil Posted On: Dec 19, 2002 Views: 1072 | RE: Big Bang? People always seem to miss the point, about the big bang theory, the operative word being 'theory', it may be the best one around, but that doesn't mean it is correct, in fact taking into account how many previously accepted theories have been proven wrong and replaced by another, better theory, it is naive to assume that any theory is 100% correct, especially one as shaky as this one. Imagine if people like Einstein had accepted current theories to be true and hadn't had the presence of mind to consider that there are other possibilities, or bright enough to realise that we don't really know much about anything... yet. What we do know is constantly evolving, changing and being built upon, alot of it relies on assumtions, most of it will be proven to be not 100% correct. I believe too much progress is lost due to people simply not keeping an open mind. |
| Posted By: Carl Rofe Posted On: Jan 2, 2003 Views: 1068 | RE: Big Bang? Think i'm in the right place now! I agree with it in many ways, but god creating the entire-verse? Query: How can something exist outside it when there's nothing to exist in outside! I don't know! The idea of creating something doesn't make much sense!? You can, on the other hand, build with what you've got! But if god is the universe, how can it have an intelligence (or whatever you call it)? |
| Posted By: Carl Rofe Posted On: Jan 2, 2003 Views: 1066 | RE: Big Bang? Have a red shift question. In 1998: Discovered universe is expanding, with an increasing rate of expansion due to measurements of recession rates! Has to do with relativistic time! They said the recession rate is measured using red-shift, and that the recession rate is the expansion rate at that time ago! The light is distorted by mass on its journey to earth. Since the universe, on a lower scale, is irregularly distributed (galaxy cluster etc), i'm assuming they took into account the light, because of where it came from, was distorted in many different ways!? The light beams themselves interact with all their surroundings!? In fact, they would have interacted with the path they were travelling, wouldn't they? |
| Posted By: yicheng Posted On: Feb 26, 2003 Views: 1057 | RE:Carl I'm surprised the big bang and the details don't make sense to you, especially with your suposed immense brainpower |
| Posted By: C. Rofe Posted On: Mar 6, 2003 Views: 1053 | RE: Big Bang? Hi Neil, Here! Here! Has anyone here thought about how much assumption we are all making? How many of us are believers? If many of us are, how much does this affect our judgment and view of these matters? Einstein was a sincere believer! Note that Einstein's theory, regardless of how much we accept it, is still only a theory. That goes for all. Can anyone answer that question above? |
| Posted By: Christopher Crosby Posted On: Mar 31, 2003 Views: 1042 | RE: Big Bang? Ok, maybe if we looked at the big bang theory from front to back we could figure out if it is flawed in any shape or form. My question is this; Lets say the Big Bang happened, now before you had the universe all nice and neatly packed away in the form of densely packed energy and matter that suddenly decided to go BANG. Ok, now you have universe as we know it today and, as we believed it to be before the big bang. So, my question is simple, where did the universe come from? And, don't say it came from nothing. |
| Posted By: Keith Mayes Posted On: Apr 1, 2003 Views: 1040 | RE: Big Bang? You think your question "Where did the Universe come from?" is simple? I have already had a go at answering that, and my explanation took nearly 4000 words. Hardly suitable for a message board posting! I notice that you say "And, don't say it came from nothing." If you don't want to hear the answer then don't ask the question. If you only want to hear an answer that pleases you then write your own answer. Keith |
| Posted By: yicheng Posted On: Apr 1, 2003 Views: 1036 | RE: Not quite nothing Well, not really nothing -more a "nothing with potential." Um - energy, I guess. Anyone want to interperet that quote for me? |
| Posted By: C. Rofe Posted On: Apr 1, 2003 Views: 1035 | RE: Big Bang? um, chris, could you explain to me how the universe could decide to go bang? |
| Posted By: yicheng Posted On: Jun 3, 2003 Views: 1025 | RE: Big Bang? Quote-Chris maybe if we looked at the big bang theory from front to back we could figure out if it is flawed in any shape or form. Scientists have looked at it, tested it, analyzed it, whatever, for THIS LONG and it has become their standard theory. Now you just look through it front and back and tell me, true or false. |
| Pages [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ] Next Page -> |