What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
72 Comments
- pintomp3, on 10/11/2007, -0/+16of course they made it up. everyone knows the universe is only 6000 years old. if you wanted to prove them wrong, you might have to study and become a physicist or astronomer. it's so much easier to just study the bible.
- iffypop, on 10/11/2007, -1/+11In a shock move, Scientologists have taken credit for this claim with an even earlier photo:
http://bayimg.com/OadKeAAbM - mntbikeracer1, on 10/11/2007, -0/+10This is always mind boggling to me.
- zeebo323, on 10/11/2007, -6/+14God doesn't exist.
- Greatmatt, on 10/11/2007, -0/+8Stuff like this is just so damn cool.
- kakwakas, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7*cue Twilight Zone music*
- zanzzz, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7In a related story astronomers looking just beyond the oldest stars have discovered its "turtles all the way down".
- nwoantibody, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7Wait another 4 months before they find stars even further then that.
- Xfer00, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6I've always wondered if we can look back enough, using astronomy, to see the beginning of the universe. I suppose only time and further innovations in astronomy will show us.
Either way, we live in a fascinating time. I can only hope that, in my lifetime, mankind is able to leave the Earth on a permanent basis.
Long live human ingenuity. - BlackOp, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5There is an invisible penis on your head. You can't prove it doesn't exist, so it must, right?
- kingfoot, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5Who the ***** cares what other believe. If you think you are right, then so be it, doesn't mean you have any more truth in your belief than the next guy's (or girls'), and visa versa.
- kakwakas, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5I'm excited for it. If they're already saying that these may be the oldest stars in the universe, finding stars beyond those could make or break the current theory of the age of the universe.
- MrKite, on 10/11/2007, -4/+9What's really amazing is that one of the stars that's the furthest away isn't a star at all... IT'S EARTH!!!! Holy *****!
- EuphopiaB, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Ok now you're just trying to annoy diggers.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Yes, the Bible says a lot of things: http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=PS%20137
"O Daughter of Babylon, doomed to destruction, happy is he who repays you for what you have done to us - he who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks."
Charming. - bIuebonics, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4you mean the evil god allowed to be done to his people? after all, god is the reason evil exists.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4It's not that unfathomable, if we're considering all the crazy things you can do with higher dimensions the farthest star might as well be Earth. Consider the game Asteroids, which is 2D. When your ship goes off the side of the screen it "wraps" around. In 2D it more or less teleports courtesy of a bit of magic. But to model this behaviour in reality we'd have to add another dimension to our Asteroids universe, and wrap our 2D plane into a dough-nut. By folding through our added dimension we have made Asteroids Two-Thirds D.
In this same way if our universe was folded through 4+ dimensions then eventually if we traveled in a straight line we'd come back upon ourselves. Note that it's a straight 3D line, in 4D it will curve. - bIuebonics, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3it's how we deal with trolls.
- GliTCH82, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4it really is. If you ever watched the BBC documentary about the Large Hedron Collider, called the "Six Billion Dollar Experiment" you would see that taking a 1 million second exposure of the most distant area possible with Hubble would eliminate the background noise that scientists claim is the light remnant from the Big Bang. Light that old reveals that stars and galaxies look quite different, and it is said that we are getting to the point where newer technology really doesn't reveal much more. That statement right there, if you were to believe it, means that we are seeing the far edge of the universe and will not be able to see much farther than this. Because matter was so dense at the moment of the Big Bang, even light couldn't escape, and in order to study the origins of the universe any further we would have to replicate the conditions present at a subatomic level, hence the creation of the LHC.
- Neem, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3If the first two lines are not a joke, you very ignorant to think that way. Measurements taken are done with very sensitive equipment and the calculations that arrive at the conclusion are based on very sound physical principles. That said, they could still be wrong, but its not because they saw a burning bush that told them about the stars.
- rstarr, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Wow...so um, I forgot this is digg.
/joke is now required so people don't think you're a bible toting creationist.
Man, you guys need to lighten up. - EarlOfLade, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Mikecampbell, you need to come and discuss over at Internet infidels, iidb.org
You will get all your ideas dismantled easily.
But first, can toy tell me which of the 2 creation stories in the bible is the correct one? And which of the 6-7 different stories about jesus resurrection is correct. And here is a challenge for you, see http://ffrf.org/books/lfif/?t=stone - swrostmore, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2I think thats kind of like the logic experiment where every second an arrow travels half the distance two its target, but never arrives.
- BlackOp, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2I really hope you are joking. http://tinyurl.com/yc7f5w
- bIuebonics, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2i don't know why you were dugg down, you're absolutely correct. anyone who has examined different cosmological structures for the universe know various topologies yield a finite, yet unbounded universe in which you could travel in one direction infinitely yet you would wind up where you started.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3When will close-minded people like swrostmore realise that science and religion are mutually exclusive? You can't have logic and ignorance in the same basket.
There's no evidence of the universe or Earth being remotely (factor of 1000) close to the age required for creation stories. It's all farcical.
I know the Internet isn't the purveyor of all things true, but take a quick romp through the evidence for something that requires the Earth to be millions of years old ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_evolution ), and then take a quick look at some of the origins of stories in the Old Testament ( http://www.livius.org/fa-fn/flood/flood3-t-atrahasis.html - down the bottom ). You'll notice evolution to be solid and logical and Noah and the Flood to be plagarised and hilarious. - Neem, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2thats not fair for the rest of us, when you play the scientology card you get automatic mod-up.
- bIuebonics, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2well, assuming the person meant to say jaw, i'd say their use of the word "literally" was absolutely correct. have you never witness something only to realize that your mouth was hanging open, your jaw had dropped? unless of course, you're confused as to the meanings of the word drop.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2You can't prove God exists, either. All you have is a 3000 year old book and a 2000 year old addendum which both praise themselves for their accuracy and their correctness.
Scroll down to the bottom here ( http://www.livius.org/fa-fn/flood/flood3-t-atrahasis.html ), and take a look at the origins of one of your Bible stories. Sort of ... plagarised, shall we say?
Whoops, all along you've been believing in a myth. - bIuebonics, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2kawahee, don't confuse religion with christianity. it gives the better religions a bad name.
- bIuebonics, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2only the giant pink unicorn didn't have a son name jesus. it doesn't have and kids; the giant pink unicorn has a sexual relationship with our sister universe's creator. unfortunately for you, our sister universe is in a separate space-time from ours and you can't prove it doesn't exist, therefore it does. in fact, the unicorn takes offense to christians claiming their god to be the true god.
- luet, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3You must have incredibly bad eyesight
- BlackOp, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2So how do you expect athiests to disprove god then?
What if the penis is in the other-than-natural realm too? - BlackOp, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Umm, I don't know.. these guys maybe? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discovery_Institute
Or do you think that intelligent design is a theory too? - bIuebonics, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2actually, the universe was created by a giant pink unicorn who exists in an "other-than-natural realm". since you can't prove this doesn't exist, then it does.
- pintomp3, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1sorry, we see too many of them round these parts. i get touchy about it since i'm in education and hate seeing what they are trying to do to our country's youth.
- luet, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Now for my answer to the actual article.
WOW. Light is so cool :3 - IckyChris, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2These photons, traveling at the speed of light for 13 thousand million years, had their trip finally stopped by objects created by hairless apes whose sun and planet had not even existed when those photons left their source.
And strangely enough, to these photons the trip was instantaneous.
Yet still you often hear that science offers no wonders compared to the writings of ignorant Bronze-Age shepherds. - EuphopiaB, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Why would they want to lie? Unlike politicians and the media, scientists seek solely to understand things. They already huge amount of funding, so they have no reason to make things like this up and betray true science.
- luet, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Okay, I was kidding when I quoted star wars. You agree with me entirely but bury me down for a little joke at the end? That's pretty mean.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3My literally dropped when I saw that. Beautiful.
- bIuebonics, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2the reason i buried you is because you seem to believe it is up to scientists to prove that a creator doesn't exist. generally, it's up to the person making the claim that something does exist to prove it.
- RussellDovey, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1This is truly amazing. Using gravitational lensing to see light emitted from the first galaxies at the very edge of the Dark Ages... Astronomy just got even cooler.
- bIuebonics, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1it's too bad nobody knows his word. it certainly isn't the bible.
- RussellDovey, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2I wish you'd literally dropped; no-one uses the word "literally" correctly anymore...
- RussellDovey, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Xeno's Paradox.
- RussellDovey, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2It's more a question of age than location. Those galaxies that they've seen are only 500 million years after the Big Bang... This is an incredible find. These might be the first stars themselves.
- nwoantibody, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Nothing is lost, nothing is created.
Therefore there will be no begining and no end.
It's infinite and has always been there.
We've actually known this for over 100 years now... - idonthack, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1I mod you -1 Overrated.
And you're only at +1! Take that bitch! - BuckFush, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1They must have calculated wrong, Its 6000 years old.
-
Show 51 - 72 of 72 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is