Off Topic Dark Matter and other Astronomy information.

My take on both sides of the coin.

God the creator has to be taken on faith because there is no tangible proof but, i would be willing to bet that the majority of "non believers" would edge their bets if given the chance by asking for forgiveness on their deat bed in the hope of an afterlife. I have never heard any argument from the religeous side that comes close to explaining where God came from or existed before he created everything else other than "he just was", if nothing existed before he created it where did he come?

Science at the moment dictates that the universe was a great void where certain particals/chemicals came together and caused a big bang which ultimately lead to the formation of planets and everything else that exists. What did this great void exist in? where did the particals/chemicals come from in this void?

I don`t think there will be any definate answer to any of these questions in my life time but am pretty sure that i will be one of those who "edge my bets" if given the chance when my time comes.

 

Sisu, we know very little about most things, we are still learning in every aspect of science and nature. One of the things we are quite well up on is electricity and it`s affects (including magnetism). Electricity is detectable and measurable, it requires the flow of electrons from one atom to another and is not conducted through materials with a strong atomic bond, a virtual vacuum such as space is not the best medium for conducting electricity (unless dark matter is condutive with plenty of free electrons). I would set as much store in this guy as i do in the presenters of "Ancient Aliens" on the documetary chanel, good entertainment but no real substance.

 

esp the one with the funny hair(cant remember name), i cant take him seriously even though he seems quite passionate about the alien theories.

most of them seem to be authors as well and written some type of book, makes me think is this just you selling your book, i get that half the time with religion as well, show me something that isnt driven by money and i may take it a bit more seriously.

 

Pascal's wager? As Christopher Hitchens said, very close to his deathbed, if God exists he'll understand his honesty that he was faithful to the reason and enquiring mind that God gave him, and if that doesn't get him into heaven he doesn't want to be there anyway.

My dad, an atheist, used to say there were no atheists in his bomber when they were 10,000 ft above Germany with half the Third Reich trying to kill them.

 

Giorgio Tsoukalos, he can find spacemen and flying saucers anywhere

 

I have heard similar things from a few old service men

 

Christianity is sun worship. The symbolism to pagan gods still exists in Christianity. Even the Pope's had is actually a fish head if you turn it sideways. An old fish god.

The bible is myth turned metaphor over time yet it is taken literally by so many. Archetypes across all major religions and civilisations all relate to the sky and how it looked thousands of years ago, which was nothing like the sky looks today goes 40 years of mythological studies anyways, a good watch is Symbols of an Alien sky, it is not proof, it's just pretty interesting. There are also some other works on Mythology on youtube and the evolution of mythology into modern religion.
China's dragons became dragons over time, some mythologists say it was most likely electrical activity in the atmosphere that created the dragons myth, electrical charges in the sky could easily be a dragon to primitive eyes at a time when gods lived in the sky and when they strike, fire destruction, also fits with electrical discharges and over time they became fire breathing dragons. So it goes anyway, symbols of an Alien sky is a pretty good documentary. Worth a watch.


As for scieince
Kirchhoff's law of thermal radiation has been proved wrong in the lab, this law is part of Planck's law which also becomes incorrect. Planck's law being wrong has huge implications for Astrophysics especially at the galaxy and universe scale.

The reviewing and acceptance of papers by bodies has to be questioned.
The IEEE accepted 100 papers, of gibberish. An MIT guy created a bit of software to randomly grab pieces of random scientific papers into one single paper of gibberish. He just wrote an abstract for each gibberish paper.
120 of these gibberish papers got accepted, published by IEEE and Springer Science journal publisher.

One of his papers was cited 15 more times than Einstein apparently. It was a gibberish paper from a person that didn't exist.
http://phys.org/news/2014-02-science-publisher-gibberish-papers.html

 

And your a ****ing idiot! You know little nd understand even less. However this does not stop you from making definitive pronouncements based solely upon ignorance. Hence you are an idiot.

 

Is unconvincing, IMO. It assumes monotheism and doesn't specify which one, for a start.

Hitchens was a well-read gentleman and, though he and I had our disagreements, I agree with a lot of his sentiments and opinions on various things. No doubt when he said this he was remembering a couple of other famous quotes from the likes of Russell, etc. It is a very good quote, though.

This reminds me of the famous quote, once used by Eisenhower, that 'there are no atheists in foxholes'. Which, despite evidence to the contrary, is a nice little tongue-in-cheek comment which, as James Morrow points out, isn't so much an argument against atheism as an argument against foxholes. It sort of embodies what Russell thought when he said: 'I would never die for my beliefs because I might be wrong.' Absolute certainty is not a logical or scientific position. I agree with Russell.

 

#meltdown

This thread should have stopped after 3 words not still going after 8 pages

 

Hitchens is also being rather silly. Hitchens has no control not any method of controlling how God will think or react. As God exists (I to have the right to make a statement on the existence of God) then he cannot make the assumption as to what God will be faithful to. However a believer would point to The Biiblical statements and suggest that Hitchens was totally wrong. If so then his quote is complete codswallop.

But Russell is a coward. So I guess that he would not sacrifice himself for love, friendship or family - after all he may be wrong about them as well.

 

Hitchens (Christopher) WAS, not is - he died a couple of years ago, hence the deathbed quote. And the preposition is that if God exists, He made Christopher what he is (or was), and if He can't accept that he doesn't want to be in His Heaven. Not predicting how a god, whom Hitchens doesn't believes exists anyway, will react at all.

 

Now as God gave man the freedom of will then there is no way that God is going to reject Hitchens as an individual. However Hitchens decision to not believe in God precludes him fro entry into union with God and hence heaven.

Hitchens is being foolish in his comment. All he has done to is adapt the Groucho Marx quote about club membership. Futile really.

 

that's your opinion dave, you're a dick, a complete dick with a grievous personality flaw and a serious issue with anything that goes against what you believe. Met many a muppet like you, funnily enough they were not successes either for all their self assurance and arrogance.


Astro it's all imo, someone would want to that that crackpot Dave that though

god pff, it's sun worship you ****ing idiot.

 

"there are no atheists in foxholes'
it's a coping mechanism when those that don't believe do things like that at times like that.

 

You are a ****ing idiot and your own posts prove it. You make categoric statements about God but forward no conclusive evidence to prove your contention and then expect others to merely accept it! Now either piss or get off the pot - prove your statements or qualify them or just shut up!

 

No it doesn't work that way, hence you are the fukwit Dave. You just throw abuse and talk bollocks.

How do you think anything is ever discovered you nonce. There are always many ideas and discussing them and ruling out what's wrong is part of discovery.
At no point did I reply to anything you posted and said "that's crap" "bullshit" "you're an idiot". What ****ing part of what I posted do you disagree with and more importantly WHY do you disagree?

I just can't fathom your ****ty attitude you clown.

All modern religions stem from pagan religions, sky and sun worship. Should I listen to you, the abuser and ranter or to people who have worked 40 years on research, hmmm. I can't say which is true but I find good research more palatable than an invisible dude who controls all that's for sure.

Are you a religious nut? you certainly act like one concerning my posts. Take the broken bottle out of your ass you might lighten up.

BABYLONIAN FISH GOD 'DAGON, Pope's fish head had.

please log in to view this image

please log in to view this image

 

Do you naturally not understand what you say or do you deliberately work at it? You expect me not to react when you insult the basis of my belief with statements such as "Christianity is sun worship" and "The Bible is myth turned metaphor" without any proof of any substance. Well if you believe that I over-react to your posts on this subject (please note I do not usually comment overly on your other tiresome conspiracy posts) then it is in a desperate attempt to make posters like you realise the arrogance of their language and its effects. So, if you show no consideration then don't expect any in return.

As for the Pope's hat. You really should learn more about who you are talking with. The size or shape of his hat is totally meaningless to me!

So I will put the argument back to you. Do you have any proof that God does or does not exist? How do you distinguish between religion and faith? If you can't or won't attempt to answer these basic questions then stop abusing people and just maybe you won't be abused in return. Capiche?

 

none of us will probably know the answers to questions to do with religion and belief until we are all dead sadly, can't see any other way of it being proven or not.

is amazing that these supposed people who can talk to the dead that no one has asked them for the answers lol but its ok to take peoples money , religion is a sensitive subject for a lot of people, one thing i have noticed when discussing anything to do with religion is it normally produces very passionate responses either way.

also have noticed that a lot of people who live their lives in an atheist sort of way, amazing how many people believe in the after life just as they are about to depart for pastures green, but i have also seen similar hypocrisy from religious people.

end of the day we all have our own opinions, and nothing (generally speaking) will change that.

we will all get the answers to so many questions we have, when we are fecking dead

 

Pretty much dude we all have opinions and there are many different ideas, I just find it a mistake not to explore all options and it's interesting debating new stuff that comes along.

Personally I think religion is a byproduct of myth and civilisation but I don't dispute the good work done by many at grass roots in religious orders and I believe faith is a powerful tool that has gotten many a person through many a hard time. My mother is very religious, not in the vehement sense, trashing anything at odds with her belief, my mother is exceptionally tolerant and follows the principles of being a decent human being. If someone said to my mother "god does not exist" or had a different point of view the answer would not be "shut up", "you are an idiot", "you talk crap" or the often violent responses by many in all religions towards those that disagree.

Some of us have faith in ourselves rather than offering one's self up to a higher power. The net result is the same in the end no matter where your faith lies. If it helps it helps.

I just don't feel the need to tell people they are wrong. Especially so if I am not a subject matter expert as is usually the case But god forbid, as my mother would say, one should stray from the mainstream view on a given topic, it's a crime