The Creationistic Method and Why It Is Fraudulent

[Super Universe]

Why? You don't merit an explanation on demand since you have never given any yourself.

You do realize that any question you may have asked is available to you for free, don't you?

 

[Polymath257]

You do realize that any question you may have asked is available to you for free, don't you?

And the question you asked has answers available for free also.

The question is whether you trust the answers you get.

In string theory, the 'strings', like the rest of the universe, have always existed. The Big Bang is more of a Bounce and there is no actual singularity.

 

[McBell]

Is that a "Yes", meaning, did Jesus change His message because the Jews weren't buying it? Maybe you should read the New Testament and find out for yourself?

It's sad that I am unable to give a direct straight forwad answer? As if you deserve to know the answers.

Still avoiding it I see.
No worries, mate.
Never expected anything meaningful from you anyway.

 

[Super Universe]

Still avoiding it I see.
No worries, mate.
Never expected anything meaningful from you anyway.

I'm still avoiding giving you information? I do try to avoid stepping on ants when I walk the pavement.

I'm not your "mate".

You never expect anything meaningful from me anyway? Glad we got that settled.

 

[McBell]

I'm still avoiding giving you information? I do try to avoid stepping on ants when I walk the pavement.

I'm not your "mate".

You never expect anything meaningful from me anyway? Glad we got that settled.

My most sincere apologies.
I gave you far more credit than you have demonstrated you deserved,


I shall not bother you any further.

Have a nice day.

 

[Super Universe]

And the question you asked has answers available for free also.

The question is whether you trust the answers you get.

In string theory, the 'strings', like the rest of the universe, have always existed. The Big Bang is more of a Bounce and there is no actual singularity.

In string theory the strings have always existed? Try again.

The Big Bang was a bounce? There was no big bang because that would violate the law of gravity. You can't come up with a theory that violates one of your laws.

There was no singularity? Of course there wasn't.

 

[Polymath257]

In string theory the strings have always existed? Try again.

Why? I gave you the answer.

The Big Bang was a bounce? There was no big bang because that would violate the law of gravity. You can't come up with a theory that violates one of your laws.

Your understanding of the laws is very poor (as you have admitted). So, no, it does NOT violate the laws of gravity any more than a ball bouncing upwards does.

There was no singularity? Of course there wasn't.

In string theory, there is no singularity. The infinities of general relativity are 'smoothed over' because of quantum effects. That is pretty common in quantum gravity descriptions.

 

[Polymath257]

I'm still avoiding giving you information? I do try to avoid stepping on ants when I walk the pavement.

Showing the loving attitudes of the monotheist, I see.

I'm not your "mate".

You never expect anything meaningful from me anyway? Glad we got that settled.

And nothing meaningful from you has been given. Glad we got that settled.

 

[Super Universe]

Why? I gave you the answer.



Your understanding of the laws is very poor (as you have admitted). So, no, it does NOT violate the laws of gravity any more than a ball bouncing upwards does.



In string theory, there is no singularity. The infinities of general relativity are 'smoothed over' because of quantum effects. That is pretty common in quantum gravity descriptions.

You gave me the answer? An incorrect one.

The law of gravity was not violated by the big bang? Then what force caused all the matter in the universe to exceed the contracting force of gravity?

In string theory there is no singularity? Of course there isn't because there never was a big bang.

 

[Super Universe]

Showing the loving attitudes of the monotheist, I see.



And nothing meaningful from you has been given. Glad we got that settled.

Jesus would not resist the primitives. What happened to Him?

 

[Sapiens]

Jesus would not resist the primitives. What happened to Him?

What happened? Why, they made up a passel of fairy tales about him.

 

[Polymath257]

You gave me the answer? An incorrect one.

The law of gravity was not violated by the big bang? Then what force caused all the matter in the universe to exceed the contracting force of gravity?

Pressure from the contraction.

In string theory there is no singularity? Of course there isn't because there never was a big bang.

What do you mean by this?

The universe was certainly once much hotter and denser to the place that nucleosynthesis was happening everywhere. Since that is what most cosmologists mean when they mention the Big Bang, there certainly *was* a Big Bang. Even in string theory (as with other quantum theories of gravity), there was a point at which the universe started to expand. At that point it was hot enough that nucleons were not stable. It has been expanding ever since. And *that* is what we mean by saying there was a Big Bang.

That said, the singularities of general relativity don't happen in the quantum gravity versions. There is a limit to the contraction in them.

 

[Polymath257]

Jesus would not resist the primitives. What happened to Him?

Jesus was at least as primitive as those who crucified him.

 

[Super Universe]

Pressure from the contraction.



What do you mean by this?

The universe was certainly once much hotter and denser to the place that nucleosynthesis was happening everywhere. Since that is what most cosmologists mean when they mention the Big Bang, there certainly *was* a Big Bang. Even in string theory (as with other quantum theories of gravity), there was a point at which the universe started to expand. At that point it was hot enough that nucleons were not stable. It has been expanding ever since. And *that* is what we mean by saying there was a Big Bang.

That said, the singularities of general relativity don't happen in the quantum gravity versions. There is a limit to the contraction in them.

Oh, so you came up with some kind of reverse gravity that we've never seen any evidence of? And yet you complain about religious people coming up with beliefs that do not having any evidence.

How does this gravity "pressure" affect black holes? It doesn't. They should be exploding all over the place from this "pressure" but they don't because there is no such thing as gravity pressure.

You guys are so full of it.

The universe was once much hotter and denser? Nope, it wasn't.

There certainly was a big bang? There certainly was not. The expansion of the universe is not from some initial big bang and there is no such thing as gravity pressure.

Even in string theory there was a point at which the universe started to expand? I don't have a problem with you guys getting it wrong so much as when you come up with some theory that violates the laws that you know are true and every scientist simply accepts it. You lose all credibility when you do that. Just admit, you don't know what's causing the universe to expand, don't try to say that gravity "pressure" caused an expansion in the early universe.

 

[Super Universe]

Jesus was at least as primitive as those who crucified him.

He is the architect of the universe. He's just about the most advanced being in existence.

 

[Polymath257]

He is the architect of the universe. He's just about the most advanced being in existence.

Again, your claim. In fact, he was a person who died.

 

[Polymath257]

Oh, so you came up with some kind of reverse gravity that we've never seen any evidence of? And yet you complain about religious people coming up with beliefs that do not having any evidence.

How does this gravity "pressure" affect black holes? It doesn't. They should be exploding all over the place from this "pressure" but they don't because there is no such thing as gravity pressure.

You guys are so full of it.

The universe was once much hotter and denser? Nope, it wasn't.

There certainly was a big bang? There certainly was not. The expansion of the universe is not from some initial big bang and there is no such thing as gravity pressure.

Even in string theory there was a point at which the universe started to expand? I don't have a problem with you guys getting it wrong so much as when you come up with some theory that violates the laws that you know are true and every scientist simply accepts it. You lose all credibility when you do that. Just admit, you don't know what's causing the universe to expand, don't try to say that gravity "pressure" caused an expansion in the early universe.

Again, you show more about your lack of understanding of physics than you do flaws in our understanding of the universe.

 

[Super Universe]

Again, you show more about your lack of understanding of physics than you do flaws in our understanding of the universe.

I lack understanding of physics? You scientists are the ones who don't make sense to me. Once in a while a "genius" gets some new information from God and gives it to the rest of you who don't accept it until many years later.

And, the genius who only received limited information then gives his opinion on other things that he did not get any new information on and sets himself up for failure because he thinks he's smarter than he really is.

And all the other scientists, who are just good at math but have no real imagination, come up with ideas that violate their own laws of physics and everyone goes along with it because it's more important not to go against the grain so you can keep your job.

 

[Polymath257]

I lack understanding of physics? You scientists are the ones who don't make sense to me. Once in a while a "genius" gets some new information from God and gives it to the rest of you who don't accept it until many years later.

Well, perhaps you should spend some time learning the basics. Then you might be able to actually read what the 'laws' are and determine when things are violations instead of using your poor understanding to make that determination.

Why do you believe that geniuses get information from a deity rather than simply working hard and getting some insight?

And, the genius who only received limited information then gives his opinion on other things that he did not get any new information on and sets himself up for failure because he thinks he's smarter than he really is.

And all the other scientists, who are just good at math but have no real imagination, come up with ideas that violate their own laws of physics and everyone goes along with it because it's more important not to go against the grain so you can keep your job.

You have a very distorted idea of how science works in practice. In fact, to be able to show where the prevailing theory is wrong and to be able to substantiate that is a sure way to get scientific success. Going against the grain is *encouraged*. But you have to be able to substantiate your claims.

 

[Super Universe]

Well, perhaps you should spend some time learning the basics. Then you might be able to actually read what the 'laws' are and determine when things are violations instead of using your poor understanding to make that determination.

Why do you believe that geniuses get information from a deity rather than simply working hard and getting some insight?



You have a very distorted idea of how science works in practice. In fact, to be able to show where the prevailing theory is wrong and to be able to substantiate that is a sure way to get scientific success. Going against the grain is *encouraged*. But you have to be able to substantiate your claims.

I should spend time learning the basics? Oh, like how pressure exceeds the force of gravity in a big bang but not in a black hole? No thanks. Why would I waste my time learning something that scientists just made up and violates one of their most basic laws?

Why do I believe that genius' get their information from God rather than simply working hard? Because it's impossible to come up with a new original idea on your own. You can't do it. No being can. Even Jesus can't because that would be creating and only God can create. All you can do is recycle and mix things/ideas that already exist. Try it, come up with something original. I can't wait to see it.

To be able to show where a prevailing theory is wrong and be able to substantiate it is a sure way to scientific success? So all the people who did not agree with Higgs went on to scientific success even though they were wrong the whole time?