Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
Paul's question list (ie Walt Brown's question list)
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="paulrob" data-source="post: 14753198" data-attributes="member: 106834"><p>But you oversimplify the issue. What force acted upon the planets to cause them to orbit their respective suns, and to spin at all? This force must be assumed to be constant. It would take an outside force to reverse the rotation, and a collision would hardly seem possible in the first place, and shouldn't be able to reverse rotation in any event.</p><p> </p><p>The BB theory supposes that all matter came from acentral location and exploded outwards, everything in a straight line. and into increasingly less dense space. Collissions therefore would be unlikely (impossible).</p><p> </p><p>Then of course there is the question of what is space, and where did it come from<img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite2" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=";)" /> </p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>Like it assumes a lot of other things? Counterrotation seems to negate the whole possibility of an orderly expansion, condensation and coalescence. Some force had to operate on the counterrotating planets that was not operating on the others.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>A car is a good example. Put a magnet into a junkyard and if you leabve it there long enough, you'll get a car. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite234" alt=":thumbsup:" title="Thumbs Up :thumbsup:" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":thumbsup:" /> </p><p> </p><p>A car needs intelligence. A universe needs intelligence. You'e right in the strictest sense about evolution assuming the universe to be in existance already, but in the common sense, there is no clear distinction.</p><p> </p><p>It was supposedly the cooling of this earth, along with the other cosmic systems that generated the conditions for essential amino acid precipitation, producing life. </p><p> </p><p>In that sense, the two are inseparable.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="paulrob, post: 14753198, member: 106834"] But you oversimplify the issue. What force acted upon the planets to cause them to orbit their respective suns, and to spin at all? This force must be assumed to be constant. It would take an outside force to reverse the rotation, and a collision would hardly seem possible in the first place, and shouldn't be able to reverse rotation in any event. The BB theory supposes that all matter came from acentral location and exploded outwards, everything in a straight line. and into increasingly less dense space. Collissions therefore would be unlikely (impossible). Then of course there is the question of what is space, and where did it come from;) Like it assumes a lot of other things? Counterrotation seems to negate the whole possibility of an orderly expansion, condensation and coalescence. Some force had to operate on the counterrotating planets that was not operating on the others. A car is a good example. Put a magnet into a junkyard and if you leabve it there long enough, you'll get a car. :thumbsup: A car needs intelligence. A universe needs intelligence. You'e right in the strictest sense about evolution assuming the universe to be in existance already, but in the common sense, there is no clear distinction. It was supposedly the cooling of this earth, along with the other cosmic systems that generated the conditions for essential amino acid precipitation, producing life. In that sense, the two are inseparable. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
Paul's question list (ie Walt Brown's question list)
Top
Bottom