Comments on: "Big Bang" Experiment Passes Key Tests
Scientists Hope World's Largest Particle Collider Will Help Explain The Makeup Of The Universe
Add a Comment See all 311 Comments
- Wow $3.8 billion. And how many of the world''s hungry could have been fed with that kind of money? Glad to know this kind of money is going towards satisfying the curiousity of some physicists rather than put to good use doing some real good in the world.
- Reply to this comment
- actually i was raised as a christian and i believe in god and that he created the world but i also believe that the world is made of more than what we see and what ppl fail to realize is the bible doesnt record every second of every minute of the bible it would take a whole lifetime and some to read I think its possiable that the earth was created by God in that could''ve been the big bang ppl argue over who created the earth but that did it ever accure to anyone that it could be one in the same and as far as we came from single said organism ppl bodies are feeled with many organisms and over time we evolved and a bodies have changed through the centuries and we''ve built up immunity to things medicine even has it effects if you that something for along time you become immune and second i dont know why orgin of the world matters so much just be happy that your alive and that your breathing that all that all that matters
- Reply to this comment
- Yep, that''''s me.
Just full of those seven deadly sins.
But, you seem to be unable to support your claims that creationism is based on evidence.
Imagine that. . .
Posted by tuckerndfw at 08:56 PM : Sep 10, 2008
There''s all sorts of evidence,like i said, try reading some of so many proof''s, to be enlightened.Or will you chose to remain in the dark? Imagination is but a derirative of the unknowing. - Reply to this comment
- Well, I know Einstein later admitted his error, but that is immaterial to the original post or my reply.
Posted by robaldrich4 at 09:31 PM : Sep 10, 2008
Actually it''s not quite immaterial. Many, many people have used and overused Einstein''s famous quote to support whatever argument they''re making. They seem to forget that the statement was made to refute a theory that was later shown to be correct. - Reply to this comment
- tuckerndfw asks, ''Where is your evidence the infinite universe was created?''
The Universe is NOT Infinite. Second Law of Thermodynamics
An always existing universe defies the laws of physics & Genesis 1:1
Where is your evidence that the universe overcomes the laws of physics and is infinite - Reply to this comment
- Earthquakes in Japan and Indonesia -we''re all gonna die because of this thing !
- Reply to this comment
- incog-nito notes that, ''Well Einstein was ultimately wrong about quantum theory. The great thing about science is that scientists can right on some things and wrong on others, and still can be great scientists. Science is a self-correcting process.''
-------------
Well, I know Einstein later admitted his error, but that is immaterial to the original post or my reply. - Reply to this comment
- What? What scientist doesn''t do that. Einstein rejected Heisenberg''s Uncertainty principle saying, ''God does not play dice.''
Posted by robaldrich4 at 09:12 PM : Sep 10, 2008
Well Einstein was ultimately wrong about quantum theory. The great thing about science is that scientists can right on some things and wrong on others, and still can be great scientists. Science is a self-correcting process. - Reply to this comment
- tuckerndfw says, ''I assume there is no evidence supporting the claim that the universe was created.''
----You must live in a black hole. Google ''creation''
Which entirely negates the claim that "creationism" is a "theory."
----You don''t even know the definition of ''theory''; e.g. ''an unproved assumption.''
It is not. It is an irrational belief that requires "creationists" to begin their "theory" with the underlying belief (creation) with no credible evidence.
-----Now we''re calling Stephen Hawking, and the majority of physicists at or near his level, irrational.
-----Try googling ''creation science.'' I''m sure you can find something written at your science level in the seventeen million responses.
Evidence is not driving creations'''' beliefs, beliefs are influencing their interpretation of evidence. Which is about as far from "science" as you can get.
-----What? What scientist doesn''t do that. Einstein rejected Heisenberg''s Uncertainty principle saying, ''God does not play dice.''
------Tuckerndfw dismisses Einstein, Hawking, and hundreds of the world''s top physicists to reach his view.
------I''ll pass. - Reply to this comment
- Our "visible universe" is NOT the entire universe. The universe is eternal and infinite. It has no beginning nor end in time or space.
Posted by tuckerndfw at 08:26 PM : Sep 10, 2008
---------
That is ultimately what all the religious people are afraid of....that scientists will mathematically prove that other dimensions of time and space currently exist in other universes. - Reply to this comment
- I was a practicing Christian for over 30 years; my grandfather was a Baptist preacher. I''''ve read the bible more than once and based on comments posted on the I''''net and conversations with people in real life, my knowledge of the bible & bible history vastly exceeds that of 99% of "Christians."
Posted by tuckerndfw at 08:37 PM : Sep 10, 2008
Ah! Pride and arrogance at work,I think you have one too many 9''s in your exaggerated opinion of yourself, at best. You are and have been decieved! - Reply to this comment
- jankebenz: Science seeks knowledge. Religion claims to have it
Posted by incog-nito at 08:17 PM : Sep 10, 2008
Religions, of which there are thousands of, have just as many explainations.Christianity claims that God has all knowledge, and we are part of his creation.Nothing wrong with seeking knowledge,however if we claim to be the end of knowledge ,we are but fools. - Reply to this comment
- I didn''''t mention the bible at all. The bible is totally irrelevant. Every word in the bible could be literally true but the premise of "creationism" is based entirely on beliefs, not evidence. Including the story of Genesis and all subsequent references to same.
Posted by tuckerndfw at 07:34 PM : Sep 10, 2008
You don''t even want to look at science that would confirm biblical truths, could it be that you''re afraid of being exposed to the truth? After all the word of God is like a sharp two edged sword, cutting away the pride and arrogance of mans rebellion. - Reply to this comment
- tuckerndfw asks, Can any "creationist" explain what evidence he is using to support his "theory of creation"? Where can this evidence that the universe was created be found?
-----------
I tried several times, but an scientific explanation, off the top of my head, exceeds the word limit, so I''ll try this.
The CERN experiment means nothing to how the universe was created. As the article clearly states, ''Eventually two beams will be fired at the same time in opposite directions with the aim of recreating conditions a A SPLIT SECOND AFTER the big bang. . . .'' Thus, it would only tell us what would happen after a big bang, NOT prove that a big bang occurred.
If you believe in the big bang theory, the REAL questions are, (1) what created the matter and put it in the universe so it could big bang when the laws of physics were applied to it, or (2) what held back the laws of physics until a microsecond before the big bang? This project at CERN does not even attempt to answer these questions.
As Hawking observed, the big bang theory requires a creator (read his book ''A Brief History of Time'' 1988). So, if you believe in the big bag, you must believe in some Creator.
Google: ''god stephen hawkling.'' - Reply to this comment
- jankebenz: Science seeks knowledge. Religion claims to have it.
- Reply to this comment
- Science has not even unlocked the secrets to a single cell, yet they claim knowledge as to the origin of the universe? Man has a great mind, yet the mind of mere men is but diminutive and miniscule compared to God. Who are we but fallible finite beings in the infinity of the universe. We refuse to lie prostrate before the majesty of supreme God,refuse to acknowledge him, yet we wonder why we fail incessantly. Will we ever learn? the answer is yes
Rom 14:11 for it is written, %u201CAs I live, says the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God.%u201D
Philippians 2:10-11
that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
11and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. - Reply to this comment
- Can any "creationist" explain what evidence he is using to support his "theory of creation"?
Where can this evidence that the universe was created be found?
Posted by tuckerndfw at 07:13 PM : Sep 10, 2008
Try the web site " science facts confirms the bible" for starters ,there''s a weeks worth of reading and study by itself, not to mention the thousands of refereces to expanded studies. - Reply to this comment
- DangYankee69: I do understand the distinction. That''s why I qualified it with the term "applied" science (as opposed to basic). For practical applications a theory can be workable enough where the distinction really doesn''t matter.
Where we disagree is that I think you see expressions of human nature (greed, superstition, etc.) as part of larger forces, possibly something to fight against. I don''t think this is possible, at least not on a large scale (although some have tried). At this time our basic instincts are still very strong. The only person you can change--and even this is not easy--is yourself. - Reply to this comment
- I think scientists need to know they are still human,which means they too can make mistakes just like the rest of us.I don''t think scientists these days understand this.
- Reply to this comment
- Incog-nito - I believe you are in error. A theory is an explanation of a phenomena, while a Law is a predictable reality. Sure some times Laws overstate their bounds (the Newtonian example you mentioned) but Laws exist as verifiable relationships between variables. Theories exist to try to explain relationships between variables. (which brings us back to the issue of assumptions and beliefs and so on and so on)
- Reply to this comment
