The Big Bang describes the evolution of this universe back to 1 x 10^-43 seconds after the start perfectly fine.
What is discussed, is what led up to the Big Bang, what caused a humongous liquid soup of energy to assemble in the first place and what caused the disturbance in that soup causing it to become unstable and start inflation.
If you want to learn more but not with all the deep math, go to YouTube, search for Stanford University, click on Playlists and choose Susskind's class in Cosmology. It will explain how the age is determined, there are actually several ways but one is very accurate.
Carl Sagan-Cosmos edited for rednecks
All statements that conflict with the creationist view of of the world are edited out and replaced. Sagan states that our planet is four—hundreds and hundreds of years old, that “scientists determine the universe was created by the God-ig Bang, and that “if you look at the bones of a Jesusnasaurus Rex, it’s clear by the use of carbon-dating that Mountain Dew is the best soda ever made.
"Are mysterious particles shooting through Earth during solar flare events? Enough to disrupt the decay rate of radioactive material previously assumed to be constant? Discovery News' Ian O'Neill explains why scientists think that may be the case."
I am not advocating for the young earth scientists - I am just pointing out a relevant article. New discoveries could radically alter all (or some) of the information in this article - and this one deserves a mention.
For the record, given the current information we have, I think the young earth scientists / young universe proponents are insane.
By coming up with a wild hypothesis and then making the data fit the conclusion?
By the way, I think that the universe is about 14 billion years old. But, there are a lot of junk science out there and biased "scientists" who try to make data fit their preconceived ideas.
Davidniven, your problem is that you simply don't have the imaginative capacity required to conceive that anyone might think differently than you do. You ignore data that doesn't fit your wild guesses about how the world works, so you assume that scientists do, too.
You obviously can't name a single concrete example of data being manipulated to fit a hypothesis - you don't even provide any evidence for the one "example" you claimed proved your point. And it doesn't even make any goddamn sense when you say you're not rejecting scientific conclusions, only the scientific method.
Wild guess...god created the earth in 6 days...6000 years ago. And some how this is supposed to sound more realistic?
As far as not having any evidence or observations...pot meet kettle. Neither creation or evolution have evidence or observations to prove it happened. (And I don't believe in the circle jerk argument that the bible says so... after all, it was only inspired by god...not actually written by god...and we all know how delusional humans can get when they feel they have been talking to god.)
lbuchaNov 30, 2010
always wondered....
jameslowellNov 30, 2010
Me too! Can't exactly look at tree rings, canya?
swansontomNov 30, 2010
People still believe in the Big Bang? I thought that was thrown out the window years ago.
agmlauncherNov 30, 2010
?? No, it's still the predominant explanation for the origin of the universe as far as I know.
Closed AccountNov 30, 2010
The Big Bang describes the evolution of this universe back to 1 x 10^-43 seconds after the start perfectly fine.
What is discussed, is what led up to the Big Bang, what caused a humongous liquid soup of energy to assemble in the first place and what caused the disturbance in that soup causing it to become unstable and start inflation.
If you want to learn more but not with all the deep math, go to YouTube, search for Stanford University, click on Playlists and choose Susskind's class in Cosmology. It will explain how the age is determined, there are actually several ways but one is very accurate.
moducNov 30, 2010
Great post. Thank you. I wish I can play it faster. The lecture is just extremely slow for me.
letherialNov 30, 2010
right wing religious nut jobs are trying to throw it out by screaming as loud as they can
specimen7Nov 30, 2010
I prefer the Christian science method. Just start speaking in tongues while drowning a baby in holy water and hey presto! the earth is 6000 years old.
swansontomNov 30, 2010
Taking ages to load. :(
frayedknotjeffNov 30, 2010
Pray, and then the first number that comes into your mind is the number God wanted you to think of.
khastDec 1, 2010
For me, the universe started 35 years ago. Hell, I don't know what happened before I was born...and like f**k if I care what happens when I die.
frayedknotjeffDec 1, 2010
lol, I know, I was dead for trillions of years before I was born, so it's kinda like "been there, done that".
fxspec06Nov 30, 2010
Site's down.
Closed AccountNov 30, 2010
Carl Sagan-Cosmos edited for rednecks
All statements that conflict with the creationist view of of the world are edited out and replaced. Sagan states that our planet is four—hundreds and hundreds of years old, that “scientists determine the universe was created by the God-ig Bang, and that “if you look at the bones of a Jesusnasaurus Rex, it’s clear by the use of carbon-dating that Mountain Dew is the best soda ever made.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DI9ImScQGAo
andrewtheartNov 30, 2010
http://news.discovery.com/videos/space-mystery-surrounds-solar-flare-event.html
"Are mysterious particles shooting through Earth during solar flare events? Enough to disrupt the decay rate of radioactive material previously assumed to be constant? Discovery News' Ian O'Neill explains why scientists think that may be the case."
andrewtheartNov 30, 2010
I am not advocating for the young earth scientists - I am just pointing out a relevant article. New discoveries could radically alter all (or some) of the information in this article - and this one deserves a mention.
For the record, given the current information we have, I think the young earth scientists / young universe proponents are insane.
davidnivenDec 1, 2010
By coming up with a wild hypothesis and then making the data fit the conclusion?
By the way, I think that the universe is about 14 billion years old. But, there are a lot of junk science out there and biased "scientists" who try to make data fit their preconceived ideas.
Example? Stephen Hawking and his ever-contracting-and-expanding universe idea.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Closed AccountDec 1, 2010
Davidniven, your problem is that you simply don't have the imaginative capacity required to conceive that anyone might think differently than you do. You ignore data that doesn't fit your wild guesses about how the world works, so you assume that scientists do, too.
You obviously can't name a single concrete example of data being manipulated to fit a hypothesis - you don't even provide any evidence for the one "example" you claimed proved your point. And it doesn't even make any goddamn sense when you say you're not rejecting scientific conclusions, only the scientific method.
khastDec 3, 2010
Wild guess...god created the earth in 6 days...6000 years ago. And some how this is supposed to sound more realistic?
As far as not having any evidence or observations...pot meet kettle. Neither creation or evolution have evidence or observations to prove it happened. (And I don't believe in the circle jerk argument that the bible says so... after all, it was only inspired by god...not actually written by god...and we all know how delusional humans can get when they feel they have been talking to god.)