QUESTION ABOUT THE BIG BANG.

they tell us that the galaxy's in the far off distance are 13.5 billion years old and they know this by red shift or doplar effect so it can not be too difficult to work out their position one millisecond after the big bang ,they say they know the speeds they are traveling at they say they have being traveling for 13.5 billion years they know the direction they are moving ,if they know all this it should not be difficult to work out where they were 13.5 billion years ago when the big bang occurred.
I am beginning to think there was no big bang and they are all BS.
YET THEY SAY,there is no center to the universe,there had to be a center one millisecond after the big bang if it occurred.

the lord stretched out the heavens - 14 times it's described in the bible.

stretched - expanded.

Georges Lemaître 1927, noted an expanding universe might be traced back in time to an originating single point. 
in 1929 Hubble observed the universe was expanding. red shifts observation.

Sir Fred Hoyle was one of Britain's best-known astronomers in 1950 with his broadcast lectures on "The Nature of the Universe." He recalled using "Big Bang" for the first time in the last of those talks, but with derision to describe a theory on the origin of the universe that he didn't accept. (LA times)

They had to have a theory to replace the steady state theory. the Bible had it right
from the start - stretched out.

by the way zorro I can give a simple explanation as to how everything in the universe came from a tiny dot.
well one that can be understood .most people say its impossible for all to come from something the size of a marble but we have an example here on earth.
I could give you a tiny acorn the size of a marble and some day in the future show you a giant oak tree standing 500 feet tall and tell you it was once an acorn the size of the top of your finger,but I cant explain where the first acorn came from.but its a good explaination for our brains to understand how something so vast came from something so tiny.

the Bible had it right from the start - stretched out.

utter ****, the creation as described in the bible is completely wrong.  And anyone expounding a contrary theory based on science was deemed a heretic.

This is the biggest laugh imo

So God made the vault and separated the water under the vault from the water above it. And it was so. 8 God called the vault “sky.”

The sky is made of water roflcopters

The thicko who wrote the bible said its blue like the sea, so it must be water,

the bible does not address the man of the 21st century solely. It uses metaphorical language?
WHY - because it addresses people of all ages.

If the bible said... God utilized quantum filaments bound them within a neogamic matrix and incorporated dynamic combative particles - people would say in the first century that this means nothing. It might mean something now(not really I made that schlok up).

You are critiquing a book of the bible that is 3,500 years old.
That passage by the way mentions spheres. Telling you the world was spherical.

The world was never believed to be flat. The greeks new that and the egyptians - only one tribe in South America had the flat earth theory - yet Atheists always point out that 'we once believed the world to be flat'

LET THERE BE LIGHT.

Unfortunately the book is not 5,500 years old, it's a collection of stories put together 1900 odd years ago. It's a good book for history buffs with a pinch of salt.

God was and always will be.And he will come again to judge the future and the past.
LET IT BE WRITTEN AS IT IS SPOKEN.

he must have being famous enough to have a book written about himself.

Jesus may have healed the ill (didn't grow back too many limbs tho) but did you know that Mohamed Split the Moon in 2? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Splitting_of_the_moon

Both must be true as their in religious books and on the Internet but Mohamed must have the trump card?

arithmetic?

3,500 years old Is what I wrote.

where did you get 5,500 yrs?

jesus was over 2000 years ago - genesis the book of Moses 1500 years before that.

the dead sea scrolls are carbon dated? all books of the old testament.
kept by jews in their temple and synagogues.

yes - Christians put it alongside the new testament in 80 a.d.

'they're' hth

I do know one thing,if man can create a mini big bang on the Hydron Collider its my guess that God would have no problem creating the real big bang ,so anyone who says it would be impossible to create a big bang may brush up on their science.

just like I can create an oak tree from a little acorn

I was thinking of James Usher dates which I also got wrong https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Ussher

It's a load of hogwash, admit it.

I HAVE OTHER QUESTIONS=1 what do you say to a blind man is he asks what colour is the wind?
2=WHY" do we think its silent when we look out at snow flakes falling"

Sep 3, 2016 -- 6:58PM, zorrostrikes wrote:

the bible does not address the man of the 21st century solely. It uses metaphorical language?WHY - because it addresses people of all ages. If the bible said... God utilized quantum filaments bound them within a neogamic matrix and incorporated dynamic combative particles - people would say in the first century that this means nothing. It might mean something now(not really I made that schlok up). You are critiquing a book of the bible that is 3,500 years old. That passage by the way mentions spheres. Telling you the world was spherical. The world was never believed to be flat. The greeks new that and the egyptians - only one tribe in South America had the flat earth theory - yet Atheists always point out that 'we once believed the world to be flat' LET THERE BE LIGHT.

It doesn't use "metaphorical language".  It uses the language of the man/men who wrote it in an attempt to understand there world.  They killed people who questioned their understanding.  If you were about in that era, you would probably have been one of the killers.

moi - a killer - nope.

last time i hit anybody was at school after he hit me. that's
thirty five years ago. never started a fight.

peter - live by the sword - die by the sword.
-----------

The most current theory holds that the solar system evolved from an interstellar cloud of swirling dust and gasses. However, if the sun,
planets, and moon evolved from the same material, they should have many similarities, yet the composition of each planet is unique.
For example, since about 98% of the sun is hydrogen or helium, Earth, Mars, Venus, and Mercury should have similar compositions.
Instead, much less than 1% of these planets is hydrogen or helium.
Also all planets should rotate in the same direction - they don't - there are exceptions.

If you could be bothered to read proper science publications you could find the answers for yourself.
Planets the size of the earth have too little gravity to hang on to the lighter elements in gaseous form at the temperature of its atmosphere.
The sun, being 1.3 million times the size of the earth does have enough gravity. So does Jupiter which is mainly composed of hydrogen and helium.
Study a bit of science and you will find out how we know this as well as the answers to your other questions.

you never answered the rotation bit? get me answers foinavon.

i've been watching Horizon since 1974 and had to listen to
my astronomer school pals for years - i've absorbed it by
osmosis. Also watch Carl Sagan Cosmos to fall asleep...
that guy is a master hypnotist, that voice... wammo sleep.

that last part of my question was from a astro-physicist...

"The most current theory holds that the solar system evolved from an interstellar cloud of swirling dust and gasses. However, if the sun,planets, and moon evolved from the same material, they should have many similarities, yet the composition of each planet is unique.
For example, since about 98% of the sun is hydrogen or helium, Earth, Mars, Venus, and Mercury should have similar compositions.Instead, much less than 1% of these planets is hydrogen or helium. Also all planets should rotate in the same direction - they don't - there are exceptions. - -David Stevenson, Cal Tech

"The moon contains considerable quantities of U-236 and TH 230, both short-lived isotopes that would have been long since gone if the moon were billions of years old."
-Dr. Kent Hovind

Zorro,
Virtually all the known matter in the universe is hydrogen (or plasma). Everything else was cooked up in stars as by products of nuclear reactions. When a star explodes (supernova) the material is ejected. It eventually aggregates to form new stars and planets. The smaller planets are composed mainly of the heavier stuff as they can't hold on to much of the lighter gases. The planets in our solar system may well have started spinning in the same direction but gravitational effects caused them over time to change orbits and even collide. Other lumps of passing space rock would have been captured into the sun's orbit and others fly off into space. we're talking billions of years here. What you see today doesn't resemble exactly what aggregated initially, it's a dynamic system affected by internal and external forces. We just see a snapshot in our tiny time frame.

please tell David Stevenson of Cal Tech - he's waiting for your expert answer.

Dr Kent Hovind? Yeah right!
http://www.religionnewsblog.com/15261/kent-hovind-evangelist-arrested-on-federal-charges

Pluto and Venus rotate backwards

At least 6 moons in the solar system have backward orbits! Furthermore, Neptune, Jupiter, and Saturn have moons orbiting in both directions.

All planets rotate horizontally, like a spinning top, except for Uranus -
it rotates on its side, like a spinning ball

if any one of these conditions were slightly higher or lower, life on Earth would cease to exist. For example, the Earth is at a very specific distance from the sun. Malcolm Bowden says, "If it were 5% closer, then the water would boil up from the oceans and if it were just 1% farther away, then the oceans would freeze, and that gives you just some idea of the knife edge we are on." Dr. Duane Gish says, "If the Earth's diameter were 7,200 miles, instead of 8,000, then almost the whole Earth, due to a lessening of the atmospheric mantle, would be reduced to snow and ice waste."

Recently physicists have counted at least 34 physical peculiarities or "universal constants" that have been precisely fine tuned and set in place in order to make life possible. These constants include such things as:
Electromagnetic and gravitational forces are finely tuned so the right kid of star can be stable. 
Carbon and oxygen nuclei have finely tuned energy levels.
The electromagnetic coupling constant binds electrons to protons in atoms. If it were smaller, fewer electrons could be held. If it were larger, electrons would be held too tightly to bond with other atoms.
The proportion of mass that is converted to energy when hydrogen is converted to helium by nuclear fusion is 0.007. If this were less, elements larger than hydrogen could not exist. If this were larger, water could not exist.

Dr Kent didn't pay his taxes??

Have you got an "apple" phone?

let's 'GOOGLE' it and find out why he didn't pay his taxes.

"There's an incredible number of these parameters that have all been in some sense finely tuned, sometimes extremely precisely tuned... so when you start multiplying all the probabilities together, we find its extremely unlikely that it's by random chance. Just as it's extremely unlikely that someone would be born with my exact genes. . . And so you begin to marvel at the incredible beauty and the incredible way everything fits together so neatly... and so it's very tempting to think that somebody designed and had a plan that was really quite spectacular."
-George Smoot, Ph.D.
Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory
(part of NASA "Cobe" satellite team)

up up and away in my beautiful, my beautiful balloon....

“This is rather as if you imagine a puddle waking up one morning and thinking, 'This is an interesting world I find myself in — an interesting hole I find myself in — fits me rather neatly, doesn't it? In fact it fits me staggeringly well, must have been made to have me in it!' This is such a powerful idea that as the sun rises in the sky and the air heats up and as, gradually, the puddle gets smaller and smaller, frantically hanging on to the notion that everything's going to be alright, because this world was meant to have him in it, was built to have him in it; so the moment he disappears catches him rather by surprise. I think this may be something we need to be on the watch out for.”


― Douglas Adams, The Salmon of Doubt

i'm referencing scientists only?

men of letters...

from fine families...

James Clerk Maxwell once said... pass me the butter....

let me enter the imaginarium.

leprecauns, sir do you believe in such childish things?

let's not descend into imagination sir. Let us consider the science only.

Keep on googling Zorro, you will find more stuff than any of us here have the time to answer.
Have fun!

nay - depart not good stout fellow - twas but a jest

"The stars of our own galaxy, the Milky Way, rotate about the galactic center with different speeds, the inner ones rotating faster than the outer ones. The observed rotation speeds are so fast that if our galaxy were more than a few hundred million years old, it would be a featureless smear of stars instead of its present spiral shape."

Is it me or are there a lot... a lot of inconsistencies
among the scientific community? Is science really science (grounded in fact)
it it cannot be tested. repeated?

"The energy stored in the Earth's magnetic field has steadily decreased by a factor of 2.7 over the past 1000 years. Evolutionary theories explaining this rapid decrease, as well as how the Earth could have maintained its magnetic field for billions of years, are very complex and inadequate."

    "All naturally occurring families of radioactive elements generate helium as they decay. If such decay took place for billions of years, as alleged by evolutionists, much helium should have found its way into the Earth's atmosphere. Yet the atmosphere today has only 0.05% of the amount of helium it would have accumulated during 5 billion years. This means the atmosphere is much younger than the alleged evolutionary age."

The 2nd law states that all things left to themselves tend to run down from order to disorder and decay. This is true of the universe as well.   If evolution were true, it would demand just the opposite - the building up from simpler to the more complex. Adding great periods of time does not change this fact.

the big bang theory has broken down due to the continued expansion of the universe .Because the dark matter and the dark energy will not work out in the maths they have come out with a new idea that can be fitted into the maths and their sums add up.
They have decided to call it Dark FLOW but the don't know what it is,dont know what causes it,they cant see it,and they don't know where it is,in fact they just decided to name it Dark Flow and when they put the DF symbol into the equation the maths work out on paper that there was a big expansion or big bang .Check it out its called Dark Flow.

Yet the atmosphere today has only 0.05% of the amount of helium it would have accumulated during 5 billion years. This means the atmosphere is much younger than the alleged evolutionary age."

No it doesn't. As I explained before, most of the helium escapes into space mostly to be captured by the sun's gravitational pull. There is so much disinformation on the net, twisted logic propagated by creationist groups desperate to to promote their unsound belief system. And you lap it up like Kenny's cats around a saucer of milk.
Carry on googling

they still wont listen to brass and call it by its real name=Ante gravity.

weird science

last night i watched a BBC documentary with a bald guy from Morocco or London that was explaining the start of the universe. He has a lovely speaking voice. So tender...
anyway he explained this weird young woman told all the uppity professors that owned science, that the sun was mostly hydrogen and helium. The big professor in charge of the cash box said - you are a woman you know nothing - he then told her the sun was made of Gold and Carbon and strawberry jelly. Three years later he did his own experiments and he did it in a different way(using his dad's boxer shorts and telescope?) He said sorry to the uppity woman and pronounced her findings as super special. they handed her the keys to the labs and they left for a tropical island to sit on the beach and look at their bits and bobs. the end.

science revised again? a story for kiddies.

that morrocan/london guy: Prof Jim Al-Khalili - the beginning and end of the universe BBC4.

he mentioned the universe expanding at the start.... one billionth, billionth, billionth of a second - from nothing to something? (minute 57. bbc iplayer)

so in the BBB of a second - what was the speed of light? perhaps faster?

speed equals distance / time ?

bedeebebdee bedee bedee - that's all folks...

the big bang theory - one o the buoys? tellin em all how it is? Begorrah? tell Katherine to come into the parlour young Jamie... let's laugh off our socks that they bought such a bag o worms.

Georges Henri Joseph Édouard Lemaître (17 July 1894 – 20 June 1966) was a Belgian priest, astronomer and professor of physics at the Catholic University of Leuven.[1] He proposed the theory of the expansion of the universe, widely misattributed to Edwin Hubble.[2][3] He was the first to derive what is now known as Hubble's law and made the first estimation of what is now called the Hubble constant, which he published in 1927, two years before Hubble's article.[4][5][6][7] Lemaître also proposed what became known as the Big Bang theory of the origin of the universe, which he called his "hypothesis of the primeval atom" or the "Cosmic Egg".

wiki quote.

You make a mistake in attacking science Zorro, it is the best thing about us human beings...

We have made the world better for ourselves, do you know how grim life was in the past?

The World does not seem necessarily happier because us human beings are a pretty nasty lot, and science can't change that.

You can still believe in GOD if you want to Zorro, there is an awful lot we don't know.


You should go and live in the Amish Christian community in America that would suit you. They reject most of the modern

conveniences science has given us.

Of course we can do terrible things to each other because of science, blow each into bits, burn each other, dismember each other,
and lots of other nasties with modern weapons.

But that is not the fault of science,that is the problem of our own nature,we are violent, greedy,obsessed with sex and other things.

Science is good, we also need to leave this planet, we have a universe to colonise, that is our destiny as a species.

My dear o'Flaherty - it's been all those christian scholars that have been aiming the breakthroughs in history... sure some atheists helped.  I'm willing to give you a share o the cake.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christians_in_science_and_technology

Hildegard of Bingen (1098 – 1179), also known as Saint Hildegard and Sibyl of the Rhine, was a German Benedictine abbess.She is considered to be the founder of scientific natural history in Germany

a thousand years ago? did she really exist - maybe it's like Jesus, a bogus thing.

Nicole Oresme (c.1323–1382): Theologian and bishop of Lisieux, he was one of the early founders and popularizers of modern sciences. One of his many scientific contributions is the discovery of the curvature of light through atmospheric refraction.

700 years might still be fake.

Joseph Priestley (1733–1804): Nontrinitarianism clergyman who wrote the controversial work History of the Corruptions of Christianity. He is credited with discovering oxygen.

200 years ago - maybe he was real? wait that MP was killed in the town that Priestley was born in. I remember the town square with his statue in the back ground.

Science is neutral - it's not good or bad -
good and bad live in a moral world of judgments.

Is it a good thing if someone murders the yorkshire ripper?

is it bad?

are you good one day, bad the next? scales of judgement?

Did Sir Jimmy get away with it? in the atheist world he's got away with it.
In God's world he might be in trouble.