Skip to comments.
Probing Question: What happened before the Big Bang?
Pennsylvania State University ^
| 03 August 2006
| Barbara Kennedy
Posted on 08/04/2006 4:26:21 AM PDT by PatrickHenry
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 201-220, 221-240, 241-260 ... 521 next last
To: sirchtruth
You don't understand. Nothing happened before the big bang, yet it was a purely natural phenomenon in spite of the fact that nature did not exist until afterward. In other words, the big bang was caused by its result. Apparently.
To: Bryan24
It has no relevance to YOU.
This does still not explain why you introduced the subject of atheism into this discussion.
222
posted on
08/04/2006 3:53:23 PM PDT
by
Dimensio
(http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
To: RightWhale
Amazing that this cosmology thread survived so long.It hasn't. It's been hijacked by the "I'm gonna witness anywhere I want" gang and dragged into the Dark Ages.
223
posted on
08/04/2006 4:12:25 PM PDT
by
PatrickHenry
(Everything is blasphemy to someone.)
To: Alter Kaker
I wish I was that clever. See my post, #49. It's an old joke I heard somewhere else.
224
posted on
08/04/2006 4:34:56 PM PDT
by
exit82
(If Democrats can lead, then I'm Chuck Norris.)
To: PatrickHenry
Yeah. Well, I was going to mention that the paper was accepted in 'Letters,' which is where informal proposals go. If it were a formal theory article or monograph it would be accepted in the journal proper after appropriate peer review. Who knows, the proposal might be adopted into the model in some form. It certainly would take care of the what happened before Time began question, but the what happens outside the universe question will never be sufficiently explained to non-mathematicians. That's the way it appears it will be until we become interested in math and science as a country again.
225
posted on
08/04/2006 4:38:36 PM PDT
by
RightWhale
(Repeal the law of the excluded middle)
To: RightWhale
Well, I was going to mention that the paper was accepted in 'Letters,' which is where informal proposals go. I'm not sure of that. Physical Review Letters is the name of the journal, and it's probably the most prestigious in the whole field of physics. The article doesn't say it was published as a letter, although maybe it was.
226
posted on
08/04/2006 4:44:22 PM PDT
by
PatrickHenry
(Everything is blasphemy to someone.)
To: Ichneumon
You are completely clueless! Just because YOU post some farcial explanation doesn't mean everyone has to buy it, hook, line, and sinker? What an arrogant prick to think YOUR explanation is the END ALL explanation, especially when you were not around to witness an event. Your opinion, and research (bad ones at that), don't explain jack! You may have an convoluted explanation, but it's not fact, or are you totally deluded in the cult of evo to realize this?
BTW, it's ALL opinion, no fact. You actually have yet to show a FACT. Way to keep track of meaningless post, you must be so proud of yourself! Welcome to FAITH 101!
227
posted on
08/04/2006 5:07:31 PM PDT
by
sirchtruth
(No one has the RIGHT not to be offended...)
www.cosmologystatement.org
To: sirchtruth
Insulting Ichneumon does not alter the fact that you have repeatedly and knowingly misrepresented the subject of the Big Bang.
229
posted on
08/04/2006 5:35:39 PM PDT
by
Dimensio
(http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
To: pageonetoo
Yes any discussion of what happened before the "big bang" is open season for the inclusion of any gods whatsoever into the dialogue. A rational person probably wouldn't be so defensive about including only one out of the thousands of gods worshipped throughout our history. But, like most in the religious community, you already know everything, and no other belief system can possibly be entertained.
You are unwilling to discuss actual science so most people would prefer to leave you in you self-chosen intellectual ghetto.
The jokes on you, friend... You are a blip on the radar to all the gods, demons, and pixies in the universe! No matter how much you try to dispel the notion, your beliefs are nothing but smoke and laughter for the truly chosen!
Give us a break and try arguing your position with positive, evidentiary comments rather than bullsh!t beliefs that any three-year-old could happily entertain. Or are you too afraid you may be wrong and be condemned to the Hell of Being Cut to Pieces for all ETERNITY!
230
posted on
08/04/2006 5:37:22 PM PDT
by
balrog666
(Ignorance is never better than knowledge. - Enrico Fermi)
To: pageonetoo
231
posted on
08/04/2006 5:39:26 PM PDT
by
Popman
("What I was doing wasn't living, it was dying. I really think God had better plans for me.")
To: sirchtruth
BTW, it's ALL opinion, no fact. You actually have yet to show a FACT. This is a fact (data point). A cute one too!
Fossil: Sts 5 Site: Sterkfontein Cave, South Africa (1)
Discovered By: R. Broom & J. Robinson 1947 (1)
Estimated Age of Fossil: 2.5 mya * determined by Stratigraphic, floral & faunal data (1, 4)
Species Name: Australopithecus africanus (1, 2)
Gender: Male (based on CAT scan of wisdom teeth roots) (1, 30) Female (original interpretation) (4)
Cranial Capacity: 485 cc (2, 4)
Information: No tools found in same layer (4)
Interpretation: Erect posture (based on forward facing foramen magnum) (8)
Nickname: Mrs. Ples (1)
See original source for notes:
http://www.mos.org/evolution/fossils/fossilview.php?fid=24
232
posted on
08/04/2006 5:41:28 PM PDT
by
Coyoteman
(I love the sound of beta decay in the morning!)
To: Perdogg
The Big Cigarette came after. LOLOLOLOLOL
To: balrog666; Dimensio
You don't understand. What to you -- in your scientific worldview -- may look like a complete mental collapse is really a blessed event. These guys are witnessing. Leave them be.
234
posted on
08/04/2006 5:44:50 PM PDT
by
PatrickHenry
(Everything is blasphemy to someone.)
To: Junior
Well, why did they call it the "Big Bang"? Why didn't they simply name it, "the rapidly-expanding spacetime"? You, know, truth in advertising and all that...
CA....
235
posted on
08/04/2006 5:50:24 PM PDT
by
Chances Are
(Whew! It seems I've once again found that silly grin!)
To: PatrickHenry
Big bang pushed back two billion years
16:26 04 August 2006
NewScientist.com news service
Zeeya Merali
Our universe may be 15% larger and older than we thought, according to new measurements of the distance to a nearby galaxy.
[snip]
Source.
236
posted on
08/04/2006 5:52:26 PM PDT
by
Coyoteman
(I love the sound of beta decay in the morning!)
To: Coyoteman
237
posted on
08/04/2006 6:00:44 PM PDT
by
PatrickHenry
(Everything is blasphemy to somebody.)
To: sirchtruth
"What an arrogant prick to think YOUR explanation is the END ALL explanation, especially when you were not around to witness an event."
Touched a nerve I see. Your manners need improvement.
BTW were you around to witness the Resurrection?
To: PatrickHenry
239
posted on
08/04/2006 6:04:37 PM PDT
by
Coyoteman
(I love the sound of beta decay in the morning!)
To: Dimensio
How can I misrepresent something that has no basis in fact, other than scientist guesses and opinions? You evo's can't stand the fact that the best explanations you can come up with are JUST GUESSES and conjecture.
It's highly arrogant to think just because science speculates about an event, it's written in stone...
You evo's can sit there and study the events,(all power to you to find the solution), but to proclaim an "explanation" the end all of the argument is so pompas, you deserved to be flicked away like nats...
What I have a hard time with, is sometimes "we" are not arguing the same definate perceptions.
I do not misrepresent the agendized science proclaimations...If I misrepresent TRUE/PURE science then it is not ME misrepresenting it, it is those with an agenda that I repeat.
It obviously PO's you evo's that my opinion can hold equal weight infront of the general public.
240
posted on
08/04/2006 6:04:48 PM PDT
by
sirchtruth
(No one has the RIGHT not to be offended...)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 201-220, 221-240, 241-260 ... 521 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson