Which one?
(media.scored.co)
Comments (17)
sorted by:
Big bang theory is retarded. 😂
Based. https://answersinGenesis.org
First article: "Remembering the Horrors of the Holocaust "... https://answersingenesis.org/sanctity-of-life/remembering-horrors-holocaust/
"Holocaust Remembrance Day is observed each year on January 27, calling the world to remember the six million jews and millions of others murdered under Nazi persecution. For Christians—especially those committed to a biblical creationist worldview—this day carries a sobering relevance"
Yeah, I hated that show. The squeaky blonde got on my nerves.
Bet you loved your cameo, though.
Why would God need billions of years to accomplish what could be done by Him in 6 days?
I’m looking forward to reading this. Seems interesting.
Can't remember the title, but I read a book on Christian apologetics a few years back. None of it really resonated with me except the fact of how insanely unlikely it is for our universe to exist.
When numbers get that big, it's hard to wrap your head around them but imagine the odds of the cells inside a woman randomly configuring themselves in such a way as to cause immaculate conception. The odds of our universe existing randomly are about a billion (billion, billion etc) times less likely.
What about the odds that a woman lied in an age where they were trusted and DNA testing didn't exist?
There was no big bang.
God may have used the big bang. If big bang theory is true, it's because that's the mechanism God used
a) Putting cor + rect together represents a contradiction in terms since a line (inception towards death) moves apart (life) anything within it.
b) -isms (consensus) can only be shaped within a line by an -ist (consent)
c) Big Bang implies a measurement taken in-between big and small, as well as confrontation of one against the other (big vs small)...that's the origin of a big bang.
Within "big" nature there can be only each "small" bang aka the intercourse among being.
d) Now isn't the end of the line, but each beings perception from within the line. Within all perceivable each ones perception can only perceive "now"...not before or after.
e) God isn't detached from the line, but represents the singularity of the whole line for each anointed one (christ) coming into being within. It's the label "god"; attached within a being for the line, which inverts detach-ment (analysis) with attach-ment (synthesis).
Letting go of suggested "god" allows one's sight to perceive how all perceivable works.
f) Suggested creationism aka creatio ex nihilo (creation out of nothing) tempts one to deny (nihilo; nothing) the line, while being (life) moved (inception towards death) within it.
g) Various/variare - "to change" implies motion...only within change can diverse come into being.
Big Bang for sure. Leonard Hofstadter (Johnny Galecki) and Sheldon Cooper (Jim Parsons), both physicists at Caltech, said so.
Why can't anyone explain dark matter?
Dark matter is super funny. They look at the observable universe, realize it doesn’t make sense based on our understanding of gravity, so they just say hey 60% of the universe is a magic invisible matter that you can’t see, can’t touch, and if you even got close it would blow up violently so don’t even think about it
My crazy, half baked theory is that the background radiation in one universe, is the other side of a black hole in another universe.
That's a paraphrase of the theory of James Hartle, who is so smart that he got first billing for the Hartle-Hawking function.
This universe is so wonky that it needed a secondary universe that appeared and disappeared in an instant in the Big Bang that would allow quantum tunneling to create this persistent universe.
But even Hartle couldn't explain dark matter. It doesn't exist. It's a math mistake that comes from the assumption of lightspeed invariance, which is rejected by the growing alternative called stochastic electrodynamics (SED). The error arises from believing in an old universe, and then wondering why galaxies still stick together so nicely instead of being random as the old-earth theory predicts: it yields the wrong total mass calculation and so new dark entities are invoked to explain the error away. If you reject the assumptions of new quantum physics conspiratorially circulated by Bohr, SED allows all phenomena to be explained without quantum uncertainty and without epicycles. Then the unexplained unexpected attraction is explained easily by the accretion theory of coalition of plasma strands that also accounts for why all spiral galaxies haven't self-randomized.
Genesis Creation is the only big bang that works. As pointed out in this thread, all other theories have an age crisis in which the stars are older than the universe containing them. "13.7 billion" is a compromise number that assumes that one or more calculations leading to the compromise are mistaken and the error will appear in time and refine the number. Well, maybe the number is .000006 billion as consistent with Joao Magueijo's CDK proposal.
u/MO-Carpenter