₦airaland Forum

akagaba: Guy, i wud hav answered u, bt ur horrible grammatical expresion has just disqualified u. I only communicate with men of ingenuity who have diplomacy and eloquence, and not primary school certificate student at 40. Read ur 1st four lines and then correct urslf of dat grammatical blunder be4 u tok 2me again. Besides ive neva seen a confused, disjointed and meaningles write up in one post. Infact, get behind me.

Reyginus: Lol. What kind of something will be in nothing, when the idea of nothing here is to be non-existent?
Lol. In what way does a b.ang equal to a process?

Reyginus: First things first. Brian Greene is nobody to know better. As expected, his claim is different from the theory I know. To call the slam a process is an intellectual nonsense. Their is no correlation, whether literally or metaphorically. Hubble knew exactly what he meant when he proposed the theory. How does bang translate to process? Haba!
Another blunder. If he's saying the energy come from nothing as you proposed, I'm sorry to say, he is a dimwit.
Seems you've forgotten so fast that, 'energy can neither be created nor destroyed'.

Reyginus: Lol. Wiegraf this tells nothing of the collocation 'big bang'.

brian greene: "A common misconception is
that the Big Bang provides a theory of
cosmic origins. It doesn't. The Big Bang
is a theory ... that delineates cosmic
evolution from a split second after
whatever happened to bring the
universe into existence, but it says
nothing at all about time zero itself.
And since, according to the Big Bang
theory, the bang is what is supposed to
have happened at the beginning, the
Big Bang leaves out the bang. It tells
us nothing about what banged, why it
banged, how it banged, or, frankly,
whether it really banged at all.

wiegraf: Ze Big B.ang

In a little more detail, the modern theory of cosmic origins goes like this. Some 15 billion or so years ago, the universe erupted from an enormously energetic, singular event, which spewed forth all of space and all of matter. (You don't have to search far to locate where the big bang occurred, for it took place where you are now as well as everywhere else; in the beginning, all locations we now see as separate were the same location.) The temperature of the universe a mere 10-43 seconds after the bang, the so-called Planck time, is calculated to have been about 1032 Kelvin, some 10 trillion trillion times hotter than the deep interior of the sun. As time passed, the universe expanded and cooled, and as it did, the initial homogeneous, roiling hot, primordial cosmic plasma began to form eddies and clumps. At about a hundred-thousandth of a second after the bang, things had cooled sufficiently (to about 10 trillion Kelvin—about a million times hotter than the sun's interior) for quarks to clump together in groups of three, forming protons and neutrons. About a hundredth of a second later, conditions were right for the nuclei of some of the lightest elements in the periodic table to start congealing out of the cooling plasma of particles. For the next three minutes, as the simmering universe cooled to about a billion degrees, the predominant nuclei that emerged were those of hydrogen and helium, along with trace amounts of deuterium ("heavy" hydrogen) and lithium. This is known as the period of primordial nucleosynthesis.

Not a whole lot happened for the next few hundred thousand years, other than further expansion and cooling. But then, when the temperature had dropped to a few thousand degrees, wildly streaming electrons slowed down to the point where atomic nuclei, mostly hydrogen and helium, could capture them, forming the first electrically neutral atoms. This was a pivotal moment: from this point forward the universe, by and large, became transparent. Prior to the era of electron capture, the universe was filled with a dense plasma of electrically charged particles—some with positive charges like nuclei and others with negative charges, like electrons. Photons, which interact only with electrically charged objects, were bumped and jostled incessantly by the thick bath of charged particles, traversing hardly any distance before being deflected or absorbed. The charged-particle barrier to the free motion of photons would have made the universe appear almost completely opaque, much like what you may have experienced in a dense morning fog or a blinding, gusty snowstorm. But when negatively charged electrons were brought into orbit around positively charged nuclei, yielding electrically neutral atoms, the charged obstructions disappeared and the dense fog lifted. From that time onward, photons from the big bang have traveled unhindered and the full expanse of the universe gradually came into view.

About a billion years later, with the universe having substantially calmed down from its frenetic beginnings, galaxies, stars, and ultimately planets began to emerge as gravitationally bound clumps of the primordial elements. Today, some 15 billion or so years after the bang, we can marvel at both the magnificence of the cosmos and at our collective ability to have pieced together a reasonable and experimentally testable theory of cosmic origin

Reyginus: All this is unnecessary. Just tell me the literal meaning of the collocation 'big bang'? Is that too much to ask.
And why would anybody, a scientist for that, use an erroneous word to define anything? Is it that he's scarce of words or what?

Reyginus: Clearly trolling? I don't troll.
If a misnomer as you claimed, it will make all scientists who have been using it all this while unintelligent.
I don't think so. It's deliberate.
What process are we talking about here?
Accept the fact.

Reyginus: lol. Wiegraf, the way you talk.
Okay. Our problem now is the source. I wonder whether science is confused or like philosophy, whose adherents would never agree to a particular definition.
Looking how far we've come, it seems the big b.ang theory has being treated like a philosophical knowledge, which is not supposed to be so.
It has now being twisted even beyond what the propounders would have it to mean.
I think is time we look at it from the linguistic angle.
Please be honest.
What do you understand by the collocation, 'big bang'?

toba: No. the closest the atheist came to winning was a second place finish in 2009. Davidylan won and mazaje came second in 2009. Mazaje is far better than Logicboy

Reyginus: Here we go again.
1. Traditional when used in the context of explosion implies nuclear explosion. Get it now. In plain language, what it is saying is, the explosion was not as a result of nuclear fission nor fussion.

Reyginus: 2. Lol. You even failed to read down the wikipedia you quoted initially.

wiki: The Big Bang theory is the prevailing cosmological model that describes the early development of the Universe. According to the Big Bang theory, the Universe was once in an extremely hot and dense state which expanded rapidly. This rapid expansion caused the Universe to cool and resulted in its present continuously expanding state.

wiki: The Big Bang is not an explosion of matter moving outward to fill an empty universe. Instead, space itself expands with time everywhere and increases the physical distance between two comoving points.

wiki: Hubble's law has two possible explanations. Either we are at the center of an explosion of galaxies—which is untenable given the Copernican principle—or the Universe is uniformly expanding everywhere. This universal expansion was predicted from general relativity by Alexander Friedmann in 1922[35] and Georges Lemaître in 1927,[36] well before Hubble made his 1929 analysis and observations, and it remains the cornerstone of the Big Bang theory as developed by Friedmann, Lemaître, Robertson, and Walker.

wiki: Radiation from the Big Bang was demonstrably warmer at earlier times throughout the Universe. Uniform cooling of the cosmic microwave background over billions of years is explainable only if the Universe is experiencing a metric expansion, and excludes the possibility that we are near the unique center of an explosion.

wiki: The metric expansion of space is the increase of the distance between two distant parts of the universe with time. It is an intrinsic expansion whereby the scale of space itself is changed. That is, a metric expansion is defined by an increase in distance between parts of the universe even without those parts "moving" anywhere. This is not the same as any usual concept of motion, or any kind of expansion of objects "outward" into other "preexisting" space, or any kind of explosion of matter which is commonly experienced on earth.

Reyginus: 3. Lol. By the above, you mean what exactly?

Reyginus: I don't quite get the point you are trying to make here. The issue was whether the singularity exploded before expanding, or expanded without any explosion.
He didnt mean that no traditional explosion happened, but that the explosion was not nuclear. If their is no traditional explosion, then no explosion and that will contradict all the claims made.
On one hand you admit the claim is wrong, on the other hand you still use it to explain your stand. I don't know what you are up to.
Do you need some other link to confirm an explosion happened, or you agree there was one?

Reyginus: This occurance was not a conventional explosion but rather an event filling all of space with all of the particles of the embryonic universe rushing away from each other. The Big Bang actually consisted of an explosion of space within itself unlike an explosion of a bomb were fragments are thrown outward. The galaxies were not all clumped together, but rather the Big Bang lay the foundations for the universe.

Lovethywilbedon: Now, if you think you can get away with Hitler who we all know was Anti-Christian (atheist), how about "THE MOST WICKED HUMAN BEING THAT LIVED ON EARTH". His name is Joseph Stalin while the real name was Ioseb Besarionis dze. He was raised devot in the Greek Orthodox Church but he later became a religion suppressing ATHEIST. He became the Secretary General (the highest rank) of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union's Central Committee from 1922 until his death in 1953. Just as Hitlers case was called Holocaust, his own was called HOLODOMOR ("Extermination by hunger" using a man-made famine) this he carried out on Ukrainians killing approximatly 13million people. He carried out other massive killing on Russians, Kazakhs, uzbekhs, Belarus, Moldovians and other nationalities in the USSR. The total estimate of people murdered under Stalins reign, ranges from 20million to 60million. This is what happens when an ANTHEIST gets into power an consider other as decendants of Apes. Anyway you can help your fellow atheist to answer my question. The killing of a fellow human being because you see them as "BEEF" (Ordinary flesh and blood) without a Soul, is it EVIL or not. PLEASE answer the question.

truthislight: where did you see the word omniscience in the bible and where is such definition in the bible.

Dont define God and go ahead to fixe him into your context.

Next is predestination of all things, i dont think so.

Do you think you are in God's image and rational, but yet he God is irrational?

truthislight: "And we know that we originate with God, but the whole world is in the power of the wicked one" (1 John 5:19).

What did you think happen, in the garden of eden when God left adam and eve?

Did God went after them outside the Garden and started helping them?

Then why did he chased them out in the first place?

honeychild: One thing a lot of people do not understand is that the issues in Eden went beyond simple obedience or disobedience on the part of Adam.
When Satan led Adam and Eve into sinning against God, he was really leading a rebellion. In effect Satan was saying: God is a bad ruler. He tells lies and withholds information from his subjects. Humans do not need God. They can decide for themselves what is good and what is bad. And they will be better off under my (Satan's) guidance.

By believing Satan and going along with him, Eve and her Husband effectively told God:
We can take care of ourselves. We do not need you....'

Remember we talked about free will earlier. They made their choice using the free will God had given them...

Ever since then, the world has been run largely independent of God by humans who feel that they know it all- sometimes under the guidance and tutelage of Satan.

Luke 4:5, 6
The Devil led him (Jesus) up to a high place and showed him in an instant all the kingdoms of the world. And he said to him,'I will give you all their AUTHORITY and splendor , IT HAS BEEN GIVEN TO ME AND I CAN GIVE IT TO ANYONE I WANT TO.

Adam and Eve handed over control over their world to Satan when they decided to believe him rather than the Father who created them.

bamto: There's a legal maxim that means 'he who asserts must prove' Theists take it for granted that there is God. Atheists assert there is no God, but they fail to prove it.

honeychild: In a world ruled by the Just, Powerful Creator (I.e the world envisaged by God when he put the man and his wife there) there would be no natural disasters. God would intervene to prevent any accidents from happening.

In a world overrun by wilful and arrogant creatures who reject his Guidance why would He intervene to stop natural disasters? We Humans have made our beds. We have to lie on it.

Reyginus: here we go
http://www.umich.edu/~gs265/bigbang.htm
We certainly know that our universe exists, however, this knowledge alone has not satisfied mankind's quest for further understanding. Our curiosity has led us to question our place in this universe and furthermore, the place of the universe itself. Throughout time we have asked ourselves these questions: How did our universe begin? How old is our universe? How did matter come to exist? Obviously, these are not simple questions and throughout our brief history on this planet much time and effort has been spent looking for some clue. Yet, after all this energy has been expended, much of what we know is still only speculation.

We have, however, come a long way from the mystical beginnings of the study of cosmology and the origins of the universe. Through the understandings of modern science we have been able to provide firm theories for some of the answers we once called hypotheses. True to the nature of science, a majority of these answers have only led to more intriguing and complex questions. It seems to be inherent in our search for knowledge that questions will always continue to exist.

Although in this short chapter it will be impossible to tackle all of the questions concerning the creation of everything we know as reality, an attempt will be made to address certain fundamental questions of our being. It will be important to keep in mind that all of this information is constantly being questioned and reevaluated in order to understand the universe more clearly. For our purposes, through an examination of what is known about the Big Bang itself, the age of the universe, and the synthesis of the first atoms, we believe that we can begin to answer several of these key questions.

THE BIG BANG
One of the most persistently asked questions has been: How was the universe created? Many once believed that the universe had no beginning or end and was truly infinite. Through the inception of the Big Bang theory, however,no longer could the universe be considered infinite. The universe was forced to take on the properties of a finite phenomenon, possessing a history and a beginning.

About 15 billion years ago a tremendous explosion started the expansion of the universe. This explosion is known as the Big Bang. At the point of this event all of the matter and energy of space was contained at one point. What exisisted prior to this event is completely unknown and is a matter of pure speculation. This occurance was not a conventional explosion but rather an event filling all of space with all of the particles of the embryonic universe rushing away from each other. The Big Bang actually consisted of an explosion of space within itself unlike an explosion of a bomb were fragments are thrown outward. The galaxies were not all clumped together, but rather the Big Bang lay the foundations for the universe.

The origin of the Big Bang theory can be credited to Edwin Hubble. Hubble made the observation that the universe is continuously expanding. He discovered that a galaxys velocity is proportional to its distance. Galaxies that are twice as far from us move twice as fast. Another consequence is that the universe is expanding in every direction. This observation means that it has taken every galaxy the same amount of time to move from a common starting position to its current position. Just as the Big Bang provided for the foundation of the universe, Hubbles observations provided for the foundation of the Big Bang theory.

Since the Big Bang, the universe has been continuously expanding and, thus, there has been more and more distance between clusters of galaxies. This phenomenon of galaxies moving farther away from each other is known as the red shift. As light from distant galaxies approach earth there is an increase of space between earth and the galaxy, which leads to wavelengths being stretched.

In addition to the understanding of the velocity of galaxies emanating from a single point, there is further evidence for the Big Bang. In 1964, two astronomers, Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson, in an attempt to detect microwaves from outer space, inadvertently discovered a noise of extraterrestrial origin. The noise did not seem to emanate from one location but instead, it came from all directions at once. It became obvious that what they heard was radiation from the farthest reaches of the universe which had been left over from the Big Bang. This discovery of the radioactive aftermath of the initial explosion lent much credence to the Big Bang theory.

Even more recently, NASAs COBE satellite was able to detect cosmic microwaves eminating from the outer reaches of the universe. These microwaves were remarkably uniform which illustrated the homogenity of the early stages of the universe. However, the satillite also discovered that as the universe began to cool and was still expanding, small fluctuations began to exist due to temperature differences. These flucuatuations verified prior calculations of the possible cooling and development of the universe just fractions of a second after its creation. These fluctuations in the universe provided a more detailed description of the first moments after the Big Bang. They also helped to tell the story of the formation of galaxies which will be discussed in the next chapter.

The Big Bang theory provides a viable solution to one of the most pressing questions of all time. It is important to understand, however, that the theory itself is constantly being revised. As more observations are made and more research conducted, the Big Bang theory becomes more complete and our knowledge of the origins of the universe more substantial.

[font=Lucida Sans Unicode][/font][color=#990000][/color]

bamto: God is 'said' could also mean 'God is believed to be.' It doesn't necessarily mean someone said so. And as for evidence, you see it everywhere in creation and in his creatures. Just add a little thinking to seeing! Peace.

Mr_Anony: So your strategy is to dictate to her what she wants to say and then ask her to prove to you that you did not read her mind. How very rational.



Lol, of course in your usual style you dictate to us what we must believe and are now burdened with the task of proving you wrong. Once again I admire your irrationality.

Mr_Anony: and where is she going with it? or have you also magically started reading minds too?

Mr_Anony: Interesting......and who holds this belief exactly?

seriallink: Hmmm.... You voted Anony? Well, that's good! But the message sounds more like sarcasm

And I agree with you on voting for who has impacted the most, not who's your favorite, which was the reason why I voted Goshen!

When it comes to debating atheists and unbelievers, I'll say Anony is my favorite. Goshen on the other hand is a great teacher of the word of God! I have learned a lot from him this year, infact that dude has exposed so many false and unscriptural teachings in Christianity and that has helped so much in strengthening my faith.

If Christians should vote based on who has impacted the most in Christianity, I'll say Goshen has it! However, some folks are not happy with the way Goshen and others exposed their false teachings and because they don't want to vote for a heathen (Logicboy), they go for Anony! My brah Buzugee voted for LB though.

Well, I'm down with Goshen. Goshen all the way brah!!!

Vote for GOSHEN360 people!

Peace wiegraf!

Mr_Anony: The question was "where do you really think they are?" Please how exactly is that question mad and what exactly does asking if they were believers have to do with the simple question: Where do you think they are?

Boomark: there will be no riot. The police are ever ready to handle the belligerent nature of some atheists.

We believe that we will unite one day. Cos one with God is majority.

Logicboy is not a humble humanbeing.
He is belligerent
he is bellicosious
he is aggressive
he is violent
he is unconscious
he is insultive
he is insensitive
he is a heathen
he dosent listen
he doesn't help the needy
he wants to marry a Christian

atimes e dey be me like say make i put my hand in side nairaland and give him a dirty slap.

Goshen stands for humility. He teaches and listen. Get ready for what is call "GoshMB." A free megabyte package for all his voters to visit NL for 1yr.

If i continue listing his qualities and all he will do, seun will charge me for advert. Not that we don't have money for Ads, but we want to keep low profile for now.

seriallink: Seems their plan is working!

Boomark: stop listening to weygrat, if he tries anything funny like rigging, he will see himself behind bars,

flourishG: we don't need controversy on this. Who told you Goshen don't deserve it? Go thru this board n see for yourself. Goshen n Anony deserves it. They both have d spirit of brotherhood. Don't blow things up. If Anony had got some vote higher than Goshen I will still encourage Christians to back Anony. Its d spirit of brotherhood.