Evidence for God from Science

Audie wrote:

Squible wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:Bah, I thought I was going to get some entertainment here.
Instead, you're both scared to debate each other.
Exiting the stage different sides. Meh.
I want a refund!

I don't think there's enough popcorn....

BBQ squid would be more appropriate.

LOL I'm glad that's not BBQ Squib...

Kurieuo wrote:

Audie wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:Bah, I thought I was going to get some entertainment here.
Instead, you're both scared to debate each other.
Exiting the stage different sides. Meh.
I want a refund!

Scared huh? Me? Ha. Ya wanna start somethin' bud? Huh???

This is what I want to start...

When?

Your shout..

Squible wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:

Audie wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:Bah, I thought I was going to get some entertainment here.
Instead, you're both scared to debate each other.
Exiting the stage different sides. Meh.
I want a refund!

Scared huh? Me? Ha. Ya wanna start somethin' bud? Huh???

This is what I want to start...

When?

Your shout..

Oh yeah. I still owe you on the curry.
That really burns.

Kurieuo wrote:

Squible wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:

Audie wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:Bah, I thought I was going to get some entertainment here.
Instead, you're both scared to debate each other.
Exiting the stage different sides. Meh.
I want a refund!

Scared huh? Me? Ha. Ya wanna start somethin' bud? Huh???

This is what I want to start...

When?

Your shout..

Oh yeah. I still owe you on the curry.
That really burns.

, I forgot all about it...

Time to setup loud hailers and tents out the front of your house..

DRDS wrote:Hi everyone, I recently saw this new article.... http://phys.org/news/2014-09-black-holes.html it claims that according to mathematics that black holes don't exist, and if this is found to be true then that could mean that the universe did NOT start as a singularity and that the Big Bang Theory and the BVG theorem could be in jeopardy, which of course could have implications for a major argument for God's existence. I was curious if any of you all have seen this and what your thoughts are on this theory and if you think it will hold up or be done away with soon. Anyways, thank you all for your time, GB.

He is correct, black holes do not exist, until they are proven to exist.

TheQuestor wrote:

DRDS wrote:Hi everyone, I recently saw this new article.... http://phys.org/news/2014-09-black-holes.html it claims that according to mathematics that black holes don't exist, and if this is found to be true then that could mean that the universe did NOT start as a singularity and that the Big Bang Theory and the BVG theorem could be in jeopardy, which of course could have implications for a major argument for God's existence. I was curious if any of you all have seen this and what your thoughts are on this theory and if you think it will hold up or be done away with soon. Anyways, thank you all for your time, GB.

He is correct, black holes do not exist, until they are proven to exist.

Now you seem to trust more some theorist/mathematician than experimentalists with their observations?
In the other thread you seemed otherwise. (My reply to you in that other thread still pending. Probably tomorrow I will reply.)

1over137 wrote:

TheQuestor wrote:

DRDS wrote:Hi everyone, I recently saw this new article.... http://phys.org/news/2014-09-black-holes.html it claims that according to mathematics that black holes don't exist, and if this is found to be true then that could mean that the universe did NOT start as a singularity and that the Big Bang Theory and the BVG theorem could be in jeopardy, which of course could have implications for a major argument for God's existence. I was curious if any of you all have seen this and what your thoughts are on this theory and if you think it will hold up or be done away with soon. Anyways, thank you all for your time, GB.

He is correct, black holes do not exist, until they are proven to exist.

Now you seem to trust more some theorist/mathematician than experimentalists with their observations?
In the other thread you seemed otherwise. (My reply to you in that other thread still pending. Probably tomorrow I will reply.)

There was a news story some years ago that Caltech discovered water, at the edge of the known universe. http://www.caltech.edu/news/caltech-led ... r-yet-1704 Now the photo is not real, as a photo from such a distance is not possible, yet how many parents will be sending junior, to Caltech, because they discovered a Hydrogen and Oxygen molecule, on the other side of the universe. This is actually so far away, that even Captain Kirk, couldn't get to it, in a movie. So if and when the human race, does travel to where a black hole is, then we will have a better idea.

To illustrate this more clearly, can it be determined, what is in my left pants pocket? You can use any type of math, or telescope that you choose, I am less than the circumference of the Earth away from you.

All will fail of course, and many may not even see the need to try, yet you accept what is a trillion trillion trillion miles away from a smidgen of light that is billions and billions of years old? and supposedly this thing does not even emit light.

They detected presence of water using spectograph. Studying the spectrum of a radiation from distant places of the universe, you can discover presence of elements and compounds.

Scientists can infer the presence of black holes and study them by detecting their effect on other matter.

And if you had a black hole in your pocket I could tell.

1over137 wrote:They detected presence of water using spectograph. Studying the spectrum of a radiation from distant places of the universe, you can discover presence of elements and compounds.

Scientists can infer the presence of black holes and study them by detecting their effect on other matter.

And if you had a black hole in your pocket I could tell.

Actually, I am aware that they claim to have used a spectrograph, to detect water. However, even a spectrograph uses light, and again, this supposed water was not in our galaxy, or in some other galaxy near our galaxy. The image was taken from a galaxy at the edge of the known universe, and thus the image was from near the beginning of time. An analogy that comes to mind, is that there is a sole car on a mountain oh say 10 miles in the distance at night, the headlights are on, and you can just barely see the light. Then you run your spectrograph, on the light, and can tell that there are 2 people in the car, and that they are eating a Whopper. The entire concept is silly, and it is not science, but as I said, some genius sent junior there to discover water, at the edge of time, that no one will ever be able to confirm, thus no one can ever say that Caltech is wrong. The main fault in this entire charade, water does not emit light, oh ice might reflect a little bit, but this amount would never be detectable over the millions or billions of galaxies containing trillions of stars in front of the ice.

But again, Caltech can't be proven wrong, so they could discover, hmmmm perhaps they will discover Hydrogen, not binded to Oxygen.

Sure scientist, can infer anything from anything, however current science is inferring that 96 percent of the universe is missing, they are calling the 96 percent dark matter. Well let me brighten, the day here, nothing in the universe is missing, everything, is exactly where it is supposed to be, and in the right amounts. It is just that the scientist looking, are clueless, in fact when the first human came down from a tree, 99.999 percent of all knowledge was unknown, today, 99.999 percent of all knowledge is still unknown, the universe is just that big, and our planet is just that small.

From the caltech.edu article:

The second group, led by Dariusz Lis, senior research associate in physics at Caltech and deputy director of the CSO, used the Plateau de Bure Interferometer in the French Alps to find water. In 2010, Lis's team was looking for traces of hydrogen fluoride in the spectrum of APM 08279+5255, but serendipitously detected a signal in the quasar's spectrum that indicated the presence of water. The signal was at a frequency corresponding to radiation that is emitted when water transitions from a higher energy state to a lower one. While Lis's team found just one signal at a single frequency, the wide bandwidth of Z-Spec enabled Bradford and his colleagues to discover water emission at many frequencies. These multiple water transitions allowed Bradford's team to determine the physical characteristics of the quasar's gas and the water's mass. - See more at: http://www.caltech.edu/news/caltech-led ... 1704#.dpuf

Water vapour emits radiation when it transits from a higher energy state to a lower one.

Please, read the articles carefully, and please do not assume you know better than scientists. You already showed on this thread and on the End of Physics thread that you do not understand physics.

1over137 wrote:From the caltech.edu article:

The second group, led by Dariusz Lis, senior research associate in physics at Caltech and deputy director of the CSO, used the Plateau de Bure Interferometer in the French Alps to find water. In 2010, Lis's team was looking for traces of hydrogen fluoride in the spectrum of APM 08279+5255, but serendipitously detected a signal in the quasar's spectrum that indicated the presence of water. The signal was at a frequency corresponding to radiation that is emitted when water transitions from a higher energy state to a lower one. While Lis's team found just one signal at a single frequency, the wide bandwidth of Z-Spec enabled Bradford and his colleagues to discover water emission at many frequencies. These multiple water transitions allowed Bradford's team to determine the physical characteristics of the quasar's gas and the water's mass. - See more at: http://www.caltech.edu/news/caltech-led ... 1704#.dpuf

Water vapour emits radiation when it transits from a higher energy state to a lower one.

Please, read the articles carefully, and please do not assume you know better than scientists. You already showed on this thread and on the End of Physics thread that you do not understand physics.

A typical galaxy composed of 100 billion stars emits not enough radiation to be detectable by the human eye, but needs a telescope to be seen. What percent of this amount of light does water emit? And why would this water be able to be seen, if there are millions of galaxies near the water? The fact is that Caltech, has no idea what they saw, at a point that is near the beginning of time, and is a trillion trillion trillion light years from here, (note my measurements might be off by a number of feet)

Did you read my disclaimer about the accuracy of the distance in my post, and that I said that my measurements might be off by a number of feet? Well, the disclaimer, was and is 100 percent accurate, as I did not disclose the number of feet.

This is how anyone, can say near anything, when referring to the universe.

Thus, whoever knows, has food on their shirt.

Look at the quasar spectra in article http://www.atnf.csiro.au/outreach/educa ... types.html from Australia Telescope National Facility.
From the redshifted Lyman alpha line astronomers can approximately establish distance of a quasar that is some billion light years.

In Figure 1 in the arxiv article http://arxiv.org/pdf/1106.4301v2.pdf by Caltech team you can see CO and H2O emission lines.

From such emission spectra scientists can do both: establish the distance to the quasar and study its composition.

1over137 wrote:Look at the quasar spectra in article http://www.atnf.csiro.au/outreach/educa ... types.html from Australia Telescope National Facility.
From the redshifted Lyman alpha line astronomers can approximately establish distance of a quasar that is some billion light years.

In Figure 1 in the arxiv article http://arxiv.org/pdf/1106.4301v2.pdf by Caltech team you can see CO and H2O emission lines.

From such emission spectra scientists can do both: establish the distance to the quasar and study its composition.

There is no reference set, of anything, from the beginning of time, thus they could be viewing anything. Are you aware that this thing is 260 trillion miles away from the Earth? seriously all they saw is what they wanted to see, to boost tuition.

I am very aware.

I am also aware of you being scientificaly uneducated. I try to teach you something, but I am not sure if you read the articles I am giving to you trying to understand them.

1over137 wrote:I am very aware.

I am also aware of you being scientificaly uneducated. I try to teach you something, but I am not sure if you read the articles I am giving to you trying to understand them.

Stephen Hawking, now says that black holes do not exist, after selling a zillion books to SCIENCE FICTION BUFFS.

http://the360experiment.com/2014/01/new ... -research/

By Barry Burch Jr.

As people age, they also reduce the amount in which they change. At some point in their life they adjusted to what worked for them. This is not always the best route because sometimes you can be wrong. Physicist Stephen Hawking is announcing that he may have been wrong after suggesting for nearly four decades that nothing (emphasis on nothing) can escape a black hole.

According to New Scientist, the cosmologist and author is actually saying that black holes do not exist. This can be seen as a little hard to believe as Hawking built his career on the notion of their existence.

Combining a theory on the black hole with quantum mechanics proved fruitful for Hawking, and the entire physics community. An ongoing debate has been underway ever since his 1974 discovery. But despite that, following a wager with a fellow physicist, Hawking is changing his tune. Maybe some things can escape what was once thought by Hawking to be the imminent grasp of the black hole.

Hawking initially argued that when a black hole dies, so does everything it has with it, as reported by New Scientist. Now; however, Hawking says that light and information could potentially escape. He says in a report that black holes have “apparent horizons” — surfaces that can trap light — but can also vary in shape,” as reported by Fox News. This leaves a possibility for the output of light.

The solution to the mysteries of black holes, according to Hawking, can be reached by giving up what is most mysterious – the event horizon.

Hawking, whose birthday is next month, informed the website that arguing in favor of inescapable black holes was his “biggest blunder.”

To make this simpler, to find a black hole, just look for the light.