'Big Bang' actually 'Big Chill,' new theory says

[WPBCowboysFan]

Hardly.

The fact that the planet has climate cycles independent of humans is not evidence that human activity cannot affect climate.

And this idea people have that climate scientists haven't thought about all this and incorporated it into their work is, frankly, baffling.

Still doesnt mean that man is actually affecting any climate change at all.

 

[CanadianCowboysFan]

Still doesnt mean that man is actually affecting any climate change at all.

nor that we aren't

Big Bang is the only plausible answer to how our universe exists.

Unless some of the scientists here care to advise me of an equally plausible one.

 

[Hoofbite]

nor that we aren't

Big Bang is the only plausible answer to how our universe exists.

Unless some of the scientists here care to advise me of an equally plausible one.

See title of thread.

 

[ScipioCowboy]

Ok, then I just didn't understand you. We're on the same page. Are you a physicist?

No. They wouldn't hire me. I missed the height requirement. Gravity has not been good to me. That's why I question its existence at the quantum level,

 

[JD_KaPow]

Still doesnt mean that man is actually affecting any climate change at all.

What doesn't mean it? The fact that people make really dumb arguments against anthropogenic climate change? Sure. Dumb, unsupported arguments aren't evidence one way or the other. There's a huge amount of actual evidence, however, that supports that hypothesis (and isn't consistent with the hypothesis that there's nothing new going on).

 

[burmafrd]

Hardly.

The fact that the planet has climate cycles independent of humans is not evidence that human activity cannot affect climate.

And this idea people have that climate scientists haven't thought about all this and incorporated it into their work is, frankly, baffling.

they cannot explain how the others happened; so why does anyone think they know why this one is happening?

Total BS

 

[CanadianCowboysFan]

See title of thread.

I think you know what I was getting at. Many here are skirting the issue while disagreeing with Big Bang, Big Chill, whatever because you know what they truly "believe".

 

[burmafrd]

What doesn't mean it? The fact that people make really dumb arguments against anthropogenic climate change? Sure. Dumb, unsupported arguments aren't evidence one way or the other. There's a huge amount of actual evidence, however, that supports that hypothesis (and isn't consistent with the hypothesis that there's nothing new going on).

actually the dumb arguements are from people that think man knows enough to say anything with certainty.

That is why MANY climate experts say the exact same thing;

We don't know enough yet to say how it happens

ANd your huge amount of evidence- that is a joke. Dig into some of those so called studies and there are so many ifs and maybes and such its ridiculous

And so much is dependent on the 'hockey stick'

And if that is proven wrong the whole theory dies.

When your theory is so dependent on one piece of evidence it is going to more than likely collapse one day

 

[jobberone]

No. They wouldn't hire me. I missed the height requirement. Gravity has not been good to me. That's why I question its existence at the quantum level,

:laugh2:

 

[ScipioCowboy]

I think you know what I was getting at. Many here are skirting the issue while disagreeing with Big Bang, Big Chill, whatever because you know what they truly "believe".

Actually, I'm less certain than I ever have been of "what you're getting at." And that's saying something.

 

[jobberone]

nor that we aren't

Big Bang is the only plausible answer to how our universe exists.

Unless some of the scientists here care to advise me of an equally plausible one.

Brane theory would be one.

 

[CanadianCowboysFan]

But Marine, at least you would agree man should do all we can to limit the effects we might be having on climate change.

I mean I am sure you recycle, reduce and reuse, n'est ce pas?

 

[CanadianCowboysFan]

Actually, I'm less certain than I ever have been of "what you're getting at." And that's saying something.

Why do you disagree with the Big Bang, Big Chill, whatever theory of the origin of the universe (and no need to cut and past some quantum physics treatise you saw online to explain).

 

[burmafrd]

Brane theory would be one.

I saw what you did there

 

[ScipioCowboy]

Why do you disagree with the Big Bang, Big Chill, whatever theory of the origin of the universe (and no need to cut and past some quantum physics treatise you saw online to explain).

Why do you think I disagree with them?

 

[WPBCowboysFan]

Big Bang is the only plausible answer to how our universe exists.

-

 

[CanadianCowboysFan]

Why do you think I disagree with them?

That is a good French debate method, when afraid to answer, respond with a question.

You haven't stated what you think created the universe, just critique the well known and accepted theories. It is up to you to put forth a plausible theory in response.

 

[masomenos]

actually the dumb arguements are from people that think man knows enough to say anything with certainty.

As a general rule, science is more in the probability game than the certainty game.

 

[CanadianCowboysFan]

As a general rule, science is more in the probability game than the certainty game.

True. Nothing is ever certain but it is more probably than not that there has been evolution, that the Earth is 6 billion years old, that man used to be Apes and we all evolved from some single cell organism that existed few billion years ago.

Of course that can't be "proven" but it is as proven as anything can be.

 

[ScipioCowboy]

That is a good French debate method, when afraid to answer, respond with a question.

I would've answered your question if it had been valid question. Instead, it was based on faulty, leading assumptions, much like if I'd asked, "When did you stop beating your wife?"

Obviously, you don't beat your wife so the question is misleading.

You haven't stated what you think created the universe, just critique the well known and accepted theories. It is up to you to put forth a plausible theory in response.

The Big Bang has proved its mettle time and time again. It provides the most beneficial understanding of the Universe.

Fun fact: The Big Bang theory was originally devised by a Belgian Priest and astronomer named Georges Lemaitre.