“When you see how fragile and delicate life can be, all else fades into the background.” -Jenna Morasca
The hot Big Bang -- proposed seventy years ago -- is a tremendous success story. Predicated on the assumption that the Universe was hotter, denser, more uniform and expanding faster in the past, it's allowed us to predict the rate of cosmic expansion over distance and time, the primeval abundances of the light elements, the formation and evolution of large-scale-structure, and the existence and properties of the cosmic microwave background: the leftover photon glow from the Big Bang.
All these predictions have been borne out, but there's one more prediction that has yet to be tested: the existence and properties of a cosmic neutrino background. A new technique taking advantage of data from the Planck satellite has just detected the cosmic neutrino background definitively and in a new way, with the subsequent polarization spectra -- set to be released by the Planck team -- ready to confirm the greatest prediction of all: the cosmic neutrino background's temperature!
No holding back on good science !
If you are a sophisticated creationist, then you may conclude that the Big Bang is a successful theory.
In actuality it suffers many problems. I'm not going to spend an hour or so to list and explain the problems and contradictions for every web article that claims that the Big Bang is the best thing since sliced bread. I have researched this for years and put together an easy to follow critique at: https://sites.google.com/site/bigbangcosmythology/
What Would Fritz Zwicky Say?
I’m not going to spend an hour or so to list and explain the problems and contradictions for every web article that claims that the Big Bang is the best thing since sliced bread.
That which is claimed without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
You're full of shit.
Just for as long as I can be arsed wading through the pigshit:
Con: In an infinite universe uniform distribution is not necessary.
Two words: Olber's Paradox.
The universe is illuminated at the wavelengths that we can't see such as the wavelength that corresponds to the microwave temperature of 2.7K.
The result of the big bang. And unless there's an optically dense universe, there is no way to get 6000-10000K thermal radiation to be 3K thermal radiation.
Con: (a) Expanding space is a nonsensical concept.
Nope, it's fine and very sensible.
Only material things can be logically described as capable of expansion.
Now THAT is illogical!. Take two apples. Move them apart. The space between them is bigger now. Yet nothing material has expanded...
Wow. The bollocks was already finished. Shit, you put no work in there, son.
Oh, that first one also has the problem it doesn't actually explain why an infinite universe is a solution.
And if the universe is infinite in size but finite in age, then it means that these things were created ex nihilo in those places.
Which is illogical.
"You’re full of shit."
It's a pleasure to read such comments - that's why most of us visit science blogs.
And yes, it's true. To be full of shit is part of the disgusting conditio humana.
"And if the universe is infinite in size but finite in age,"
... right, that would be illogical. Of course the universe is infinite in size as well as in age.
Glad you agree that the commenter was full of it.
Question: do you claim that you read scienceblogs for the posters full of shit, or for comments NOT full of shit?
"Of course the universe is infinite in size as well as in age."
Then Olber's Paradox.
I see another option for your comment, tourist. You come to scienceblogs to participate in seeding comments full of shit.
always amazes me how creationist want to argue fact over a hundred years of scientist trying to disprove the big bang to no avail but uneducated jack asses want to think that they no better than Einstein hubble hawking just about every physicist in the last hundred years the only thing uncertain about what we know is the first fractions in the first second but that's ok creationist keep getting your information from a book that was written by people hundreds of years after the fact and not to mention the tons of books in the bible they didn't want to put in so man decided what went in you can say its divinely inspired so the other books not in weren't divinely inspired the general idea of the big bang is fact and never going away ive researched that since I was five ill take my information from men and women who are educated in cosmology and do it every day over a man whos got a bible degree from middle western southern Kentucky bible belt school I suppose your next argument is the universe isn't expanding thx for ruining my day stupid science blogs always piss me off keep defending real facts wow
Though they have no real feeling of shame, since they are "doing god's work" or feel that "the elitists" are conspiring against "real people" (i.e. them), they do feel SOME shame.
It's very little and mostly self-healing, but not entirely self healing: there are some scars left.
Eventually the discomfort will make them try to move away from the situation and at that point, they will see some things in a different light. Even if it's "I won' t bother proselytizing".
It feels very much like water off a stone, but it does eventually make a difference.
A general social PC harangue based on unearned "respect" for "feelings" *as long as they are stated to be religious* ensures that the progress is slow. The religious keep dropping more sprogs, and some of them don't manage to avoid the indoctrination. Four steps forward, three steps back.
another thing why would religious people argue the big bang every religion has a creation story what do they want a static universe a catholic priest came up with the big bang I mean they don't understand what they argue you live on a non special rock around a non special star in a non special galaxy 1 of at least 150,000,000,000 your made up out of the same chemicals as a rock or kitchen table just in different proportions I mean genesis has the earth being created before the sun how does that work do they not see the very young solar systems Alma has seen forming they don't have to loose their faith follow the lead of a good amount of physicist and scientist who keep theirs but know the general idea of the universe expanding from a hot dense state is more than theory its fact that's why America is falling behind because holy people have know problem lying about science so much could be solved if all of humanity accepted their place in the cosmos no more jihad no more racism or homophobia come on America lets get back to being the best they way we done it before science an innovation
and im from Indiana the middle of the bible belt I was raied in a deeply Baptist family I know both sides very well but was luck enough at the age of five to understand something wasn't right with what I was being told so unlike close minded people who argue fact I do understand both sides
"keep defending real facts wow"
Awww isn't that sweet, wowzie has a fan.
How hackneyed, two methodological naturalist high fiving and back slapping right into neopaganism's arms.
Aye, the belief in god is no different from the belief in santa clause. You're told what to believe when you're very young and you believe it, but it's pretty obvious when you think about it that it's rubbish.
The only difference is that god is a santa that grownups think is fine for grownups to believe in.
Raggie, how does it feel to be out-thought by a five year old?
" You’re told what to believe when you’re very young and you believe it, but it’s pretty obvious when you think about it that it’s rubbish."
You believe because you saw results, toys, eaten cookies,ect.. Because who you were told was not really the "cause" of the results there still was an event that produced a result that was logical but beyond your comprehension outside of the information you had at the time.
"The only difference is that god is a santa that grownups think is fine for grownups to believe in."
What "God" then is your Santa? Humanism, Govt, Natural Law? Yep, your cause for existence and purpose is a reality that has a common denominator as mine, that being self aware humans and who is our Santa. Reality will show that our logic seems reasoned to both but the ultimate conclusions hold a profoundly different outcomes.
"You believe because you saw results, toys, eaten cookies,ect.."
None of which santa did.
And we were told that santa did them.
But he still didn't.
You don't seem to be able to comprehend as an adult that santa doesn't exist.
THAT is pitiful.
"What “God” then is your Santa? "
I don't have a god. Or a santa.
Just like I don't have a Zeus or a Snuffleupagus or an invisible friend who steals all the cookies.
"I don’t have a god. Or a santa."
Yes you do, and that would be you. In order to claim there is no God you need authority to seal it. The authority comes from you thus you are your own god. Like it or not your own belief system of denial is a faith based construct.
"“I don’t have a god. Or a santa.”
Yes you do, "
No I don't.
Do you claim that there is no russel's teapot? How can you unless you're your own russel's teapot? And then how can you claim it doesn't exist, when it's you? You'd be claiming you don't exist!
Who knows, maybe it does exist and I don't. Does time exist?
Perhaps this is all an illusion.
Then how are you posting?
Maybe it's a "really good" illusion.
That can't just happen on it's own, the strings of information are being or have been plucked.
That goofy Tea pot analogy always amused me. It's such a lame argument, and because I have a decent grasp on human nature, I would go so far as to say absolutely there is a tea pot out there in space. Now the cause is what would be up for debate.
I would reason in this perceived reality of ours, an astronaut took a small tea pot on a mission with himself and while in space found a way to launch out into the universe as a ahhaaa moment for himself that he has one over on the whole planet.
But the whole silliness of it is that it does not fall with in the same reference frame when people relate to a higher power.
The analogy should at least have something like tea bags and saucers floating in orbit were known but no teapots ever found. Well, then an more reasonable footing for comparison can be debated.
"Maybe it’s a “really good” illusion."
Then it wouldn't be posted.
"the strings of information are being or have been plucked....That goofy Tea pot analogy always amused me. It’s such a lame argument,"
"But the whole silliness of it is that it does not fall with in the same reference frame when people relate to a higher power."
Yes it does.
Oh, and the question was "Then how are you posting?". Not how might you be posting.
How ARE you posting?
HOW are you posting?
Let's get this clear I have no problem with someone's personal faith I have problems when people use that faith to lie about facts they don't understand science but want to tell the greates science minds in the world their wrong ridiculous if you would have read my post I said there's a good number of physicist who are Christian, Muslim and other religions but to argue the general idea of the Big Bang the expanding universe from a hot dense point is ridiculous and if u think not you have no point being on these websites by the way you shouldn't get your science information from googling Big Bang theory. My entire family our still Christian have no idea what the Big Bang is and completely dismiss it so if u agree with that keep adding to the problem
One thing just occurred to me.
Mary, according to the christian doctrine, would have likely have been pre-pubescent when god did the dirty with her.
And they complain about Mohammed's marriage (unconsummated for a few years)... Mohammed wasn't supposed to be the perfect good being!
Big Bang theory is teleology. It's creationism at it's worst.
Nope, its science.
And apparently the answer to my query was the third option.
Talking of teleology, what's god's purpose? So far it looks like his only purpose is to create a universe and then spy on everyone in their bedrooms.
Oh, not quite right, to spy on everyone ELSE in their bedrooms.
It still amazes me that creationist and crackpot theorists are allowed to panhandle their nonsense on this blog, as if their own little ideas deserve as much recognition as that of Inflation, GR, QM, and the Standard Model.
I keep saying this and I will say it again, you do not deserve to have your opinion heard, if your opinion is creationist, or skepticism for the sake of skepticism, pet theory that has no basis in actual reality- nonsense.
Thats the kind of political correctness that has actually poisoned our discourse.
That everyone's opinion is equally valid
"Let’s get this clear I have no problem with someone’s personal faith I have problems when people use that faith to lie about facts they don’t understand science"
Umm Yes you do, does a Dudes Dick by nature belong in another dudes ass for procreation or for what ever and now we spend BILLIONS on Aides research for the fuckers that could be better spent on childrens cancer research?
Your bullshit rant on people of faith shotgun mentality now has a women Kim Davis in fucking jail for refusing to give the homos a marriage license AND NO FUCKING BAIL.
JOHN WAYNE fucking GACY WAS granted bail you idiot open your damn eyes to what the fuck is going on.
A dude with a Bible is not your enemy, the one with a black robe is.
"Umm Yes you do, does a Dudes Dick by nature belong in another dudes ass for procreation or for what ever "
Why does nature get to decide what "belongs"? It isn't sentient and doesn't get to choose.
But as to what nature thinks should happen:
it appears the answer is "Yes, definitely".
The thing to ask is does nature think your head belongs up your arse?
There you go Ethan, if using the word "Homo's" when refering to same sex couples isn't a reason enough to ban this fucking twat then I don't know what is.
"a women Kim Davis in fucking jail for refusing to give the homos a marriage license AND NO FUCKING BAIL."
Yes. Do you think that religious people should not obey the law?
Can the religious get $80,000 for a job that they don't want to do?
And remember, she's not handing out ANY marriage certificates. For which she gets paid 80grand a year. The richest person in the town.
So, yes, she's in jail for breaking the law, disregarding the constitution and refusing to do her job for which she still insists she must get paid.
Oh, and she's married four times, divorced twice and had two kids by husband number 3 out of wedlock between husband number 1 and 2, whose kids were adopted by husband 2 after which she divorced him, still collects alimony for the kids as she marries the father of those children (husband number 3) who she then divorces and marries husband number 2.
Now what were those marriage vows again?
"...divorced three times...", obviously.
But clearly not someone who should be lecturing people on what the bible says.
And she was always 100% free to not sign marriage licenses as long as she gave up her job which was ti sign marriage licenses.
Remember, TK, Raggie, like most homophobic men, can't seem to get the image and thought of a man's penis in their bum out of their heads.
Being male, they feel no compunction to imagine a lesbian scissoring with them, so do not care what they do.
Please also remember she never asked whether someone had been married before, or whether they ate shellfish, or whether they were christian before marrying them.
Only if they were gay or lesbian.
Oh, and teabag medium here didn't bother to mention, along with not marrying hetero couples (though one was a post-op trans woman marrying a woman and they got married fine), lesbians were also her reason for refusing to issue or sign a license.
Because only the sexy sex of a hot bod bloke occupies teabagger's mind.
BTW, Rag, Kim Davis is in jail because she disobeyed a court order. It's called "contempt of court" and anyone who disobeys a court order for whatever reason is liable to be jailed for doing so. The fact that the court order involved issuing marriage licenses to gay couples in not particularly relevant; the disobeying of that order is what landed her in jail.
Some of us don't care about the context of our martyrdom Sean. Just that the martyrdom comes.
Look at Fox News. There's not even need for martyrdom to exist for them to claim it.
hey ragtag your obviously a moron whos a homophobe what don't u guys get physicist try every day to prove the ig bang wrong not inflation or a singularity they have tried for 100 years to that's whats great about science doesn't matter what you believe its whats right that matters you want to talk about fuckin dudes n the ass on a science blog you probably are gay so you defend religion but f you knew te bible you would know that its not mans place to judge and you don't sound like that good a person so you better jump to our side because regardless if you believe in god or not your obviously a piece of shit and is going to burn I hell if theres a god so stupid its a good thing we are right that still wouldn't stop me from smashing your intolerant mouth
and like I said I don't care if your a Christian or anything the bible was written by ma just don't go andargue the universe expanding from a hot dense state it doesnt hurt your relgion the just don't understand both sides once again why are there physicist who are Christian, muslims, hindu it makes no sense to argue it when you obviously don't understand but your right your more intelligent then hawking guth hubble Einstein quit coming to a websit written by a scientist who constantly talks about the origin f the universe if you want to argue abut the big bang argue about aspects of it that aren't completely accepted inflation things like that even though I completely accept it but don't argue the general idea of the big bang its beyond reproach especially by somebody whos uneducated ask ethan#95 was my question even if everything was wrong a new theory would have to take whats successful from the last the universe expanding from a hot dese state is so far beyond theory but keep coming to a science websites to start fights and tal about fucking guys in there ASS weirdo
I am most likely completely in agreement with your Chris, but your stream of consciousness style makes for a difficult read.
My bad TK just frustrated but yes I'm sure we agree
Thanks for the heads up!
"Yes. Do you think that religious people should not obey the law?"
There is no law anymore, as we are now beyond constitutional republic and the laws are politicized full throttle thanks to the leftist president we have now.
Tell me all you legal scholarly geniuses does Obama enforce the laws as he has taken an oath or does he simply pick and choose?
How bought those "Sanctuary cities" for illegals aliens.
OH!! HELL Break the laws and get freebies and that's no where in the constitution. However, religious liberties are afforded.
The Law.. Follow the law???
What laws? Oh just the one's we progressives in charge deem worth enforcing.
Louis Farrakhan recently said this:
“we must rise up and kill those who kill us. Stalk them and kill them and let them feel the pain of death that we are feeling.”
Lawlessness, why isn't he in jail???
"hey ragtag your obviously a moron"
Look at your own use of grammar dumb ass.
Why do you go about putting every person of faith in the same box in regards to science?
Heck, from what I recall, certain groups/people of faith have long claimed a beginning (creation) while the academia claimed the universe was around forever.
And now some scientist claim possibly no singularity no "Big Bang":
So are they Morons now?
" ban this fucking twat "
Ahh yes, the thread hypocrite rears his face.
Which my point is a direct hit here. The same folks who condemn this woman for ignoring the law (not doing her job) praises Obama for not doing his job in regards to things like illegal aliens. Or using the IRS to attack tea party conservatives.
"Who will rid me of this turbulent priest?"
Ya know like King Henry II against Thomas Becket
"There is no law anymore, as we are now beyond constitutional republic "
Have you ever READ your constition? WHERE THE FUCK does it claim that you must disctriminate against people because of their sexual orientation?
It says SPECIFICALLY that everyone is created equal and must be given equal rights under the law.
The only ones trying to send it out of a constitutional republic (and into a religious state) are retards like you and that whore of a bitch now thankfully in prison.
And all because there's a fucking nigger in charge and you can't handle it 'cos he's not white.
"Ahh yes, the thread hypocrite rears his face"
REALLY? You're going with that? "Oh, don't discriminate against my religion, let me choose a job that doesn't accord with my "religious" bigotry, but don't you DARE tell me I have to do the job I'm paid for!!!!"
It's a free country, fuck off out of the job and let someone SANE handle it you moronic bitch.
And the same for you, too, you godbothering fuckwit.
Ethan, ban this insane fuckwit.
Each individual has the same rights as INDIVIDUALS DUMMY.
A marriage is a contract between TWO.
This bull shit conception of homosexual marriage was based on ridiculous 14th amendment interpretations.
You do know that at the passing of the 14th amendment homosexuality was a felon in EVERY state.
The states make marriage laws not the fed and there is a constitutional amendment process to change it if needed.
But the militant homosexual activist and their judges circumvent the will of the people and the law.
"Ethan, ban this insane fuckwit."
Haha your TRUE colors are exposed. I recall recently the thread posters had pitch forks out for your banishment and yet I spoke up on your behalf not to ban.
You filthy disgusting hypocrite, your just like all the little bitch ass sniveling coward liberals who run around yelling "I may disagree with what you say but will defend your right to say it".
Yeah B.S. you cowards would run and hide at the first site of any harm to folks that differ in thought with you if tyrannical force came with heavy hand.
And just watch you whiny ass clowns cry foul when the billionaire marries their children to circumvent tax laws.
Oh not fair not right blah blah.. I will laugh in your face "it's just love ya know, equal rights"
"Each individual has the same rights as INDIVIDUALS DUMMY."
YEAH, like *getting equal treatment under the law*.
And NOT like *refusing service to someone else*. Know why? BECAUSE THAT'S MORE THAN ONE INDIVIDUAL.
"And just watch you whiny ass clowns cry foul when the billionaire marries their children to circumvent tax laws."
So you think that tax breaks for marriage should be killed.
And you admit that refusing marriage to gay or lesbian couples is financially damaging.
THIS is why you CANNOT demand they can't get married.
So you think polygamy, incest, and bestiality still need their day at the equality alter I take it?
You have also revealed that your prediliction isn't just men, but that you want to go full roman catholic.
"So you think polygamy, incest, and bestiality still need their day at the equality alter I take it?"
Wow. So you want to fuck animals AND your sister AT THE SAME TIME?!?!?!?
Where the hell does the law say you can marry an animal? Or your child? Or multiple animals, children, men and women?
When the law says that any of those are legal, YES, you have to sign the marriage license for it.
If they aren't, and they aren't, then you don't have to worry because there's no marriage license to sign.
Just because you think that you would fuck anything moving or dead if it weren't for fear of eternal torment (and nothing less would deter you, THAT is how sick and twisted your fornication fantasies are), doesn't mean that other people want to do it too.
The sick perversion is YOUR mind, not anyone else's.
"So you think that tax breaks for marriage should be killed.
And you admit that refusing marriage to gay or lesbian couples is financially damaging.
Nope and double Nope. heterosexual couples who procreate have a benefit to society. We need real babies to keep civilization going, we don't need adult cry babies who need to hijack civil rights movements to condone thier perverse view of reality.
Besides, they had civil unions, even your Sir Elton John was down with that.
And why the hell are you whining about polygamy when Solomon had HOW many wives? Why are you whining about sex with your children when your bible has the story of Lot and his two daughters after Ms Lot was condimented for being concerned about the death and destruction of other human beings? Why are you whining about bestiality when one version of the genesis story has god asking adam which animal he wants to get bizzy with and only after he says "none of them, thanks, got anything else?" creates woman. AND THEY DON'T GET MARRIED.
If your bibble were the "reason" as opposed to your bigotry, blind hatred and fear of your own twisted and sick mind, you'd be all for that shit. Not whining about how gay marriage will lead to it.
"Just because you think that you would fuck anything moving or dead"
Oh now your OK with necrophilia. Man you are warped.
"heterosexual couples who procreate have a benefit to society"
And homosexual couples have a benefit to society. They work, they buy stuff. They make efficiency savings on space and purchases, reducing the housing problem and the power demand problem.
Meanwhile, the increasing numbers of people indicate that procreation is NOT a benefit to society.
The number of orphaned or abandoned kids indicate that procreation by people is a detriment to society that has to take on the collective burden of their rearing.
Whilst childless, including gay or lesbian, couples can take on the burden of adopting these children and are a benefit to society.
YOU just hate the gays and lesbians and pick parts of your religion to "justify" it and protect it from all rational thought.
"“Just because you think that you would fuck anything moving or dead”
Oh now your OK with necrophilia. Man you are warped."
YOU'RE the one imagining fucking everything.
And apparently you DO think fucking anything is fine, as long as it's not dead, then.
Proof that your problem is your own twisted and sick sexuality.
" your bible has the story of Lot and his two daughters after Ms Lot was condimented for being concerned about the death and destruction of other human beings?"
Do you know the whole story? You act as though God was all giddy with Lot and his daughters.
Here is a clue, he was not.
"“So you think that tax breaks for marriage should be killed.
And you admit that refusing marriage to gay or lesbian couples is financially damaging.
Nope and double Nope. "
So you DO want to financially punish gays and lesbians.
WHICH IS WHY IT IS DISCRIMINATION against them and therefore UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
"” your bible has the story of Lot and his two daughters after Ms Lot was condimented for being concerned about the death and destruction of other human beings?”
Do you know the whole story?"
Yes. He fucked his daughters whilst drunk and had children.
AND HE WAS THE MOST SAINTLY MAN IN SODDOM. The one that god decided to save.
"YOU’RE the one imagining fucking everything."
Well, I do imagine you being a fuck off that's for sure.
"AND HE WAS THE MOST SAINTLY MAN IN SODDOM. The one that god decided to save"
Yep, he chose to live among the filth pagan idolaters far from his family of the covenant. His own selfishness and lack of faith brought about his own downfall.
Re: Your liking fucking anything that is alive:
"Well, I do imagine you being a fuck off that’s for sure."
Sense. It makes none.
Re: Lot who fucked his daughers whilst drunk and got them pregnant:
"Yep, he chose to live among the filth pagan idolaters"
Sense. Still makes none.
"His own selfishness and lack of faith brought about his own downfall."
His downfall being "was saved by god from death in Soddom"?!?!?!
Of course, since biblical scholars believe that the Sodom and Gomorrah myths are about the horrible ways the residents of those towns treated travelers and dealt with money issues, the stories' use to condemn same sex relationships has everything to do with personal bigotry and nithing to do with an understanding of religion.
And, of course, since they are fables, they should have no influence on the real world in the first place.
Given they were at war with their neighbours, and this foreigner living there has two strangers come in mysteriously and they want to know who they are.
Of course, being perverts, christians then leap to the conclusions "Who are they, do you know 'em?" means "Can I bum them to death?" and immediately offers his two virgin daughters to them to rape to death instead.
This may be why they all fucked later. You know, they were vigins, he thought they should get banged to death, so they were all "woah! lets partaaaay!" and got drunk and had an incestuous orgy.
You know, like christians do.
"And, of course, since they are fables, they should have no influence on the real world in the first place."
Dean, that pretty lame. Ever heard of Aesop's Fables?
The wise take lessons from fables, parables, stories that teach a culture about moral decency
@#76 Your script is nothing but the ramblings of a lunatic.
I suspect that I should be glad that I'm seeing only 19 comments. Anyway, it's not immediately clear to me exactly how this result finally nails the 2013 Planck Rₑᵣᵣ to the wall.
"Dean, that pretty lame. Ever heard of Aesop’s Fables?"
Yes, many people have. And they have no influence on the real world. Ever hear of a law being passed about not throwing rabbits in the briar patch?
Yet we hear BS about how gays should be discriminated against because of another ridiculous fable.
And have you ever read Aesop? How many mass murders, how much incest, human sacrifice, torture, stonings, zomnies or other batshit crazy and downright SICK AND TWISTED stuff that you find in your death cult fables appear in Aesop?
The bible IS the the ramblings of a range of lunatics, some of them frothing screaming mad.
Which is why it's not used for making any sort of sane society.
"@#76 Your script is nothing but the ramblings of a lunatic."
Though this is correct: the story of soddom and gomarrah IS NOTHING MORE than the ramblings of a lunatic, your use here is really just "LALALALALALALA! CAN'T HEAR YOU!!!".
NOT ONE WORD of 76 is wrong in its description of that story. You have obviously NEVER read it. Go ahead: for each point made in 76, point out whether it's true or not. E.g.
Soddom: True. Appears in the story.
At war with their neighbours: True. Appears in the story.
Lot is a foreigner: True. Appears in the story.
Has two strangers come along: True. Appears in the story.
and so on.
In christianity women are not supposed to have authority over men.
THEREFORE according to christian doctrine, he CANNOT hold that position of power.
Indeed if a gay man comes up to her and demands a marriage license for his gay marriage: SHE CANNOT REFUSE *HIS* AUTHORITY. To do otherwise would be against the laws of god.
The judge was male and if they tell her she MUST issue the license, SHE CANNOT REFUSE *HIS* AUTHORITY. To do otherwise would be against the laws of god.
Indeed, since the judge would be considered one of the "elders", her actions are against the law of god AND ACCORDING TO THOSE LAWS SHE MUST BE STONED TO DEATH.
If you're going to obey the laws of god and ignore the laws of the land, be VERY careful about the laws you will be missing.
Yes, I know of Aesop's fables. I also realize that they are fables, as the stories in the bible (and other religious texts) are the writings of people who were unaware of science, and often decency, trying to to give reason to the world and activities of people around them. I'm also aware that they are similar in that neither has any external historic support.
But the religious stories were written and rewritten many times to reflect the whims of the people who happened to be in power. Ascribing any "eternal moral truth" to them goes beyond the bounds of reasoned thought. Especially when, as is clear when the Bible is read, there are so many justifications for horrible actions: slavery, genocide, rape - the list is almost endless.
But it does remain a favorite go to for folks who've been handed a good life through the luck of people born into wealth, never really work or contribute anything to society, and then try to use it to justify not allowing others to have the same advantages they used.
In short, people like you and Trump, born at home plate, who worked their way back to third base and claim they hit a triple.
Fascinating as these comments are from a psychological standpoint, the astronomy/physics content seems low. It appears to me that Ethan could save everyone time if, after any post that mentioned the Big Bang, he just auto-posted two comments:
"Einstein knew nothing, I am a genius who proved him wrong, visit my blog"
"Ha ha, you're the one who knows nothing"
and then closed comments.
Ken, then just close comments. After all woomancer cranks ALWAYS bang on about how science has it wrong and they have it right. Frequently 'merkins, since their state religion of "Furious Indpendent" plus "Fundi Xtian" plus their social framework of "Every Opinion Has Equal Right To Be Heard (therefore is of equal validity)" ensures that Science will be attacked MERELY FOR BEING AUTHORITATIVE. And proving that every miracle god does has another non-miracle solution. And for DARING to claim that, no, NOT all opinions are of equal validity in reality.
Teabag here just hates science, knows fuck all about god and is overall just a classic example of the Xtian ISIS on their best behaviour.
"the writings of people who were unaware of science"
Dean, you do know that the Mosaic dietary health laws are pretty scientifically backed up as being healthy and culturally isolated to those people (Israelite) not surrounding tribes.
You fall victim to false assumptions like Wowzie does in thinking people thousands of years ago were brain dead neanderthals.
Ever heard of the Khemitians? They came before the Egyptians and are speculated the builders of the great pyramids of Giza and the Sphinx, a pretty decent feat of scientific engineering I would say. Another one are the bore holes, ever seen them?
I have used a Hilti drill with those same diamond encrusted bits to bore through concrete with reinforced steel rod and it's a slow process for modern tools.
"Dean, you do know that the Mosaic dietary health laws are pretty scientifically backed up "
The dietary laws weren't done from science knowledge, but observation that some things made people sick. Since GOD always did that (they thought), it must be god telling you that it is bad.
What a moronic claim.
"Mosaic dietary health laws are pretty scientifically backed up "
Yes, there are a good number of woo-based sites arguing that those diets are healthy - sort of food-based apologetics for the simple minded - like the paleo diet fad, it's all a bunch of crap.
There was no science in the selection of diets 2000 years ago - simply a selection of which items made people sick and which didn't, based on the limited means of keeping food.
Hiddenincatours - the place run by scam artist Brien Foerster? Guy who claims to be a "Canadian-Peruvian anthropologist" but really is a glorified tour guide? He of the ridiculous Paracas skull mythology?
I'm not surprised you've fallen for another scam story - it is sad you expect anyone else to be taken in by it.
“Mosaic dietary health [sic] laws are pretty scientifically backed up ”
Jeezums, whoever trotted this one out really needs figure out anything to bloviate about other than a boneheaded "teleology" of halacha and kashrut. Some familiarity with the past half-century or so's foodways anthropology might help, too.
"Hiddenincatours – the place run by scam artist Brien Foerster? "
Really Dean? I just posted that link because of the decent photos. It pops up on the first google search.
Although, I have been to Peru and seen the Inca's remarkable engineering abilities as well though.
But anyways. So tell me then your thoughts about Egyptian Core #7:
Christopher Dunn and Stephen S. Mehler have published some very insightful works, not just snake oil crap.
These so called "ancients" were more advanced than you are willing to acknowledge.
"people like you and Trump, born at home plate"
RU KIDDING ME? I was bused from my white middle class town into the hood for middle school.
I am a product of Govt integration.. I just never took the bait.
I don't know to what degree George Gamow popularized the Big Bang, but credit for the idea goes to Georges LeMaitre, a Jesuit astronomer, who proposed the "primeval atom" in 1930.
Yea, right. How come you know shit, then?
"I just posted that link because of the decent photos."
And dean just gave a potted summary of his cred. Yet you wondered, WHAT, exactly?
Hey, you seem to love the crankosphere. We are NOT surprised by this. Why are you so defensive?
"Yet you wondered, WHAT, exactly?"
Of course I wonder What because as usual the case with you and Dean, you folks miss the forest because the trees are in your way.
I was pointing out his (and your) misunderstanding about ancient civilizations in that they were not very not very advanced when in fact they were more advanced than you cretans are willing to acknowledge.
"Christopher Dunn and Stephen S. Mehler have published some very insightful works, not just snake oil crap."
So what? What proof is that that whatever YOU have read into that link is actually true?
Given your crank magnetism it rather indicates you have a prediliction for the nutbar claims.
Here is my thought.
1) They have only found two turns at a time. Not a helix.
2) They claim the same separation of the scoring, but the first one is definitely different from the next two.
3) They claim the same pitch, but the second and first have clearly different pitch.
None of this written up and tested by independent audit, or replicated.
What do you think of this, teabaggie?
I was pointing out his (and your) misunderstanding about ancient civilizations in that they were not very not very advanced when in fact they were more advanced than you cretans are willing to acknowledge.
Given the essentially substance-free tone of most of your comments, I feel safe in saying I give them more real credit for accomplishments than you do. It's just that I don't feel the need to rely on unsubstantiated attributions of their abilities.
Also, aren't Cretans those people from Crete?
He's a cretin.
"Given the essentially substance-free tone of most of your comments"
That's a hoot, coming from someone who would vote for Hitlary over Trump.
Yeah, you'd never notice the emptiness of your comments. Such as that one.
Because it doesn't pander to you.
That’s a hoot, coming from someone who would vote for Hitlary over Trump
True, would not vote for Trump, as
* he has no understanding of international relations
* he seems to believe he could wave a wand and change laws and constitutional amendments he doesn't like
* he's a non-repentant racist (like you)
* he's a liar
* he's a crappy businessman
* his whole campaign is a charade aimed completely at boosting his "presence"
In reality, he isn't any more unqualified for office than any of the rest of the Republicans, nor is he any more racist: he simply doesn't use the same codes to hide his feelings that they do
As for the person I would vote for? Right now you don't have a clue, but then neither do I.
Ken you would be better off closing comments altogether if you aren't going to moderate them for quacks and denialists.
At the start, I must say that there is no current one normal and logical conclusion and evidence of the occurrence of the Big Bang. Such claims are so many illogical it is, indeed, strange as most men of science, may believe in that big of a mirage.
It seems that science is becoming more and more rushing in the wrong direction, which has long since Einstein determined. In his time me had more opportunities to check such great minds as we now have options. And why is everyone going and qualify to where the scientific aspect of the dark.
First, science has no idea about the organization univrzuma and so do the many erroneous conclusions.
BB never existed, because something can not, of itself, get out of anything. The universe is a sphere of infinite diameter, filled substance ether, from which it was created substances under the command of the Absolute consciousness of the universe (ACU), which represents tremendous power of creation.
The universe is not expanding, but it is the motion of matter according to certain laws, and the matter and energy of the universe consists of a single entity, to be distinguished from the general universe, and it should be called COSMOS. Time and space were formed to accommodate the movement and measure the movement of matter and there is no "marriage" space-time, as there is a myth that it is a network in which "melt" heavenly bodies. As images of your universe resembles an ostrich egg, and what is around the egg? Is it an unseen bird that keeps the egg.? There is no dark energy nor dark matter, it is ether, about which science knows nothing. Mutual relations between matter and ether result in the formation of all hitherto unexplained phenomena such as gravity, magnetism, electrical charge, light, heat, and combinations thereof. So if science wants to know the truth about the universe, must be respected and study the spiritual entity of the universe (SEU), because it is unnatural to ignore the emergence and formation of human beings, without which spirituality can not exist as living matter (the soul and body make the man, as that the universe is a two entitety: SEU and matter "immersed" into the ether from which it is produced and in which returns through a black hole).
This is not religion, this is a real science, through intuition leads us to the true causes of all phenomena.