re: James webb tele proving big bang theory probably is inaccurate

Science: Give us one miracle for free and we will explain the rest

quote:

---

Another scientific pivot. Dark matter last time…what else can we pull out our arse if our theory doesn’t seem logical, empirical, or provable?

---

Dude that is how science works. Scientist do experiments and test to verify and TEST calculation. When something doesn’t make seem to fit and does not make sense they rejoice! Something else to discover and figure out,. It is what they do for a living.

biz, thank you very much for the reference to "reasons.org". I watched the Hugh Ross intro and it made me very happy. I love to see Knowledge which fortifies Faith into Power, and per the God Paradigm...into Love.

Ross is an astounding individual. No doubt flawed as are we all but blessed to be a blessing to many who seek Love. I'll be checking out more on him and his work.

When I heard that top scientists believed that all the matter in the entire universe was once compressed into the size of a baseball (or some similar sized object), I called…

bullshite!

yes, Hugh Ross’s conversion was triggered by scientific observation. Ross started as an astro physicist who could not reconcile the existance of an observable universe without a plan and a planner/ creator. IMO, a person cannot be informed on the subject of the origins of the universe without knowing the science and writings from reasons.org. There are many fascinating books on the subject besides Reasons’. I read another written by the chief NASA science officer for the space shuttle missions. A wide range of resources exist on the subject but you have to be intellectually honest to find them and read them objectively.

quote:

---

Science: Give us one miracle for free and we will explain the rest

---

Christianity: Let us break our own rule once and we can explain the rest.

quote:

---

When I heard that top scientists believed that all the matter in the entire universe was once compressed into the size of a baseball (or some similar sized object), I called…

bullshite!

---

Tell me you don't understand the Big Bang without telling me you don't understand the Big Bang.

quote:

---

Yep, I’m one of those who believe God created the everything in 6 literal days and a young earth.

There is no way to rationalize the scriptures with evolution. The biblical account shows the first man and woman lived between 6000-10,000 years ago counting back generations and ages given in the Bible.

Death didn’t occur until mankind sinned so the fossil records with many layers of dead animals couldn’t have occurred over millions of years. There is another explanation- a worldwide flood in Noah’s day.

There are many scientists who believe in a young earth and refute evolution. The difference is that they look at the same data, but through a worldview that assumes a creator. The evolutionist almost exclusively have an atheist worldview.

---

Damn...I remember when I was banned for nearly 9 months that once time like 10 years ago when Chicken banned all religious topics on this board which nearly all stemmed from discussions on evolution and I bitched about it.

I must have missed the complete reversal of that rule...

quote:

---

Then they discovered not only is it not slowing like models should show it is speeding up. There is no current explanation for this so the idea of dark matter was created to make it work.

---

"Dark energy" (not matter) is what is used to explain the universe's acceleration. Edwin Hubbell discovered in the 1920's that the universe was expanding, but everyone expected it to be slowing down over time due to gravity. This was a logical conclusion and made perfect sense at the time.

Then in 1998 two separate teams of astronomers (working independently) found that the universe's expansion was accelerating. They didn't believe it (and didn't expect it) and double and triple checked all their data. Both teams came to the conclusion they had done everything right and that their conclusions were solid. Extensive peer review of their work confirmed it. Both teams won the Nobel prize.

So astronomers had to come up with some explanation as to how the universe could possibly be accelerating (breaking the laws of gravity). They theorized it must be some unseen energy in the fabric of space-time itself. This energy has obvious anti-gravitational effects and came to be known as "dark energy." While it might sound sort of contrived, it is the only possible thing to explain it.

Dark matter is another thing entirely. It was also "created" to explain anomalous astronomical observations. But it is a bit more controversial since there are other possible explanations.

Stephen Hawking, in a roundabout way admitted that the subject baffled him too. Read his last book. He realizes that the answers have eluded him.

Keep this in mind, that while academia approaches this subject with the pretense that they have an open and objective mind, in actuality they approach it with an assumption that there is no God/Creator/Designer. So everything that points to planning by a creator is ignored and rejected automatically. The simply head in another direction by default. Much of it is because they want to be mainstream and protect their academic careers.