Re: Rant: Big Bang theory 'ridiculous'


michael.palmer1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
by Herman Cummings
Science Teachers Have a License to Lie?
[excerpts]

Our students are taught the ridiculous theory that there was a "Big
Bang" (explosion) of condensed matter, that contained all the
elements of the universe, about 16 billion years ago.

A) the Big Bang was not an explosion, it is an expansion, there is a
big difference, but it is probably hard for you to grasp.

B) the Big Bang started out as pure energy, temperatures were to hot
for any known particles to form until 10**-36 seconds had past. Atomic
nuclea did not form until several hundred seconds had past, and neutral
atoms for several hundred years. So, it did not start out as mater in
any form, condensed or otherwise.

C) for the 99.9999%-level of accuracy, the Big Bang only synthesized
Hydrogen, Helium and trace amounts of lithium. Every other element was
synthesized in the nuclear furnaces within stars, and emitted back into
the universe at the end of these stars lives wither as the sheding of
the outer layers or in novae or super novae.

D) the time is 13.7 BYA +/- 0.2 BYA not 16 BYA.

What was in existence 50 billion years ago?

A) Nothing that we know of.
B) time as we understand it was not in existance before the BB
happened.

What did our natural realm
look like 60 trillion Earth years ago, or did it even exist?

The earth is only 4.5 BYO, the universe only 13.7 BYO. As far as we
KNOW, nothing existed.

What was
in the vast emptiness of what we now refer to as outer space, 70
quadrillion Earth years ago?

The concept of space itself was born with the BB. Prior to the BB,
there was no linear dimensionis to denote space itself. But, if you
insist that there was something there, I can agree that it is both vast
and empty. However, it did not have the dimensions we understand as
distance or time.

These, and other questions, are not
answered. ...

Only because you do not look for the science behind these questions.

Secular science is not searching for the truth, as much as they are
searching for a weapon to use against theism.

Science is NOT LOOKING for TRUTHS. Science is looking for models that
allow us to understand what is really going on--whatever it may be. The
fact that science has never uncovered one or more deities is not a
problem of science, but upon those who insist that one or more of these
things exist.

Using the public schools
as a recruiting ground, science attempts to disprove the existence of
God, which is contrary to the U.S. Constitution, and fails the
so-called "Lemon Test".

It is the lack of evidence that fails to support the notion that one or
more god-thingies actually exist, not science.

So what sort of answers are our science teachers giving their students?

Answers that should be in agreement with the well researched OPINIONs
of the majority of real scientists in those topics at the time the
textbooks are written.

What sort of answers are they allowed to give? Why are certain
questions not allowed to be asked? It's because science teachers have
not been squarely trained.

It seems to me, that your problem, here, is the startling lack of
evidence of one or more god-thingies. So, why don't you and your myriad
hoard, pary to your god-thingie so that one or more of them actually
show up in a venue where hundres of people can see, hear, photograph,
and record the present of them. Until then, you are wanting something
to be true that is not supported by the evidence.

.

Quantcast