Originally posted by Da Pittman
How can I be stubborn??? Please do not start this argument again; you are comparing apples and oranges, man made to organic which will fail for the compression. Did you not read anything that I just wrote???How do you create fire?
How do you create ice?
How do you create atomic fusion?
What is an atom?Stop answering a question with an f'n question!!!
As for you question, yes the computer that is before me evolved to what it is today. A different version of this model was used to create this model and an older model used to create the one before that and on and on. You are trying to use tools in your example which will fail, tools can only have a designer hence they are tools.
Computers don't evolve (in the sense that I meant it). So, you are wrong.
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Categorically no (you know me better than that Shakyamunison).
Categorically? I know no such thing.
Different? My religion is different. We believe you and I are already enlightened. That makes us different, and being different makes us better. The problem is that once we believe we are better, then all that is before us is the realization that we are not better. Are you still at the stage of realizing that you are different?
Originally posted by Da Pittman
Where did I say anything about not having awe or appreciation for something? Did you not even understand anything that I just wrote?You are completely wrong, the human body would be more complex to a laymen than a human doctor, just try and have a laymen try and explain how the human brain works and have a brain surgeon do it and see what you get if you don’t believe me. The layman may be able to describe the basic workings but the doctor will explain how and down to the minute detail.
That is not the crux of this discussion. The point is that regardless of educational attainment, IQ level, or how many d's that a person has behind their name, that does not presuppose that that individual somehow loses their respect for something that is complex (even if he/she understands its innerworkings).
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
You understand perfectly how and why things happen? Okay.[B]Why
did the universe come into existence--oh, and how did the universe come into existence? [/B]
Perhaps the universe did not come into existence. After all, if the universe did not exist, then nothingness would exist, and nothingness cannot exist.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Categorically? I know no such thing.Different? My religion is different. We believe you and I are already enlightened. That makes us different, and being different makes us better. The problem is that once we believe we are better, then all that is before us is the realization that we are not better. Are you still at the stage of realizing that you are different?
I don't have a religion, I have a relationship with God through His Son Jesus the Christ. So, yes I am different.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Perhaps the universe did not come into existence. After all, if the universe did not exist, then nothingness would exist, and nothingness cannot exist.
I have already established that scientists agree that the universe is expanding. This expansion had a starting point; hence, the universe had a beginning.
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
I have already established that scientists agree that the universe is expanding. This expansion had a starting point; hence, the universe had a beginning.
What if it doesn't? What if like God, it always was, in some state of existance?
Edit: Why do you believe this aspect of science, yet disbelieve others, like evolution, the age of the Earth etc. etc. etc.?
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
I have already established that scientists agree that the universe is expanding. This expansion had a starting point; hence, the universe had a beginning.
But Einsteins theory of Relativity says that the universe cannot be static. That means it is ether expanding or contracting.
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
I have already established that scientists agree that the universe is expanding. This expansion had a starting point; hence, the universe had a beginning.
Not totally true, it has been speculated that the universe goes through periods of expansion and contraction.
Edit: and currently we have been in a period of expansion for the past 13+ billion years.
Originally posted by Robtard
What if it doesn't? What if like God, it always was, in some state of existance?Edit: Why do you believe this aspect of science, yet disbelieve others, like evolution, the age of the Earth etc. etc. etc.?
Like I said before, the universe had a starting point, this has already been settled. Some aspects of science are in accord with the Scriptures, but evolution contradicts the Bible
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Like I said before, the universe had a starting point, this has already been settled. Some aspects of science are in accord with the Scriptures, but evolution contradicts the Bible
Stating something over and over again, and then saying it is true because I have stating something over and over again is circular logic.
More like the bible contradicts evolution.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
How do we know anything? You seem to pick and choose your theories.We know it is expanding for now, but before the BB, it could have contracting.
The universe did not exist prior to any purported big bang.
Proof that the Universe is Not Static, but Expanding
It's still a non-linear differential equation, so it's not all that easy. But Einstein was able to perceive and demonstrate that, according to this equation, the universe not only decelerates, it positively expands. Hence, the Big Bang. How so? Normally, I demonstrate this for audiences by bringing a grenade, but they no longer let you take grenades on airplanes.
I only do that demonstration when I'm on TV or in California, so you're just going to have to pretend that I've got a grenade here in front of me. If I were to pull the pin from the grenade, you'd feel a few effects. One being that the pieces of the grenade would expand outward from the pin. That's positive expansion.
Those outwardly expanding pieces of the grenade would inevitably bump into obstacles into this room. When they collide with those obstacles, they slow down. That's deceleration. After a grenade has exploded, a physicist could make measurements of the positions and the velocities of the pieces of shrapnel, and through the equation Velocity = Distance/Time, he could calculate the moment that the pin was pulled on the grenade.
We can do the same thing with the galaxies in the universe. We can measure their positions and their velocities and calculate the moment that the “pin” was pulled on the entire universe.
As Einstein pointed out, the significance is that the universe has this moment of pin pulling. It has a beginning. Through the principle of positive fact, if the universe has a beginning, it must have a beginner, hence the existence of God.
To his dying day, Einstein held to his belief that as the result of the verification of his theory of General Relativity, God exists. (Good book on Einstein's extensive discussions of religion and theology: Einstein and Religion: Physics and Theology by Max Jammer -Ed) God created the universe and God is intelligent. Today, we don't deny that God is personal. Einstein died too soon.
If he had lived to the late 1980's, he'd have seen direct scientific proof for the personality of the creator. But he acknowledged as a result of the confirmations of his equations and his theory that God is transcendent. That God exists, he is intelligent, he is creative and he is responsible for the universe.
But he didn't know the details of that transcendence. The details of that transcendence had to equate to a deeper solution of those equations of General Relativity. They are non-linear, which means they're hard to solve.
©1994-2007 Cosmic Fingerprints and Willow Creek Community Church, South Barrington, Illinois
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
The universe did not exist prior to any purported big bang.
There's more bad assumptions in that link than a poor marriage.
Originally posted by AngryManatee
There's more bad assumptions in that link than a poor marriage.
Proof that the Universe is Not Static, but Expanding
It's still a non-linear differential equation, so it's not all that easy. But Einstein was able to perceive and demonstrate that, according to this equation, the universe not only decelerates, it positively expands. Hence, the Big Bang. How so? Normally, I demonstrate this for audiences by bringing a grenade, but they no longer let you take grenades on airplanes.
I only do that demonstration when I'm on TV or in California, so you're just going to have to pretend that I've got a grenade here in front of me. If I were to pull the pin from the grenade, you'd feel a few effects. One being that the pieces of the grenade would expand outward from the pin. That's positive expansion.
Those outwardly expanding pieces of the grenade would inevitably bump into obstacles into this room. When they collide with those obstacles, they slow down. That's deceleration. After a grenade has exploded, a physicist could make measurements of the positions and the velocities of the pieces of shrapnel, and through the equation Velocity = Distance/Time, he could calculate the moment that the pin was pulled on the grenade.
We can do the same thing with the galaxies in the universe. We can measure their positions and their velocities and calculate the moment that the “pin” was pulled on the entire universe.
As Einstein pointed out, the significance is that the universe has this moment of pin pulling. It has a beginning. Through the principle of positive fact, if the universe has a beginning, it must have a beginner, hence the existence of God.
To his dying day, Einstein held to his belief that as the result of the verification of his theory of General Relativity, God exists. (Good book on Einstein's extensive discussions of religion and theology: Einstein and Religion: Physics and Theology by Max Jammer -Ed) God created the universe and God is intelligent. Today, we don't deny that God is personal. Einstein died too soon.
If he had lived to the late 1980's, he'd have seen direct scientific proof for the personality of the creator. But he acknowledged as a result of the confirmations of his equations and his theory that God is transcendent. That God exists, he is intelligent, he is creative and he is responsible for the universe.
But he didn't know the details of that transcendence. The details of that transcendence had to equate to a deeper solution of those equations of General Relativity. They are non-linear, which means they're hard to solve.
©1994-2007 Cosmic Fingerprints and Willow Creek Community Church, South Barrington, Illinois
Here, I'll add some delicious copypasta too:
Before observations of dark energy, cosmologists considered two scenarios for the future of the universe. If the mass density of the universe were greater than the critical density, then the universe would reach a maximum size and then begin to collapse. It would become denser and hotter again, ending with a state that was similar to that in which it started—a Big Crunch. Alternatively, if the density in the universe were equal to or below the critical density, the expansion would slow down, but never stop. Star formation would cease as all the interstellar gas in each galaxy is consumed; stars would burn out leaving white dwarfs, neutron stars, and black holes. Very gradually, collisions between these would result in mass accumulating into larger and larger black holes. The average temperature of the universe would asymptotically approach absolute zero—a Big Freeze. Moreover, if the proton were unstable, then baryonic matter would disappear, leaving only radiation and black holes. Eventually, black holes would evaporate. The entropy of the universe would increase to the point where no organized form of energy could be extracted from it, a scenario known as heat death.
Modern observations of accelerated expansion imply that more and more of the currently visible universe will pass beyond our event horizon and out of contact with us. The eventual result is not known. The ËCDM model of the universe contains dark energy in the form of a cosmological constant. This theory suggests that only gravitationally bound systems, such as galaxies, would remain together, and they too would be subject to heat death, as the universe expands and cools. Other explanations of dark energy—so-called phantom energy theories—suggest that ultimately galaxy clusters, stars, planets, atoms, nuclei and matter itself will be torn apart by the ever-increasing expansion in a so-called Big Rip.
It should be noted that a lot of the info you're linking to is from the early 90's. The following post contains information from no more than 5 years ago.