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

[zrinkill]

The evidence is there for us to see.For example, if you want evidence for evolution just go to a museum and they have transistional fossils for you to see.

You do realize that those are made of plaster ...... right?

 

[trickblue]

I never said I had all the answers. I admit that there are things that we do not know.

So how can you be so sure that your beliefs are superior to those of anyone else?

Science has long corrected itself over centuries... what we believe as truth today, my be "flat-earth" theory in 100 years...

My point is that so many people argue red-faced that they are right and the other side is foolish, when the most important thing in the world, another Lombardi trophy for the Cowboys, is forgotten in the mix...

 

[jwitten82]

So how can you be so sure that your beliefs are superior to those of anyone else?

Science has long corrected itself over centuries... what we believe as truth today, my be "flat-earth" theory in 100 years...

My point is that so many people argue red-faced that they are right and the other side is foolish, when the most important thing in the world, another Lombardi trophy for the Cowboys, is forgotten in the mix...

I agree.

 

[jwitten82]

You do realize that those are made of plaster ...... right?

You do realize that they can't send the original fossil to every museum..... right?

 

[zrinkill]

You do realize that they can't send the original fossil to every museum..... right?

Yes I do ...... I actually do have faith that they are sending accurate casts of creatures they think existed and how they think they looked.

 

[YosemiteSam]

So you have faith that scientist police themselves.

I am glad you believe that.

Vs what? There are thousands of scientist all over the world. You believe every single one of them form all different countries around the world for whom most don't even know each other are all in cahoots? For what reason?

If you don't believe the results, you are more than welcome to verify their claims. Most of their research is posted in scientific journals. You are more than welcome to verify the claims. Most who dismiss scientific claims do not have any shred of hard evidence to do so and can't breakdown the scientific evidence they are denouncing. At least scientists lay their proof out on the table.

 

[jwitten82]

“Science replaces private prejudice with public, verifiable evidence.”- Dawkins

 

[YosemiteSam]

“Science replaces private prejudice with public, verifiable evidence.”- Dawkins

 

[zrinkill]

Most who accept scientific claims do not have any shred of hard evidence to do so and can't breakdown the scientific evidence they are accepting. At least I think scientist lay out all their evidence

Fixed

 

[jobberone]

Scientists have evidence to back up their theories. No faith required.

Of course they have faith. Faith and/or assumptions the observations are correct. That the best answer is the right one though other answers with less probability are in fact incorrect. Faith that the laws of the universe we observe are in fact the laws of all the universe or at least the one we live in. Faith that the entire whatever we see out there and in here is 'real'.

The fact we can see up to a millionth of a millionth of a millionth of a millionth of a second to the "Big Bang" doesn't mean we know for sure what happened before that or especially before the ?'time'? before that event occurred. Brane theory might be correct and there was no infinitely hot 'singularity' that popped into existence by whatever means. There may never have been a singularity even by the present best guess scenario. OTOH, perhaps something did pop into existence in OUR universe by whatever means of 'infinite density, heat, energy and pressure. We don't know so we keep looking into the very small and the very large slowly accumulating data and revising our theories.

There is no one 'Big Bang' theory and even if there was it doesn't fit all the data and/or there are holes and existing data that don't fit it.

 

[zrinkill]

“Science replaces private prejudice with public, verifiable evidence.”- Dawkins

Ahhh a quote from the king of secular bigots, Dawkins.

Surprised it took that long.

 

[YosemiteSam]

Fixed

For Your Information Unlimited shreds of evidence.

 

[masomenos]

So how can you be so sure that your beliefs are superior to those of anyone else?

Science has long corrected itself over centuries... what we believe as truth today, my be "flat-earth" theory in 100 years...

Isn't that how knowledge is built?

Consider making a new recipe from scratch:

The first time you make something it's a bit of an experiment. The second time, you respond to the new information (e.g. it was a little dry, a little bland) and make refinements. You change the cooking temperature, you add some spice. After a series of refinements, you come up with a recipe you like and you keep it. Then maybe a friend introduces you to a new spice and you think, "Gee, that could make my dish better". So you add it in, but it doesn't come out quite right. So you make a few more small refinements in the constant pursuit of a better recipe.

It's just that the "recipes" for the various scientific disciplines have been undergoing refinements for the past 3000 years. To keep with the analogy: we're certainly eating a better meal than we were back then.

 

[jwitten82]

The quote is true no matter who said it.

 

[zrinkill]

For Your Information Unlimited shreds of evidence.

Good old Wikipedia ...... making people think they are scientist since 2001.

 

[YosemiteSam]

Good old Wikipedia ...... making people think they are scientist since 2001.

Umm, did you not read it? That page makes no claims. It just lists many scientific journals where scientific facts are printed.

Your deflection failed.

 

[zrinkill]

The quote is true no matter who said it.

The opinion of a known bigot should never be used for anything ..... his opinion is worthless.

 

[jwitten82]

The opinion of a known bigot should never be used for anything ..... his opinion is worthless.

The opinion of a well respected scientist is not worthless.

 

[JD_KaPow]

umm... don't turn this around... you said they have evidence to back up their theories...

When I was in school we were taught that Pluto was in our solar system... now it isn't. I bet the day before that revelation, you would have argued until blue in the face it was, then argued the opposite the next... Apparently their evidence was misguided...

What in the world are you talking about?

First of all, the reclassification of Pluto didn't come out of nowhere; there was a long, very public debate about it for many years. There was certainly no consensus that suddenly got overthrown, as you suggest.

Secondly, the debate was entirely about what to call Pluto. Reclassifying it didn't change its position in the solar system or its orbital mechanics or anything about it. It didn't alter a single scientific principle or theory. We've understood Pluto's place in the cosmos for a long time. There was no "revelation", just a big argument about terminology.

 

[zrinkill]

The opinion of a well respected scientist is not worthless.

It would be the same as having an anti gun activist opinion of the Dark knight shootings and why they happened.

I actually agree with most of the theories of evolution. I also happen to be a religious person.

I do not think one cancels out the other.

I also understand that if I lived a thousand years I would probably laugh about the things I believed in these days.