- Jun 18, 2006
- 3,856,323
- 52,688
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
What particles collided in the past to form superhot plasma?
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
What particles collided in the past to form superhot plasma?So you're saying that colliding particles together in the past didn't result in superhot plasma?
So you're saying that colliding particles together in the past didn't result in superhot plasma?
So by that logic gravity never used to exist either and just because we drop a pencil now doesn't mean the pencil will fall to the ground the next time we drop it just because every single time a pencil has been dropped on the Earth in recorded history it has fallen to the ground as a result of gravity. What an enchanted world you live in.
You can't just take the laws of physics and go "meh... doesn't mean it always has worked like that... the laws of physics aren't constant". Either show me some evidence to demonstrate that that stance has even the remotest chance of holding true or hush until you've got something concrete.
From Dr Andrew Snelling articleYou mean like this? I facepalmed after reading three words of the abstract. It does not get any better!
From Dr Andrew Snelling article
«It is thus envisaged that this cataclysmic rate of formation of these rocks during an episode of accelerated radioisotope decay accounts for their apparent long history when wrongly viewed in the context of todays slow process rates.»
This sadly reminds me of that Simpsons episode where Homer tries to fit two puzzle pieces together by smashing them with a hammer. This so-called scientist tries to fit the data with his biased version of geological history, no matter what method he must use to make the pieces fit, it's wrong on so many levels.
Sorry for the interruption, now back on the thread
Salami!Baloney.
Would it be too much to ask you 'highly-educated' academicians to shut your cupboard doors and answer Dove's point?
Would it be too much to ask you 'highly-educated' academicians to shut your cupboard doors and answer Dove's point?
Why? His point is as inane as it was rude. I chose to ignore it.Would it be too much to ask you 'highly-educated' academicians to shut your cupboard doors and answer Dove's point?
Baloney.
No human being has ever known what the early universe was like. The Big Bang is just a model, and a flawed model no doubt, it's not reality. Speculate all you want but stop trying to fool the public.
Ahh, the word "known", one of my favorites. Nobody knows anything to a 0% chance of error ..... ever, so forget absolute knowledge. Knowledge is basically ideas that have past enough tests of truthfulness that we stop testing them. That line depends on the individual, but we all have that line.
I personally try to keep that line consistent across all theories, even those which I have personal bias (although I know I fail, it's a goal). I have a relatively strict line for "knowing" something, and I would say that we know the big bang theory is a relatively accurate theory.
Like what stuff, William?Yeah, and evidence for the big bang is exponentially more-common than any of this creationist stuff.
Like what stuff, William?
Show me some evidence of creatio ex nihilo, please.
You're right -- a whole universe was created from nothing.Nothing can be created from nothing.
Again, you're right -- He spoke it into existence.God didn't just clap his hands and instantly zap the earth into existence.
You're right -- a whole universe was created from nothing.
Again, you're right -- He spoke it into existence.
(Note: this is 2 rights, and according to one poster's tagline [whose name escapes me] ... 2 rights make 1 wrong. Don't believe it.)
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?