header pic

Area51 Board (non-moderated) at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

The 'Old' Scout-Tennessee a51 Crowd- Enjoy ROWDY discussion covering politics, religion, current events, and all things under the sun

Anyone is welcomed and encouraged to join our FREE site and to take part in our community- a community with you- the user, the fan, -and the person- will be protected from intrusive actions and with a clean place to interact.


Author

Topic: The Big Bang Theory

 (Read 1073 times)

DunkingDan

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 19200
  • Liked:
Re: The Big Bang Theory
« Reply #14 on: March 16, 2018, 07:14:55 PM »

:57: Fuzz don't even understand the point did fly over his head.

Fuzz has had some of the science shown  to him multiple times about it science pointed out to a creator. He ignores it.
Fuzz has had the fact that Christ being alive and crucified is almost universally accepted by historians as well as a larger historical record than he likes to use. He think that historians  write in the here and now like the Washington Compost does.
Fuzz's mind is as closed as they come and you could not open it with a  case of TNT
« Last Edit: March 16, 2018, 07:20:34 PM by DunkingDan »
President Harry S. Truman said: “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount.  The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings…  If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.”

P1tchBlack

  • Guest
Re: The Big Bang Theory
« Reply #15 on: March 16, 2018, 08:00:43 PM »
On the first day,  God said let there be light....but he didn't create the sun and stars until day 4. 

Weird.

DunkingDan

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 19200
  • Liked:
Pitch digs his hole deeper
« Reply #16 on: March 16, 2018, 08:08:10 PM »
On the first day,  God said let there be light....but he didn't create the sun and stars until day 4.

Weird.
More false statements

First thing to think is there are no chapters in the original text so what is written after the initial account is detail likewise there is no days or order given  
Genesis chapters one and two describe the creation of the universe, the earth, and life on the earth. Some have said that these accounts are purely mythology. One of the reasons for this perception is because of the apparent contradiction between chapters one and two in the creation accounts. Chapter one describes the creation of plants followed by the creation of animals then humans. Chapter two seems to describe the creation of humans followed by the creation of plants then animals. If this assessment is true, it would seem that there is a contradiction between the creation accounts of Genesis 1 and 2.
Genesis one
Genesis one, the first chapter of the Bible, begins with the creation of the "heavens and earth"1 - a phrase that describes the entire universe. The Genesis one account is notable for being sequential, since the events are listed numerically by the day in which they occurred. Where does this creation take place? Locations mentioned include the heavens (the Hebrew termshamayim can refer to the atmosphere, interstellar space, or God's abode),2 earth (the Hebrew term erets can refer to the entire planet, a people group, or a local piece of geography),3 Sun, moon, and stars.4 How do we know the Hebrew term erets refers to the entire planet as opposed to local geography? Verse 2 describes the "surface of the deep,"5 which describes the primordial ocean.6 Subsequent verses indicate that there was no land until God caused it to appear from the midst of the waters.7 These facts, in the absence of specific place names, suggests that Genesis one describes creation on a global scale.

Besides describing the formation of land and seas, Genesis one describes the creation of plants and animals. The account begins with the creation on plants. Following this is the creation of birds, large sea creatures and swarming sea life. On the final "day," God creates the large grazing mammals and carnivores, along with small scurrying mammals. Creation culminates with the creation of mankind - the last creatures God creates. For a more detailed explanation, see The Literal Interpretation of the Genesis One Creation Account and Day-Age Genesis One Interpretation.
Genesis two
Contrary to what many "scholars" have reported, Genesis two is not a retelling of Genesis one. How can we determine this to be true? First, we should examine the overall context. Genesis two is considerably different in regard to the emphasis of the content. Genesis one dedicates 4 verses (13%) to the creation of humans, beginning with verse 26. However, Genesis two dedicates 19 verses (76%) to the creation of humans, beginning with verse 7. Actually, since there are no real chapter breaks in the original Hebrew manuscripts, the story of the creation of humans continues throughout chapter 3 (another 24 verses). Obviously, the emphasis of the two "versions" is quite different. Part of the problem understanding this passage is because of the poor choice of English words in the common translations. The Hebrew word erets can be translated as "earth" (meaning global) or "land" (referring to a local geographical area). In the Old Testament, erets almost always refers to local geography and not the planet as a whole. We need to examine the context to determine whether erets refers to the entire earth or only a portion of it.
In contrast to Genesis one, there are no indications that the text is referring to global creation. In fact, Genesis 2 begins with God planting a garden8 in a place called Eden, whose location is described in the text that follows. In all, there are three other place names mentioned along with four rivers (verses 10-14). The second place name is Havilah, which is thought to be near the Caspian Sea.9 The third is Cush, which is thought to be a location in Southern Egypt or Ethiopia.10 The fourth is Assyria, which constitutes modern Iraq and Iran.11 Of the four rivers described in the text, only two are definitively identifiable. The Tigris12 and Euphrates13 Rivers run though Iraq and Iran. All the events of Genesis 2 occur in Eden, which is bounded by the three other locations, putting it within the Mesopotamian flood plain.
The narrative continues with descriptions of creation events. Adam was placed in the garden to cultivate it. God brought to Adam the animals He had already created for him to name.14 Since a suitable companion was not found for Adam, God created Eve.15 The narrative concludes with the initiation of the first marriage.16 All the creation descriptions in Genesis two can be attributed to the preparation of a place in which the first humans would live. Therefore, Genesis two further develops the account of mankind's creation at the end of the sixth day.
Conclusion
 
Genesis 1 is the account of the creation of the universe and life on planet earth as it happened in chronological sequence. Genesis 2 is simply an expanded explanation of the events that occurred at the end of the sixth creation day - when God created human beings. Genesis one provides virtually no details about the creation of human beings (other than the idea that humans were created in the image of God). For a book that is dedicated to the relationship between humans and God, four verses seems like a rather poor explanation for the creation of God's preeminent creature. This is because Genesis one was never intended to stand apart from Genesis 2 and 3. Genesis 2 describes God's preparation of a specific location on earth (Eden) for habitation by the first human beings. Part of the confusion results from our English translations, which use the term "earth" when the Hebrew would better be translated "land." Read a modified NIV translation of the Genesis 2 account to see how the text should read.

« Last Edit: March 16, 2018, 08:25:13 PM by DunkingDan »
President Harry S. Truman said: “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount.  The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings…  If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.”

P1tchBlack

  • Guest
Re: The Big Bang Theory
« Reply #17 on: March 16, 2018, 08:35:18 PM »
^^^ I knew you would have some spin. You're very well-versed in explaining away so many of the "issues" in the Bible.^^^^

However, you are correct about my mistatement. According to the Bible, on the first day God created night and day. Equally impossible given that there was no sun which is the only reason night and day are possible.

DunkingDan

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 19200
  • Liked:
Pitch digs his hole deeper
« Reply #18 on: March 16, 2018, 08:42:31 PM »
^^^ I knew you would have some spin. You're very well-versed in explaining away so many of the "issues" in the Bible.^^^^

However, you are correct about my mistatement. According to the Bible, on the first day God created night and day. Equally impossible given that there was no sun which is the only reason night and day are possible.
No spin but then you love false narratives. Perhaps if you tried to read you might understand
But no, you go post more false narrative. 

Again the original text as it was written has no chapters or verses

The Beginning
1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.
3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.
6 And God said, “Let there be a vault between the waters to separate water from water.” 7 So God made the vault and separated the water under the vault from the water above it. And it was so. 8 God called the vault “sky.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day.
9 And God said, “Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear.” And it was so. 10 God called the dry ground “land,” and the gathered waters he called “seas.” And God saw that it was good.
11 Then God said, “Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds.” And it was so. 12 The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good. 13 And there was evening, and there was morning—the third day.
14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark sacred times, and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth.” And it was so. 16 God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17 God set them in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day.
20 And God said, “Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the vault of the sky.” 21 So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living thing with which the water teems and that moves about in it, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. 22 God blessed them and said, “Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the water in the seas, and let the birds increase on the earth.” 23 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fifth day.
24 And God said, “Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: the livestock, the creatures that move along the ground, and the wild animals, each according to its kind.” And it was so. 25 God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.
26 Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals,[a] and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”

27 So God created mankind in his own image,
    in the image of God he created them;
    male and female he created them.

28 God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.”
29 Then God said, “I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food. 30 And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds in the sky and all the creatures that move along the ground—everything that has the breath of life in it—I give every green plant for food.” And it was so.
31 God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning—the sixth day.


--------------------------------

Introduction
Get out your Bibles and be prepared for a shock. You are about to read the Genesis creation account and see (probably) for the first time what the text really says. My only request is that you pray for spiritual guidance, since the Holy Spirit can teach us what our pride usually rejects.
Quote
Holy Spirit, teach us what you told Moses about what you were doing1 during the creation of the earth and life upon it. In Jesus name we pray. Amen.
Genesis 1:1
Quote
"In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth."
Volumes have been written about the first verse of Genesis. There are a two main interpretations of what this verse really means. Some say that the verse is a summary of the rest of the Genesis creation account. Others say that the verse represents the first creative act of God. How can we tell which interpretation is correct?
Day 1
The answer is really quite simple - keep reading! Reading Genesis 1:1 or any other Bible verse outside its context is one of the worst things that a person can do.2 When we look at Genesis 1:2,3 we see that it begins with the conjunction "and." This fact immediately tells us that Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 are part of one continuous thought. Remove the period at the end of Genesis 1:1 and read it as originally intended:
Quote
"In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth and the earth was formless and void...
The conjunction at the beginning of Genesis 1:2 tells us that Genesis 1:1 is not a summary of the creation account! This verse is a factual statement of what God did at the beginning of the first day. There are other context clues that tell us that this is not a summary statement. If we continue reading the Genesis creation account, we come to the real summary at the end (Genesis 2:1).4 It would be superfluous to have a second summary at the beginning. As we continue to read Genesis one, we will notice how succinct the creation account really is.
So, we conclude that the text claims that God created the heavens and earth on the first day. What do the heavens consist of? Stars, galaxies, etc. So, we know that God created, at minimum, the stars and the earth. Actually, the Hebrew phrase translated "heaven and earth" refer to the entire created universe. Some people claim that God created the earth first and that the rest of the heavenly bodies were created later. However, we are led to contemplate why God said that He created the "heavens and the earth." To accept this interpretation, we would have to say that God created "nothing" and the earth. If God had only created the earth, the Genesis 1:1 would have said, "In the beginning God created the earth." So, we can safely say that God created the entire heavens and earth at the beginning of the first creation day.
Genesis 1:2 - the early earth
Keep your Bible open as we zoom on to Genesis 1:2. Those interpretations that claim Genesis 1:1 is just a summary have a problem in this next verse. If Genesis 1:1 is just a summary, then there is no mention in Genesis of God creating matter - it is just suddenly mentioned as if it had existed all along. Such a model is compatible with the LDS (Mormon) theology, but not Christianity.
It is important in Genesis 1:2 to examine the context and the perspective to determine where the action is happening. Let's read the text:
Quote
And the earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep; and the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the waters. (Genesis 1:2)
Where is God? In heaven? In outer space? NO! God, our personal Creator and Savior, is on the surface of the waters of the earth doing His creating "up close and personal." Imagine that - God personally came to earth to create and shape it for habitation! The important thing about this verse is that it defines the conditions as they appeared from God's perspective on the surface of the earth. What are the conditions? "...the earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep..." Why was the earth dark? Genesis one does not say, but other creation accounts in the Bible do say. In fact, in the book of Job, God Himself tells us the answer:
Quote
"Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth? ...When I made a cloud its garment, And thick darkness its swaddling band" (Job 38:4-9)5
How long is day 1?
Many Christians assume that all the Genesis creation days are exactly 24-hours long. Neither the Genesis 1 text nor other Bible verses directly address how long the first day was. However, there were a lot of things that happened on the first day. God created the entire universe. There are other Bible verses that address at least part of how God created the universe. No fewer than 11 verses from five different inspired authors claim that God stretches out the heavens.6 Many of these verses use present tense, indicating that God is still stretching out the heavens. How long did it take to stretch out the trillions and trillions of stars. The Bible doesn't say, but if we measure the current rate that the universe is being stretched, it would suggest a very long time.

So, we know that when God created the earth it was dark because it was covered with thick clouds. This fact will be important to understand the next few verses.
"Let there be light"
Genesis 1:3 begins with another conjunction, so we know it is part of the continuing action. God is still on the surface of the earth. "And God said, 'Let there be light,' and there was light." Where is the light? It's on the surface of the earth for the first time. Where does the light come from. The text does not say directly, but it gives a lot of clues. Did God create the light? No! If God had created the light, the text would have said so, like it does in the rest of Genesis one. It says that God "let it be." Let's read the rest of the first day to get the clues.
Quote
"And God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness. And God called the light day, and the darkness He called night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day." (Genesis 1:4-5)
Notice that every thought is begun with a conjunction, so we know that all of this is part of the continuing action. The text says that there was day and night on the earth on the first day. This tells us that the light that was shining on the earth was directional (from one source). Let's put it all together. God created the earth with a thick layer of clouds around it that caused it to be dark. When God said "Let there be light" it is most logical to conclude that God removed at least some of those thick clouds so that light would fall on the surface of the earth. Where did the light come from? The Sun shining on a rotating earth. You might protest, "But the text never said God created the Sun." It actually does. As stated previously, the Hebrew term "the heavens and the earth" in Genesis 1:1 refers to the entire created universe. So, the Sun, stars, and earth were all created at the beginning of day 1.
Day 2
How long is day 2?
It is difficult to say how long the second day was. Part of the verse indicates that God "let the separation be" (suggesting natural process), but then the text goes on to explain that God "made" the separation. The Hebrew word asah10 translated "made" suggests that God formed the separation from materials that already existed, rather than creating it brand new. As such, the formation could involve both supernatural and natural processes. If the separation was allowed to form on its own, it would be expected that the second day could be a very long period of time.

On the second day, God allows a separation of the waters above from the waters below (Genesis 1:6-7).7 The text seems to be describing the setting up of a water cycle on the earth. The waters above (i.e., clouds) are separated from the waters below (the "deep" or seas mentioned in verse 2). The separation is called "heaven"8 (also translated "skies").9
Day 3
God did a couple things on the third day. God's first action was the formation of dry land:
Quote
Then God said, "Let the waters below the heavens be gathered into one place, and let the dry land appear"; and it was so. And God called the dry land earth, and the gathering of the waters He called seas; and God saw that it was good. (Genesis 1:9-10)
Similar to the first two days, God "let" the dry land appear. The land already existed, although it was underneath the original seas. Psalm 104 (the "creation Psalm") tells us how God accomplished the appearance of the land. According to the Psalm, "The mountains rose; the valleys sank down To the place which Thou didst establish for them."11 The description suggests that God used some form of tectonic activity to form the dry land. If tectonic activity were used by God to form the dry land, it would suggest that the beginning of the third day would be a very long period of time.
How long is day 3?
There is no plant in the world that can germinate and produce seeds within a 24-hour period of time. It gets worse for the 24-hour interpretation. Not only do we have plants, we have trees that grow and produce fruit with seed in it. It takes fruit trees several years of growth before they produce any fruit. You might say that God could have caused everything to happen super-quick. However, God says, "Let the earth sprout vegetation..." and the text says, "And the earth brought forth vegetation..." In order to claim that God miraculously created all the plants, seed, etc. in 24-hours, one would have to claim God was a liar. Not a good accusation to make! So we know that the second part of the third day was at least several years long.

Creation of plants
Quote
Then God said, "Let the earth sprout vegetation, plants yielding seed, and fruit trees bearing fruit after their kind, with seed in them, on the earth"; and it was so. And the earth brought forth vegetation, plants yielding seed after their kind, and trees bearing fruit, with seed in them, after their kind; and God saw that it was good. (Genesis 1:11-12)
On the third day God allows the earth to produce plants through germination (sprouting) and growth until seeds are produced. The Hebrew word dasha refers to a plant that sprouts from a seed until the seedling turns green.12 This verb tells us that God used processes identical to what we see on the earth today. Plants spouted, grew to maturity, and produced seeds. Several kinds of plants are described. The Hebrew word deshe13 refers primarily to grasses; the word eseb14 refers primarily to herbs and the words peri15 ets16 refer to fruit trees.
Day 4
Many people believe that the text about day 4 says that God created the Sun, moon and stars on the fourth day. This is not what the text actually says, so let's read it again.
  • Then God said, "Let there be lights in the expanse of the heavens to separate the day from the night, and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days and years; (Genesis 1:14)
  • and let them be for lights in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth"; and it was so. (Genesis 1:15)
  • And God made the two great lights, the greater light to govern the day, and the lesser light to govern the night; He made the stars also. (Genesis 1:16)
  • And God placed them in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth, (Genesis 1:17)
  • and to govern the day and the night, and to separate the light from the darkness; and God saw that it was good. (Genesis 1:18)
How can a day be longer than 24-hours?
Even though the Genesis text clearly indicates that the days are longer than 24-hours, some Christians insist that any interpretation of Genesis 1 that deviates from 24-hour days is not literal. The problem is that the Hebrew word yom17 has three literal definitions - 12 hour daylight period, 24 period of time, or a long, but indefinite period of time. A careful reading of the Genesis creation account reveals that the 24-hour interpretation is ruled out by the actual Genesis text. The first definitive example of a day that is longer than 24-hours can be found in the beginning of the Genesis 2 creation account, which says that the entire six days of creation are one day.18

In verse 14 we have that unusual construction again of "let there be." It is not a statement of creation, but a statement of appearance. At this point, the clouds present at the initial creation of the earth were completely removed so that the bodies themselves appeared for the first time on the surface of the earth. The passage tells us that the lights were allowed "to be" so that they could be signs of the seasons, days, and years. It was necessary for the creatures of day 5 that the heavenly bodies be visible. We know that many of the migratory birds (created on day 5) require visible stars to navigate, hence the need to actually see these bodies. Verse 18 gives us another hint. The lights were placed in the sky to "separate the light from the darkness." Does this sound familiar? It is the exact Hebrew phrase used for God's work on the first day when, "God separated the light from the darkness" (Genesis 1:4) By using this phrase, the text is recounting the formation of the Sun, moon and stars from the first day. If we accept that God created the Sun, moon and stars on the fourth day, then He didn't really create the heavens in verse one. So, the 24-hour day interpretation suffers a contradiction between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:16.
Day 5
On the fifth day, God created the animals described by the Hebrew word nephesh.
  • Then God said, "Let the waters teem with swarms of living creatures [nephesh], and let birds fly above the earth in the open expanse of the heavens." (Genesis 1:20)
  • And God created the great sea monsters, and every living creature [nephesh] that moves, with which the waters swarmed after their kind, and every winged bird after its kind; and God saw that it was good. (Genesis 1:21)
  • And God blessed them, saying, "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let birds multiply on the earth." (Genesis 1:22)
The word nephesh is used of both animals and human beings, and primarily has the meaning "soul."19 The term encompasses the ideas of mind, will, and emotion. These characteristics apply to the higher animals, such as the birds and mammals. The kinds of creature created includes many different kinds of birds (Genesis 1:21) and the "great sea monsters," probably referring to the whales (also referred to as nephesh beings). These creatures were created in great abundance, as indicated by the verbs sharats20 and ramas.21 The fossil record confirms that there was a massive introduction of bird and mammal species at the beginning of the tertiary age.22
Day 6
The sixth days describes the creation of animals that impact mankind and the creation of mankind himself.
  • Then God said, "Let the earth bring forth living creatures [nephesh] after their kind: cattle and creeping things and beasts of the earth after their kind"; and it was so. (Genesis 1:24)
  • God made the beasts of the earth after their kind, and the cattle after their kind, and everything that creeps on the ground after its kind; and God saw that it was good. (Genesis 1:25)
  • Then God said, "Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth." (Genesis 1:26)
  • God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. (Genesis 1:27)
The sixth day begins with the creation of more nephesh creatures. These include the cattle (behemah23), creeping (remes24) nephesh (probably rodents), and "beasts (chay25) of the earth" (translated "wild animals" in the NIV, usually referring to the wild carnivores).
The ultimate nephesh creation is mankind, created at the end of the sixth day. Genesis 1:27 tells us that God created mankind as males and females. However, Genesis 2 tells us more about the sixth day. From Genesis 1:27, we know that the sixth day extended at least through the creation of Eve, since the text indicates that God created both males and females on the sixth day. The following events took place after the creation of Adam
The events of the sixth day seem to require longer than 24 hours also. The text indicates that God planted a garden. This garden was not planted full-grown, since the text says that the trees were caused to sprout or grow (Hebrew tsamach30). The amount of time allowed for the garden to grow is not stated, but would presumably take longer than 24-hours. After the garden had grown sufficiently, the man was placed into the garden to cultivate it.31 By this time, the trees were producing fruit so that Adam could eat.32 This process takes a period of time greater than 24 hours. Next, Adam was given the assignment of naming the birds, cattle and wild animals. The list includes only birds and mammals and does not mention fish or other lower life forms. Even so, it would require that Adam name at least 14,600 species (8,600 species of birds and 4,000 species of mammals). This would require Adam to name more than 10 species per minute (assuming he had the entire 24 hours). For those who believe in a young earth, it would require that Adam name not only all of the existing birds and mammals but all the ones in the fossil record also (since they would all have to be alive on day 6 - no animal death before the fall). Such a task would probably double the number of species to be named. However, Adam did not have the entire 24 hours, since part of it was required for the planting and growing of the garden, Adam tending the garden, and God putting Adam to sleep to create Eve. Realistically, Adam would have to name at least 20 species per minute, including all the species found in the fossil record. Following this naming of the animals, no suitable helper was found for Adam. So, God put Adam to sleep, took at piece of Adam's side, and created Eve. Adam's response to Eve's creation is also telling. Upon seeing Eve for the first time, Adam says "at last."33 This is not exactly the response one would expect from a person who had waited for less than one day. So, we must conclude that the sixth day was most certainly longer than 24 hours, and probably took at least several years from Adam's response.
« Last Edit: March 16, 2018, 09:00:01 PM by DunkingDan »
President Harry S. Truman said: “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount.  The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings…  If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.”

P1tchBlack

  • Guest
Re: The Big Bang Theory
« Reply #19 on: March 16, 2018, 09:07:11 PM »
Who knows, who cares.  Just as long as it wasn't God.
That's kind of the point for me. I don't claim to know exactly how the universe started or where everything came from. What I do know is that of all the possible explanations for how we came to be, the "sky wizard", to me, is the least reasonable.

VolRage

  • All Star
  • ******
  • Posts: 3044
  • Liked:
Re: The Big Bang Theory
« Reply #20 on: March 17, 2018, 10:01:02 AM »
^^^^^and this is least possible to me. That every living creature, man, and plants came from the very same matter as a result of some Big Bang. Then we all evolved taking far different paths when the fossil records prove otherwise.

As an example. Look at the evolution of the whale. You’d have to be a complete idiot to believe that evolution path was ever possible.

fuzzynavol

  • seeker of passage
  • Legend
  • ****
  • Posts: 8737
  • Liked:
Re: The Big Bang Theory
« Reply #21 on: March 17, 2018, 04:46:27 PM »
Then we all evolved taking far different paths when the fossil records prove otherwise.

Fossil records disprove evolution?  Please elaborate.

As an example. Look at the evolution of the whale. You’d have to be a complete idiot to believe that evolution path was ever possible.

You urgently need to read up about a man named Darwin.  

Drew4UTk

  • Administrator
  • Team Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 6072
  • Liked:
Re: The Big Bang Theory
« Reply #22 on: March 17, 2018, 06:06:22 PM »
when i walk in the door with a 50lbs bag of dog food over my shoulder, my dogs are awestruck.  they must believe i went out and killed a bag of food, and brought it for their use.  i'd love to be the man my dogs think i am.  

i wonder what fish think when we snatch them out of the wet into a strange world and stare at them.  they stare back.  i can't ever tell you that i've seen a fish blink... that is some serious fear, there, y'all.  

i've never been stoned enough to talk to a tree.  i was always afraid that observing my inebriation they might speak back. maybe it's because i know that they are alive and have never seen one as much as flinch- even when approached with a chainsaw, that i get the feeling they're wise- and stoic.. and always watching with little approval.  

of course this is projecting human sensibilities on creatures that have none. 

there have been cases of people reporting alien (as in SPACEMEN!!!) abduction... prodding and devices, and always shit they couldn't explain accompanied by lights, flashing, buzzing sounds, and devices that defy gravity.  I don't know if that shit is true..... but it makes me feel something like a fish when i think about it.  one that has a hook embedded in the corner of it's jaw.  

now here is my point, while trying to present it in a humorous way- what makes us think ~truly believe~ we are better than a tree, a fish, or a dog?  obviously we are.. but what if there is something that looks at us the same way we look at a dog/fish/tree and lump them in the same category as us?  

people feign intelligence.   everybody does.  me too (and not just because i'm part of 'everybody') ... it's not a foolish intellectual exercise to imagine seeing a hot blond or a hundred dollar bill laying around, attempting to pick it up- and being snatched clean out of the reality you know- staring blank faced and unblinking at whatever-the-fuck-that-is that is looking at us with little to no compassion other than saying something even our narrow minds can roughly translate to "hey look!! i caught a good one!!"... not aliens, mind you... i've seen enough pictures of them to readily identify them as something imaginable.  But.. imagine something snatching your ass out of reality and into something you are completely ill equipped to explain or even describe... 

my personal reckoning is this is how it is.  we're trying to describe and explain something we simply can't.  we've been clued in and directed- some things explained- but in a way a person talks to a dog (us being the dogs).  We're beyond arrogant to believe we can understand the power, or intelligence that 'caused' this condition of the world as we know it.  i think- believe- we're so damn dumb, in comparison to this 'entity?' that our lack of grasp/understanding make it as if we're that fish to them... or a tree- oblivious of condition except for projection. 

remove the arrogance of man, and this is the only conclusion within our capacity.  yeah, we can figure things out, but all told we're not really any smarter now than we were a thousand years ago- not even a little smarter truth be known, and while comparing it to the divide in intelligence between us and Whomever, Whatever, However, 'Entity' that is responsible for this here..... circumstance? 

DunkingDan

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 19200
  • Liked:
Re: The Big Bang Theory
« Reply #23 on: March 17, 2018, 06:11:22 PM »
^^^^^and this is least possible to me. That every living creature, man, and plants came from the very same matter as a result of some Big Bang. Then we all evolved taking far different paths when the fossil records prove otherwise.

As an example. Look at the evolution of the whale. You’d have to be a complete idiot to believe that evolution path was ever possible.
Fuzz and his shadow have no understanding of  science 
President Harry S. Truman said: “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount.  The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings…  If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.”

DunkingDan

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 19200
  • Liked:
THE EQUILIBRIUM IN THE EXPLOSION
« Reply #24 on: March 17, 2018, 06:19:05 PM »
Scientists estimate that there are over 300 billion galaxies in the whole universe. These galaxies have a number of different forms (spiral, elliptical, etc) and each contains about as many stars as the universe contains galaxies. One of these stars, the Sun, has nine major planets rotating around in it in great harmony. All of us live on the third of those planets counting from the sun.
 Look about you: Does what you see appear to be a disordered jumble of matter haphazardly scattered this way and that? Of course not. But how could matter have formed organized galaxies if it had been dispersed randomly? Why has matter accumulated at certain points and formed stars? How could the delicate balance of our solar system have emerged from a violent explosion? These are very important questions and they lead us to the real question of how the universe was structured after the Big Bang.
 
 If the Big Bang was indeed a such cataclysmic explosion then it is reasonable to expect that matter should have been scattered everywhere at random. And yet it is not. Instead it is organized into planets, and stars, and galaxies, and clusters of galaxies, and superclusters of galaxies. It is as if a bomb that exploded in a granary caused all the wheat to fall into neat sacks and bales on the backs of trucks ready to be delivered instead of showering the grains every which way. Fred Hoyle, a staunch opponent of the Big Bang theory for years, expressed his own surprise at this structure:

 The big bang theory holds that the universe began with a single explosion. Yet as can be seen below, an explosion merely throws matter apart, while the big bang has mysteriously produced the opposite effect- with matter clumping together in the form of galaxies. (2)

That the matter produced by the Big Bang should have formed such tidy and organized shapes is indeed an extraordinary thing. The occurrence of such a harmony leads us to the realization that the universe was the result of its perfect creation by God.
 In this chapter we will examine and consider this extraordinary perfection and excellence.

The Speed of the Explosion
 People hearing of the Big Bang but not considering the subject at length do not think about what an extraordinary plan must lie behind this explosion. That's because the notion of an explosion doesn't suggest harmony, plan, or organization to most people. In fact there are a number of very puzzling aspects to the intricate order in the Big Bang.
 One of these puzzles has to do with the acceleration caused by the explosion. When the explosion took place, matter certainly must have begun moving at an enormous speed in every direction. But there is another point that we need to pay attention to here. There must also have been a very big attractive force at the first moment of the explosion: an attractive force that was strong enough to gather the whole universe into one point.
 


Paul Davies: "The evidence is strong enough to acknowledge the existence of a conscious cosmic design."
Two different and opposing forces are at work here. The force of the explosion, driving matter outward and away, and the force of attraction, trying to resist the first and pull everything back together. The universe came into being because these two forces were in equilibrium. If the attractive force had been greater than the explosive, the universe would have collapsed. If the opposite had been true, matter would have been splattered in every direction in a way never to unite again.
 Then how sensitive was this equilibrium? How much "slack" could there have been between the two forces?
 The mathematical physicist Paul Davies, a professor at the University of Adelaide in Australia, performed lengthy calculations of the conditions that must have existed at the moment of the Big Bang and came up with a result that can only be described as astonishing. According to Davies, if the rate of expansion had differed by more than 10-18 seconds (one quintillionth of a second), there would have been no universe. Davies describes his conclusion:

 Careful measurements puts the rate of expansion very close to a critical value at which the universe will just escape its own gravity and expand forever. A little slower and the cosmos would collapse, a little faster and the cosmic material would have long ago completely dispersed. It is interesting to ask precisely how delicately the rate of expansion has been "fine tuned" to fall on this narrow dividing line between two catastrophes. If at time I S (by which the time pattern of expansion was already firmly established) the expansion rate had differed from its actual value by more than 10-18, it would have been sufficient to throw the delicate balance out. The explosive vigour of the universe is thus matched with almost unbelievable accuracy to its gravitating power. The big bang was not evidently, any old bang, but an explosion of exquisitely arranged magnitude. (3)
Bilim Teknik (Science Technique, a Turkish scientific periodical) quotes an article that appeared in Science in which the phenomenal equilibrium that obtained in the initial phase of universe is stated:
 If the density of the universe was a little bit more, in that case, according to Einstein's relativity theory, the universe would not be expanding due to the attraction forces of atomic particles but contracting, ultimately diminishing to a spot. If the initial density had been a little bit less, then the universe would rapidly be expanding, but in this case, atomic particles would not be attracting each other and no stars and no galaxies would ever have formed. Consequently, man would never come into existence! According to the calculations, the difference between the initial real density of the universe and its critical density, which is unlikely to occur, is less than one percent's one quadrillion. This is similar to place a pencil in a position so that it can stand on its sharp end even after one billion years… Furthermore, as the universe expands, this equilibrium becomes more delicate. (4)
Even Stephen Hawking, who tries hard to explain away the creation of the universe as a series coincidences in A Brief History of Time, acknowledges the extraordinary equilibrium in the rate of expansion:
 If the rate of expansion one second after the big bang had been smaller by even one part in a hundred thousand million million, the universe would have recollapsed before it ever reached its present size. (5)
What then does such a remarkable equilibrium as this indicate? The only rational answer to that question is that it is proof of conscious design and cannot possibly be accidental. Despite his own materialist bent, Dr Davies admits this himself:
 It is hard to resist that the present structure of the universe, apparently so sensitive to minor alterations in the numbers, has been rather carefully thought out… The seemingly miraculous concurrence of numerical values that nature has assigned to her fundamental constants must remain the most compelling evidence for an element of cosmic design. (6)
   

 The Four Forces

he speed of the Big Bang's explosion is only one of the remarkable states of equilibrium at the initial moment of creation. Immediately after the Big Bang, forces that underpin and organize the universe we live in had to be numerically "just right" otherwise there would have been no universe.
 These are the "four fundamental forces" that are recognized by modern physics. All structure and motion in the universe is governed by these four forces, known as the gravitational force, the electromagnetic force, the strong nuclear force, and the weak nuclear force. The strong and weak nuclear forces operate only at the atomic scale. The remaining two-the gravitational force and the electromagnetic force-govern assemblages of atoms, in other words "matter". These four fundamental forces were at work in the immediate aftermath of the Big Bang and resulted in the creation of atoms and matter.
 A comparison of those forces is enlightening for their values are stunningly different from one another. Below they are given in international standard units:
 Strong nuclear force: 15
 Weak nuclear force: 7.03 x 10-3
 Electromagnetic force: 3.05 x 10-12
 Gravitational force: 5.90 x 10-39
 Notice how great are the differences in the strengths of these four fundamental forces. The difference between the strongest (strong nuclear force) and the weakest (gravitational force) is about 25 followed by 38 zeros! Why should this be so?
 The molecular biologist Michael Denton addresses this question in his book, Nature's Destiny:

 If, for example, the gravitational force was a trillion times stronger, then the universe would be far smaller and its life history far shorter. An average star would have a mass a trillion times less than the sun and a life span of about one year. On the other hand, if gravity had been less powerful, no stars or galaxies would have ever formed. The other relationships and values are no less critical. If the strong force had been just slightly weaker, the only element that would be stable would be hydrogen. No other atoms could exist. If it had been slightly stronger in relation to electromagnetism, then an atomic nucleus consisting of only two protons would be a stable feature of the universe-which would mean there would be no hydrogen, and if any stars or galaxies evolved, they would be very different from the way they are. Clearly, if these various forces and constants did not have precisely the values they do, there would be no stars, no supernovae, no planets, no atoms, no life. (7)
Paul Davies comments on how the laws of physics provide for conditions ideal for people to live:
 Had nature opted for a slightly different set of numbers, the world would be a very different place. Probably we would not be here to see it…Recent discoveries about the primeval cosmos oblige us to accept that the expanding universe has been set up in its motion with a cooperation of astonishing precision. (8)
Arno Penzias, who was the first, along with Robert Wilson to detect the cosmic background radiation (for which discovery the pair received a Nobel prize in 1965), comments on the beautiful design in the universe:
 Astronomy leads us to a unique event, a universe which was created out of nothing, one with the very delicate balance needed to provide exactly the conditions required to permit life, and one which has underlying (one might say "supernational") plan. (9)
The scientists we have just quoted have all drawn an important conclusion from their observations. Examining and thinking about the incredible balances and their beautiful order in the design of universe inevitably leads one to a truth: There exists in this universe a superior design and a perfect harmony. Unquestionably the Author of this design and harmony is God, Who has created everything flawlessly.
The Mathematics of Probability Refutes "Coincidence"
 What has been said so far shows the extraordinary balances among the forces that make human life possible in this universe. The speed of the Big Bang's explosion, the values of the four fundamental forces, and all the other variables that we will be examining in the chapters ahead and which are vital for existence have been arranged according to an extraordinary precision.
 Let us now make a brief digression and consider the coincidence theory of materialism. Coincidence is a mathematical term and the possibility of an event's occurrence can be calculated using the mathematics of probability. Let's do so.


THE PROBABILITY OF THE OCCURRENCE OF A UNIVERSE IN WHICH LIFE CAN FORM
The calculations of British mathematician Roger Penrose show that the probability of universe conducive to life occurring by chance is in 1010123. The phrase "extremely unlikely" is inadequate to describe this possibility.
 


10000000000000000000000000000000
00000000000000000000000000000000
00000000000000000000000000000000
10 00000000000000000000000000000000
  
Taking the physical variables into account, what is the likelihood of a universe giving us life coming into existence by coincidence? One in billions of billions? Or trillions of trillions of trillions? Or more?
 Roger Penrose, a famous British mathematician and a close friend of Stephen Hawking, wondered about this question and tried to calculate the probability. Including what he considered to be all variables required for human beings to exist and live on a planet such as ours, he computed the probability of this environment occurring among all the possible results of the Big Bang.


Roger Penrose: "This number tells us how precise the Creator's aim must have been."
According to Penrose, the odds against such an occurrence were on the order of 1010123 to 1.
 It is hard even to imagine what this number means. In math, the value 10123 means 1 followed by 123 zeros. (This is, by the way, more than the total number of atoms 1078 believed to exist in the whole universe.) But Penrose's answer is vastly more than this: It requires 1 followed by 10123zeros.
 Or consider: 103 means 1,000, a thousand. 10103 is a number that that has 1 followed by 1000 zeros. If there are six zeros, it's called a million; if nine, a billion; if twelve, a trillion and so on. There is not even a name for a number that has 1 followed by 10123 zeros.
 In practical terms, in mathematics, a probability of 1 in 1050 means "zero probability". Penrose's number is more than trillion trillion trillion times less than that. In short, Penrose's number tells us that the 'accidental" or "coincidental" creation of our universe is an impossibility.
 Concerning this mind-boggling number Roger Penrose comments:

 This now tells how precise the Creator's aim must have been, namely to an accuracy of one part in 1010123. This is an extraordinary figure. One could not possibly even write the number down in full in the ordinary denary notation: it would be 1 followed by 10123 successive 0's. Even if we were to write a 0 on each separate proton and on each separate neutron in the entire universe- and we could throw in all the other particles for good measure- we should fall far short of writing down the figure needed. (10)
The numbers defining the design and plan of the universe's equilibrium play a crucial role and exceed comprehension. They prove that the universe is by no means the product of a coincidence, and show us "how precise the Creator's aim must have been" as Penrose stated.
 In fact in order to recognize that the universe is not a "product of coincidences" one does not really need any of these calculations at all. Simply by looking around himself, a person can easily perceive the fact of creation in even the tiniest details of what he sees. How could a universe like this, perfect in its systems, the sun, the earth, people, houses, cars, trees, flowers, insects, and all the other things in it ever have come into existence as the result of atoms falling together by chance after an explosion? Every detail we peer at shows the evidence of God's existence and supreme power.

Seeing the Plain Truth
 20th-century science has come up with categorical evidence that the universe was created by God. The anthropic principle that we mentioned before reveals every detail of a universe that has been designed for mankind to live in and in which there is no place for chance.
 The interesting part is that the ones who discovered all this and came to the conclusion that the universe couldn't possibly have come into being by accident are the very same people who defend the philosophy of materialism. Scientists such as Paul Davies, Arno Penzias, Fred Hoyle and Roger Penrose are not pious men and they certainly had no intention of proving God's existence as they pursued their work. One can imagine that they reached their conclusions about the design of the universe by a superior power most unwillingly.
 The American astronomer George Greenstein confesses this in his book The Symbiotic Universe:

 How could this possibly have come to pass (that the laws of physics conform themselves to life)?…As we survey all the evidence, the thought insistently arises that some supernatural agency - or, rather Agency- must be involved. Is it possible that suddenly, without intending to, we have stumbled upon scientific proof of the existence of a Supreme Being? Was it God who stepped in and so providentially crafted the cosmos for our benefit? (11)
An atheist, Greenstein disregards the plain truth; nevertheless he cannot keep from wondering. Other, less prejudiced scientists on the other hand, readily admit that the universe must have been specially designed for mankind to live in. The American astrophysicist Hugh Ross ends his article "Design and the Anthropic Principle" with these words:
 An intelligent, transcendent Creator must have brought the universe into existence. An intelligent, transcendent Creator must have designed the universe. An intelligent, transcendent Creator must have designed planet Earth. An intelligent, transcendent Creator must have designed life. (12)
Thus science proves the reality of creation. Certainly there is God and He has created everything around us-the seen and the unseen. He is the sole Creator of the extraordinary and outstanding equilibrium and design of the heavens and Earth.
 
 It has come such a pass that today, materialism has the flavor of a superstitious, unscientific system of belief. The American geneticist Robert Griffiths jokingly remarked "If we need an atheist for a debate, I go to the philosophy department. The physics department isn't much use." (13)
 To sum up: Every physical law and every physical constant in this universe has been specifically designed to enable human beings to exist and live. In his book The Cosmic Blueprint, Davies states this truth in the last paragraph, "The impression of Design is overwhelming." (14)
 Doubtlessly, the design of the universe is evidence of God's power to establish. The precise balances and all the human beings and other creatures are the evidence of God's supreme power and act of creation.

       
References:
 1. Paul Davies, Superforce: The Search for a Grand Unified Theory of Nature, 1984, p. 184 
 2. Fred Hoyle, The Intelligent Universe, London, 1984, p. 184-185 
 3. Paul Davies, Superforce: The Search for a Grand Unified Theory of Nature, 1984, p. 184 
 4. Bilim ve Teknik  (Science and Technics ) 201, p. 16 
 5. Stephen Hawking, A Brief History Of Time, Bantam Press, London: 1988, p. 121-125 
 6. Paul Davies. God and the New Physics. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1983, p. 189 
 7. Michael Denton, Nature's Destiny: How the Laws of Biology Reveal Purpose in the Universe, The New York: The Free Press, 1998, p. 12-13 
 8. Paul Davies. The Accidental Universe, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982, Foreword. 
 9. Hugh Ross, The Creator and the Cosmos, p. 122-23 
 10. Roger Penrose, The Emperor's New Mind, 1989; Michael Denton, Nature's Destiny, The New York: The Free Press, 1998, p. 9 
 11. George Greenstein, The Symbiotic Universe, p. 27 
 12. Hugh Ross, Design and the Anthropic Principle, Reasons To Believe, CA, 1988 
 13. Hugh Ross, The Creator and the Cosmos, p. 123 
 14. Paul Davies, The Cosmic Blueprint, London: Penguin Books, 1987, p. 203  
President Harry S. Truman said: “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount.  The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings…  If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.”

 

Associate Links/Search