Posted on 04/28/2009 9:16:01 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
Science Still in the Dark about Dark Energy
by Brian Thomas, M.S.*
Evolutionary astronomers have a problem. The universe is expanding at an ever-increasing rate, but if general relativity is an accurate cosmological model, and if the universe is made up of the kinds of matter and energy that are directly detectable (like atoms and light), then its expansion should be slowing. Astronomers “fixed” this problem by theorizing that “75% of the energy density of the universe exists…as dark energy.”[1] This non-detectable dark energy allows the man-made model to match astronomical observations.
However, scientists are aware that dark energy itself has problems: “Nothing meeting the description of dark energy [matches] fundamental particles… It is a substance that has not as yet been measured directly, has properties unlike anything we have ever seen…. In short, we are very much in the dark about dark energy.”[2] At the urging of mainstream cosmologists, millions of government dollars are being spent trying to detect and characterize dark energy, whose supposed existence is only one of the assumptions required to make standard cosmological models “work.”
Another of these assumptions is...
(Excerpt) Read more at icr.org ...
Ping!
*Evolutionary astronomers*
For crying out loud!
Imaginary bandaids characterize all the anti-God models; is that a coincidence? ;o)
ROTFLMAO
Sorry but I can't drop my IQ far enough to read the rest of the article
So let me get this straight. There is a problem with General Relativity as a cosmological model, but Global Warming has long moved past the need for debate and is absolute truth. Riiiiiiiight!
What’s anti-God in this one?
In other words “dark energy” must be a liberal concept ; it can’t be seen or measured,it’s only an imaginary concept used to keep alive other theories that have failed real-world testing,and it costs millions of dollars for no observable results!
Careful. Brian Thomas has an M.S.* after his name.
Thanks for the ping!
I admit there are flaws in current physics models but the stupidity in this article could be pointed out by a third grader.
Evolutionary astronomers
__________
Can you help a freeper out here? What is an evolutionary astronomer, and how does the study of astronomy relate to a theory dealing with speciation?
Just call cosmology another form of religion.
Scientists are relying on modern observations of God's creation rather than ancient guesses.
Anyone who doesn’t believe the Earth to be 10,000 years old is an Evolutionary XXX. Some time back we even witnessed the birth of Evolutionary banking.
God’s always good for a modern inspiration.
What’s anti-God in this one?
_______
Silly you. Did you not see the word evolution in the article? That’s all it takes to qualify as anti-God.
Someone's indulging himself in "word magic" to come up with that ~ I usually ignore "word magic" since, as it turns out, IT DOESN'T WORK!
The “big bang” is a falacious construct to deny the obvious, and clearly observed Terra-centric nature of the creation. It (big bang) is only supported by about 10% of astronomers.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.