Posted on 12/18/2004 5:56:30 PM PST by PatrickHenry
You don't know?! LOL. Forgive me while I bow to the superior intellect.. I'm gonna fall out.
In order for you to believe that the earth is 6000 years old, you have to believe that every major educational institution is involved in a conspiracy OR you have to believe that God planted all this "evidence" that the earth is older than 6000 years.
I take it that the above means you don't know.
RadioAstronomer, you can correct me if I am wrong, but to invoke a conservation law you must know the value of the conserved quantity before and after a change takes place. What was the angular momentum of the universe before the big bang? That question makes no sense because there was no universe before the big bang. Really since the big bang is the beginning of space-time, the phrase "before the big bang" doesn't even make sense. It seems to me that conservation laws are inapplicable to big bang cosmology. Even assuming that there is such a thing as "before the big bang" and that whatever there was has measurable properties, what was the angular momentum of the "pre-big bang universe"? If it were zero, then object spinning in different directions would not only be consistent with the conservation of angular momentum, but would be required by that law. I am only a mere chemist, so please feel free to tell me I'm full of crap with any of this. I struggle with some of the more esoteric aspects of bb cosmology.
Yeah, but you're just saying that now to save face. I've already demonstrated on the thread that I know. Ok, go away, you're too funny.
It should also be noted that the post-formation solar system has had a chaotic history with planetary breakups (several, including a big one that formed the asteroid belt), near-collisions, ejections into interstellar space, and several planetary moons probably being captured into their present orbits after their formation elsewhere. The assumption that everything should have condensed into a smooth and stable configuration where every object has the same spin is unjustifiable from the evidence of the real history.
You say this, but then you don't back it up with citations.
Were you there? How would you know this. IE, you can't know this and are positing it as though it were a fact. Try again.
No. You've only stated that there was a spike in the decline of morality in the sixties. NOW give the date evolution was required in schools.
It would take a lot of faith to believe that you really know without your giving a date.
Are you capable of understanding that the argument--a precise echo of your own--would be a fallacy, would be bad reasoning, would be wrong, would be a stupid argument, even if the spikes matched perfectly?
I wish I could tell you that you're doing Creation Science wrong, but the problem I have with Creation Science is that you are doing it right.
Of course, you don't even need to go outside. I just sat in my chair here, and oddly enough, the angular momentum of the universe doesn't seem to be preventing me from spinning in both directions. I was even right there to witness it. ;)
what have you done since you've been on this thread? ROFL. Do you read anything other than retractions for your own side and the standard propaganda sheets you quote from like vade just did. 'After the universe formed there was planetary breakups that made asteroid belts' - thus sayeth Vade.. ROFL.
I make a statement on something you can darned well check on the web. Where do we go to check on the web to see proof that planets broke up and made asteroid belts after the big bang and before recorded history? Hmmm? Can we handwring some more or shall I give you something else to wring about?
In the Left Hemisphere or the Right Hemisphere?
I've sat in a non-pivoting chair and had the universe rotate in both directions; sometimes sequentially, sometimes simultaneously.
Most skulls of any size and age are found crushed by sediment pressure and are jig-saw puzzled back together. This can introduce controversy and confusion but does not constitute fraud. Fraud is a spectacular claim which a real Christian would avoid unless he had some evidence for it. Not being religious myself, I'm in no position to say for sure, but I'll guess that a militant YEC is probably not a good example of a real Christian. YECs reliably exhibit several species of bad behavior that the good citizens (Christians virtually all) of my experience abhor, the utterly reckless flinging of accusations being but one.
The existence of multiple Australopithecine species and specimens thereof found by several people in several places makes it extremely unlikely that every reconstruction is wrong in the same way. I'm aware of no evidence of fraud regarding Lucy and have already provided links dissecting the usual creationist dumb-dumbisms on the Australopithecines.
Your emphatic denial of any lines of research that contradict your preconceived views of the universe is amusing, but it is not "proof" for your position.
I've had that same experience, although I recall being face-down at the time...
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.