So wolfbin are doing this or not?
Thread Closed 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
04-11-2014, 12:42 PM
So wolfbin are doing this or not?
I am accepting your challenge so do you want to go or not?

[Image: Guilmon-41189.gif] https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOW_Ioi2wtuPa88FvBmnBgQ my youtube
Find all posts by this user
[+] 5 users Like Metazoa Zeke's post
04-11-2014, 03:08 PM
RE: So wolfbin are doing this or not?
Bumping in case he missed it.
Find all posts by this user
04-11-2014, 05:39 PM
RE: So wolfbin are doing this or not?
Yup... youll have my first post tonight... provided I have any of my 100 for the day left after this post Smile

Big bang/string and "God created", which theories are more tested, and which fared better in testing.

Both Theories allow us to make predictions that are testable. Both have had many of these predictions tested

WHICH is the superior theory is the point of the debate.

Also debated will be the fact Darwin himself is CORRECTED by Genesis 1 and the "God created" theory.

I accept so no one else need post on this thread.

Pablo, I thank you for your civility, it would have been a pleasure Smile


WE both agree to answer direct questions from the opponent, with direct sensible, honest, scholarly answers.

We can allow 5 direct questions per post, and unanswered questions can be tacked to the 5 in any post.

Moderators can enforce these simple rules making sure we both answer questions directly.

Thank you for the debate and good luck.

Wolfbitn
Find all posts by this user
04-11-2014, 06:46 PM
RE: So wolfbin are doing this or not?
(04-11-2014 05:39 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  Yup... youll have my first post tonight... provided I have any of my 100 for the day left after this post Smile

Big bang/string and "God created", which theories are more tested, and which fared better in testing.

Both Theories allow us to make predictions that are testable. Both have had many of these predictions tested

WHICH is the superior theory is the point of the debate.

Also debated will be the fact Darwin himself is CORRECTED by Genesis 1 and the "God created" theory.

I accept so no one else need post on this thread.

Pablo, I thank you for your civility, it would have been a pleasure Smile


WE both agree to answer direct questions from the opponent, with direct sensible, honest, scholarly answers.

We can allow 5 direct questions per post, and unanswered questions can be tacked to the 5 in any post.

Moderators can enforce these simple rules making sure we both answer questions directly.

Thank you for the debate and good luck.

Wolfbitn

What predictions does the god created thing make exactly in fact when did the big bang happening equal no god?

[Image: Guilmon-41189.gif] https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOW_Ioi2wtuPa88FvBmnBgQ my youtube
Find all posts by this user
04-11-2014, 09:49 PM (This post was last modified: 05-11-2014 02:10 AM by Wolfbitn.)
RE: So wolfbin are doing this or not?
Hello everyone,
This debate is to compare my theory regarding Genesis 1, "God created", with the big bang/string theory, and also how Genesis 1 actually CORRECTS Darwin.

This is going to be a very long post, as there is SO much information to present. I am nutshelling it as much as possible.

There are a few rules:

We answer one another's direct questions with direct honest answers.

we are allowing 5 questions per post and unanswered questions can be tacked onto the 5 in any post.

Very good luck to you in this debate

I am going to show you exactly WHY I believe Genesis chapter 1 is a LITERAL PART of the history of life on earth.

I believe in what is known as "Old Earth Creation", or OEC, in theological circles. The OEC stance is the most popular stance in Christianity today, as nearly everyone I know is OEC as opposed to YEC or young earth creationists.

In the OEC belief it is widely held that the days of creation equal AGES, which is backed by the fact that the word translated "day", when we see in the translation "the first day" "the 2nd day" etc., is also just as properly translated as AGE. These ages can represent very long time periods. The most extensive time period most likely between the Genesis 1:1, and Genesis 1:2. We propose a wide gap of time between the 2 verses hence the name of this thought is "Gap Theory". So between verse 1, When God creates the heavens and earth, and verse 2, we are talking an extremely long and yet undetermined about of time.


My THEORY regarding Genesis 1 is this:

To put this in the simplest form, Genesis 1:1 initially mentions the creation of everything. From verse 2 and to the end of the chapter, Genesis 1 gves us a description of an "Extinction Event" unfolding before us, and then it also goes on to describe the subsequent healing of the earth and the rebounding of life on earth.

Cycles of life and extinction are in fact verified in scripture, just as they are verified in stone. We see it here in Genesis 1, Jeremiah 4, Ecclesiastes, Revelation, and certainly implications are made elsewhere.

Ecclesiastes 1
9 What has been will be again,
what has been done will be done again;
there is nothing new under the sun.
10 Is there anything of which one can say,
“Look! This is something new”?
It was here already, long ago;
it was here before our time.
11 No one remembers the former generations,
and even those yet to come
will not be remembered
by those who follow them.


Revelation ends with the destruction of this current civilization/age and then the subsequent healing of the earth once more for another cycle of life, just as it began in Genesis 1:

Quote:Rev. 21:1 Then I saw “a new heaven and a new earth,”[a] for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea.


So the bible declares we do indeed have cycles of life and death upon the earth. Today, people in the OEC movement believe this very thing.

This OEC belief can be traced back over 2000 years, and we believe it is the original intent in the earliest manuscripts. I am in very good company with SO many PHD's in various fields related to the subject, and it seems the more learned they are in the subject, both Theologically and scientifically, the more apt they are to believe Old Earth Creation.

Genesis is one of the most poetic books in all of scripture and is valued as extremely sacred by more than one religion. I suggest that this is for good reason. It actually shows creation, then extinction, and then finally the restoration of life on earth... it shows both EVOLUTION and special creation.

A theory makes predictions that are TESTABLE... Is MY theory testable? Yes it is and it HAS been REPEATEDLY tested every time we find a fossil. And it PASSES those tests with flying colors whereas Darwin fails.

If this theory regarding the literal nature of Genesis 1 is to be tested, then MUCH of the testing of this theory has already been done for the last 150 years or more... through geology, archeology, as well as the fossil record. All we need do to test this theory is to compare it to all these records that have literally been written in stone and CANNOT be changed. We will test the theory against these findings right here in this thread.


To summarize, I believe Genesis 1 gives us an HISTORICAL ACCOUNT of an extinction event upon the earth, similar to the one we see with the asteroid impact at the Yucatan peninsula. I believe it further details the subsequent healing of the earth, and the re-establishment of life on earth.


To outline this belief and show it unfolds in Genesis 1, you can refer to this.


1) A proper translation of the Hebrew in Genesis 1, 1 and 2, says this:

"In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. And the earth BECAME decimated and laid waste."

...The verbiage of Genesis 1 allows us to reference verse 2 to a time after the creation, in which the earth was laid waste and emptied. This checks with the fossil and geological records.

2) In extinction events that have spewed ash, debris, earth, and water into the atmosphere, such as the impact in the Yucatan, the Atmosphere becomes so filled with debris that the suns rays no longer reach the plants depending on photosynthesis. Then the plant eaters die... then the meat eaters. At this point, the first thing necessary to occur for life again to flourish is for the atmosphere to clear.

Genesis 1, on the first day or age, states that the special event occurring in the first age was the clearing of the atmosphere, to allow the rays of the sun to filter through. This checks with the fossil and geological records. More on this in a few moments...

3) We see in Genesis 1 that waters and the atmosphere were in a chaotic state and that eventual settling allowed some water to settle back down to the earth, while some water was left trapped within the atmosphere. We can see from the various geological records, that we have certainly seen times when the water levels of the earth have varied drastically, and polar caps do not always explain this. This checks with the fossil and geological records.

4) Genesis 1 refers to EVOLUTION and was the ONLY ancient document to declare Evolution of the animals of the earth. It states evolution AS A FACT 3500 years before Darwin. This CERTAINLY checks with the fossil and geological records.

5) Genesis 1 goes on to tell us that man is unique among the rest of the animal kingdom. Genesis 1 tells us that God gifted man with the ability to dominate and take rule and dominion over the earth. It is easy to see our intelligence and body style allows for a lot of intellectual and technological advancement, but WHAT is behind this sudden JUMP of our species over all others? WHY are we so far above the rest of the animal kingdom that we would appear to be like gods?

We find one clue on a genetic level and we are unique among ALL other primates partially because of our 2nd chromosome, which, genetic scientists tell us deals specifically with intelligence.

Every primate has 48 chromosomes in 24 base pairs... EXCEPT for man, who only has 46 chromosomes in 23 base pairs.

The mystery of our 2nd chromosome is that it actually has the appearance of having been fused with another chromosome. So somehow we apparently DEvolved into a simpler form, and yet we gained superiority, Evolving in intelligence.

This adds EVEN MORE to the credibility of taking Genesis 1 literally, recognizing it to be describing our last major extinction event, and the subsequent restoration of life on earth.



Now... Can I show that the bible actually says the earth BECAME destroyed and laid waste? Yes and I can show also this view goes back over 2000 years.


http://ucg-canada.org/booklets/BT/versesofgenesis.asp


Quote: The explanation that there existed an indefinite period between the initial beautiful creation described in Genesis 1:1 and the earth becoming waste and void in verse 2 has been called, sometimes disparagingly, "the gap theory." The idea was attributed to Thomas Chalmers in the 19th century and to Cyrus Scofield in the 20th.

Yet this interpretation that the earth "became" waste and void has been discussed for close to 2,000 years, as pointed out by the late Arthur Custance in his book Without Form and Void: A Study of the Meaning of Genesis 1:2.

The earliest known recorded controversy on this point can be attributed to Jewish sages at the beginning of the second century. The Hebrew scholars who wrote the Targum of Onkelos, the earliest of the Aramaic paraphrases of the Old Testament, rendered Genesis 1:2 with an Aramaic expression Dr. Custance translates as "and the earth was laid waste" (1988, p. 15). The original language evidently led them to understand that something had occurred which had "laid waste" the earth, and they interpreted this as a destruction.

The early Catholic theologian Origen (186-254), in his commentary De Principiis, explains regarding Genesis 1:2 that the original earth had been "cast downwards" (Ante-Nicene Fathers, 1917, p. 342).

In the Middle Ages the Flemish scholar Hugo St. Victor (1097-1141) wrote about Genesis 1:2, "Perhaps enough has already been debated about these matters thus far, if we add only this, 'how long did the world remain in this disorder before the regular re-ordering...of it was taken in hand?' (De Sacramentis Christianae Fidei, Book 1, part 1, chapter 6). Other medieval scholars, such as Dionysius Peavius and Pererius, also considered that there was an interval of time between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2.

According to The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge, the Dutch scholar Simon Episcopius (1583-1643) taught that the earth had originally been created before the six days of creation described in Genesis (1952, Vol. 3, p. 302). This was roughly 200 years before geology embraced an ancient origin for the earth.

These numerous examples show us that the idea of an interval between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 has a long history. Any claim that it is of only recent origin—that it was invented simply as a desperate attempt to reconcile the Genesis account with geology—is groundless.


And
http://www.scripture4all.org/ ,,, then click into "Hebrew interlinear" and then click into "Genesis 1".

In the Above link you will find it actually IS interpreted as "BECAME" destroyed in one ancient translation of the Targum.


Then by going here:

http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible...c=1&t=KJV&ss=1

You can see the corresponding number for the words "Was" "without form" and "void".


Here you see the word translated "was" is also properly understood to mean:


Quote:
to be, become, come to pass, exist, happen, fall out



We see "without form" is also properly understood as


Quote:
wasteland, wilderness (of solitary places)



and void we see is also properly understood as


Quote:
emptiness, void, waste


To further show that "the earth BECAME destroyed" is the intended translation:

"Qal"

"Qal", Was = to happen, fall out, occur, take place, come about, come to pass
to come about, come to pass
to come into being, become
to arise, appear, come
to become
to become
to become like

Without form = wasteland, wilderness (of solitary places)
place of chaos

Void = emptiness, void, waste


So then we see without question that Genesis 1, 1 and 2 can be meant to say in the Hebrew, "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. The earth BECAME decimated and a wasteland."


So... it has to be said that so far this is exactly what we are told in the fossil and geological records.




Ok... now Im going to lay another layer of information on top of the first. First I want to lay out a little more order to my theory/view, and then talk about what strata and the fossil record teaches us.

Past extinction event healing patterns

1) The earth is laid waste

2) This earth has certainly seen extinction events which filled the atmosphere with water, debris, earth, and ash, causing photosynthesis to cease, starving the plant eaters and then starving the meat eaters.

3) Inevitably the atmosphere ALWAYS began to clear. It MUST clear in order to allow photosynthesis to begin again on a mass worldwide scale.

4) Inevitably life began to flourish in the seas.

5) Inevitably grasses and herbs began to flourish.

6) Inevitably the atmosphere clears to the point that the heavenS, as in the stars the sun and the moon, can be seen and distinguished clearly.

Here I will begin to lay out the evidences for my theory.

Simply as a reminder, My theory is that Genesis 1, begins in verse 2 to relay to us a brief history of an extinction event and the subsequent clearing of the atmosphere and healing of the earth.
Testing:

Test 1: If this holds any water, then the first thing we should be able to verify VERY quickly whether or not this earth has ever undergone an extinction event.

Result: I believe that there is nearly 100 percent agreement within the scientific community, that this earth has endured extinction events. Geology AND paleontology PROVE that this earth has seen extinction events... My theory regarding Genesis 1 holds up under this point. This test against the facts in stone verify Genesis 1.


Test 2: This described event indicates that the atmosphere was cluttered and darkened to the point no light could filter through. A large abundance of Water also was mixed in with the description of contents within the atmosphere. This is tested again according to the same evidence indicating mass extinction events in the past.

Result: It is quite evident for instance because of the crater in Yucatan, that this earth has seen MULTIPLE extinction events and that some of these events would have erupted large amounts of water into the atmosphere, along with earth and ash and etc, and that this indeed went on to possibly be the cause for the extinction of the dinosaur. There certainly is no disagreement within the scientific community that this earth has seen disaster that darkened the skies, killed off all plant life, starving out the plant eaters, and then starving out the predators. Genesis 1 in no way conflicts with and is verified.


Test 3: Now regarding the atmosphere placed between the waters we see in the 2nd day, we can see that waters settled below and around the atmosphere. This is nothing new at all. We see example of this many times. A recent giant planet was recently found with strange plasma like water hanging into the lower levels of the atmosphere, while another dwarf planet was recently found with an enveloping water vapor layer.

Result: Again we verify that this indeed is not an extremely unusual occurrence, it is not at all outlandish, and we do observe in nature, this event taking place around us elsewhere.


Test 5: We should be able to expect basic plant life, both marine and on land, to begin to flourish, now that the earth begins to warm and a bit of life begins to allow photosynthesis to give us back our paradise.

Result: This is the exact order given to us in the passages of scripture, and it is the correct order shown in the fossil record. Genesis 1 is calling correctly the order we see in stone.


Now on the 4th day or age, many people look at this and think it means the sun and moon were created on the 4th day. We disagree... We recognize that since we saw the PLURAL "heavenS" created before this first age, and that we saw LIGHT during the 2nd age, this is simply a poor translation of the literal hebrew poetry.. He is causing them to appear as opposed to actually creating them at this point. They were created with the "heavens". Accepting then that God simply "caused the sun and moon to appear" which is literally what the Hebrew states, we recognize this as simply the clearing of the atmosphere to the point that the heavens can be distinguished.


Test 6: Most amazingly during the 5th age we see EVOLUTION. We see that after this extinction event, and after the light could once again begin to filter through, life begins to spring forth from the oceans. Genesis 1 states that life began evolving in the seas first and that even the birds descended from the sea:

Quote:20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.

21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

22 And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth.

23 And the evening and the morning were the fifth day.



...IF this is true, then we should be able to note evolution in nature and in the fossil record. (nudge nudge wink)


SO... how many times has this alone been tested? How many times have fossil finds shown us that life began in the water and evolved from there? How many? Sure there are a lot of connections that CANNOT be made or have not been made, but consensus is that life began in the seas and evolved... I can produce the consensus of NEARLY EVERY major scientist in this area. This is one of the best tested theories in science.

I can literally produce hundreds of fossil finds that verify it.


The only problem IS, they arrived to this consensus 3500 years after Genesis 1 stated it as a very bold fact.


Sudden explosions of life coming out of nowhere


http://www.economist.com/news/scienc...e...aeontol...



Quote:AMONG the mysteries of evolution, one of the most profound is what exactly happened at the beginning of the Cambrian period. Before that period, which started 541m years ago and ran on for 56m years, life was a modest thing. Bacteria had been around for about 3 billion years, but for most of this time they had had the Earth to themselves. Seaweeds,
jellyfish-like creatures, sponges and the odd worm do start to put in an appearance a few million years before the Cambrian begins. But red in tooth and claw the Precambrian was not—for neither teeth nor claws existed.

Then, in the 20m-year blink of a geological eye, animals arrived in force. Most of the main groups of the animal kingdom—arthropods, brachiopods, coelenterates, echinoderms, molluscs and even chordates, the branch from which vertebrates went on to develop—are found in the fossil beds of the Cambrian. The sudden evolution of this megafauna is known as the Cambrian explosion. But two centuries after it was noticed, in the mountains of Wales after which the Cambrian period is named, nobody knows what detonated it.



Again... NOBODY KNOWS what detonated this Cambrian explosion. Now we must reason that when theory departs from unchanging stone records, we need to begin to reconsider certain dogmas. The fossil record is our WITNESS... to what really occurred. WHERE did this sudden explosion of life come from?

The records in stone teach us that Darwin was WRONG about gradualism that he held so stubbornly to. Explosions HAVE come seemingly from nowhere... miraculously.


Now lets look at Genesis 1 again:


Quote:
20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.

21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

22 And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth.

23 And the evening and the morning were the fifth day.


NOTE the word ABUNDANTLY. Not only is Genesis 1 the ONLY ANCIENT DOCUMENT IN HISTORY to declare an evolutionary process, until Darwin, and not only did it teach as we know today, that life began in the seas, It DECLARES sudden explosions of life, JUST as we see in the Cambrian. DARWIN did NOT do this and this was where he and Huxley failed. They postulated a very long and very slow process of life evolving over hundreds of millions of years. This SIMPLY IS NOT what we find written in the fossil record. Sure life evolved, and sure it took time, but for some unexplained by science reason, life EXPLODED before it "evolved". Genesis 1 nails this on the head. 3500 years before Darwin and Huxley... and the fossil records prove Genesis 1 to be correct about the sudden explosion of life... Darwin and huxley, falsified in this aspect of the theory, Genesis 1, Verified.


http://www.newscientist.com/article/...e...ambrian...



Quote:LIFE on Earth experienced a singular revolution just over 500 million years ago. In a geological blink of an eye, most groups of the animal kingdom appeared in the Earth's oceans and then diversified. The acquisition of skeletons, the advent of predation and the rise of complex ecosystems all occurred in what's known as the Cambrian explosion of marine animals.

Life took such a giant leap forward in abundance and complexity during the Cambrian that the rock record itself was indelibly changed. Long before geologists knew the precise age of the Earth, they could divide its history into two parts: the first 4 billion years, known simply as the Precambrian, followed by the Phanerozoic, meaning "visible life", which includes the Cambrian right up to today.

Evolutionary change isn't supposed to happen so abruptly, at least not according to Charles Darwin.





http://www.csun.edu/~dgray/Evol322/Chapter18.pdf



Quote:Darwin was a gradualist
• Expected evolutionary change to be slow
and continuous
– Predicts many many intermediate forms
• Many of course have been found in major groups
– But many fossil morphological species
• Appear suddenly in fossil record
• Fewer transitional forms than you might expect
• Darwin attributed stasis to incomplete fossil
record






http://www.icr.org/article/biggest-p...for-evolution/


Quote:Even though the gaps in the fossil record are found between each basic animal type, there are two huge gaps in particular that should be emphasized. The evolutionary distance between single-cell organisms and the vast array of multicellular, highly complex marine invertebrates precludes even rapid evolution. In the supposedly 600-million-year-old layers of rock designated as Cambrian (which contain the first appearance of varied multi-cell life), sponges, clams, trilobites, starfish, etc., are found without the required evolutionary ancestors.

The gap from marine invertebrates to the vertebrate fish is likewise immense. To make matters worse for the evolutionists, fish fossils are also found in Cambrian strata. If evolution is true, fish must have evolved from something, and invertebrates must also have evolved from something. Evolution has no ancestor to propose, but the evidence exactly fits the creation model, which insists that each animal type was created fully formed, with no evolutionary transition
.





http://www.allaboutthejourney.org/pr...sil-record.htm




Quote:The British Museum of Natural History boasts the largest collection of fossils in the world. Among the five respected museum officials, Sunderland interviewed Dr. Colin Patterson, Senior Paleontologist at the British Museum and editor of a prestigious scientific journal. Patterson is a well known expert having an intimate knowledge of the fossil record. He was unable to give a single example of Macro-Evolutionary transition. In fact, Patterson wrote a book for the British Museum of Natural History entitled, "Evolution". When asked why he had not included a single photograph of a transitional fossil in his book, Patterson responded:


...I fully agree with your comments on the lack of direct illustration of evolutionary transitions in my book. If I knew of any, fossil or living, I would certainly have included them. You suggest that an artist should be used to visualize such transformations, but where would he get the information from? I could not, honestly, provide it, and if I were to leave it to artistic license, would that not mislead the reader? I wrote the text of my book four years ago. If I were to write it now, I think the book would be rather different. Gradualism is a concept I believe in, not just because of Darwin's authority, but because my understanding of genetics seems to demand it. Yet Gould and the American Museum people are hard to contradict when they say there are no transitional fossils. As a paleontologist myself, I am much occupied with the philosophical problems of identifying ancestral forms in the fossil record. You say that I should at least "show a photo of the fossil from which each type of organism was derived." I will lay it on the line - there is not one such fossil for which one could make a watertight argument.




David B. Kitts. PhD (Zoology) is Head Curator of the Department of Geology at the Stoval Museum. In an evolutionary trade journal, he wrote:




Quote:Despite the bright promise that paleontology provides a means of "seeing" evolution, it has presented some nasty difficulties for evolutionists, the most notorious of which is the presence of "gaps" in the fossil record. Evolution requires intermediate forms between species and paleontology does not provide them





So we see that Darwin/Huxleyism sect of evolutionist has it wrong. We see that Genesis 1 is STILL ahead of its time. Genesis 1, verified again.

The Cambrian EXPLODED out of nowhere. Darwinism did not predict this... Darwinism predicted a much slower rate of evolution. The wording of Genesis 1 shows however that this is exactly what we should find in the fossil record. If one were to predict that Genesis 1 is an actual history, then they could predict this is exactly what we would find in the fossil record. And this is certainly what we then observe. Genesis is verified and Darwinism swings and misses when it comes to the Cambrian.



Now... this was a nutshell and we can fill in the spaces. We also have to tackle the Big Bang and String and inflaitonary theory, as this is the standard model of the universe.


I would like now to take the opportunity to ask my 5 questions of my opponent.


1) Darwin was wrong when he predicted gradualism. He also blamed the holes in the fossil record on the lack of a complete fossil record. In light of the articles above, in regards to Darwin's gradualism not lining up with the fossil record, please explain both the sudden bursts of life, and the holes in the fossil record, specifically in the many tens of thousands of obvious transitionals we should have found but HAVENT.

2) How have the predictions of the big bang AND string been tested?

3) What problems do the current model of the universe have when you take away inflationary and string theory?

4) Why is string theory called by many notable theoretical physicists "the theory of everything?"

5) How is the rate of the sudden expansion we call "inflation", the length of time this expansion occurred, and the point and rate of sudden Deceleration, relevant and relative to the age of the universe?

Thank you and very good luck
Wolfbitn
Find all posts by this user
04-11-2014, 09:58 PM
RE: So wolfbin are doing this or not?
This debate is between Metazoa Zeke and Wolfbitn. Comments from other members will be removed.

[Image: giphy.gif]
Find all posts by this user
05-11-2014, 01:04 PM
RE: So wolfbin are doing this or not?
I give the floor to you Meta, Looking forward to your post.

Very good luck to you Smile

.
Find all posts by this user
05-11-2014, 05:11 PM
RE: So wolfbin are doing this or not?
(05-11-2014 01:04 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  Simply as a reminder, My theory is that Genesis 1, begins in verse 2 to relay to us a brief history of an extinction event and the subsequent clearing of the atmosphere and healing of the earth.

An extinction event eh? Let us look at this genesis book first:

1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.

5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.

7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.

8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.

I may have only put eight but within those eight there are two give away. First whether earth was barren or not night and day would still exist as they are what the earths rotation is, so if that is the case why did this book mentioning this god making night and day when those things would have already existed if the earth was barren? Because it is not talking about the earth being renewed but instead is talking about how this god made day and night as something new.

Second bold one is firmament. Firmament basically means sky but if we want to be scientific it would have to mean atmosphere. Earth has always had an atmosphere, though it has been different from before. Now you might say that god is mentioning how he is using the firmament for water but the verse says god made the firmament as in made, not so much kept. So if earth had an actually atmosphere, but the bible says that god made it later, what does that mean? It means one is wrong and one is right. The earths atmosphere has always been around as shown here http://forces.si.edu/atmosphere/02_02_01.html . So my point, god didn't use a old atmosphere to use for water, but was trying to say he created it.

(05-11-2014 01:04 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  Test 1: If this holds any water, then the first thing we should be able to verify VERY quickly whether or not this earth has ever undergone an extinction event.

Result: I believe that there is nearly 100 percent agreement within the scientific community, that this earth has endured extinction events. Geology AND paleontology PROVE that this earth has seen extinction events... My theory regarding Genesis 1 holds up under this point. This test against the facts in stone verify Genesis 1.


Well of course the earth has had many extinction events, but it effected most life during the time. For example the final extinction of non-avian dinosaurs. Non-avian dinosaurs, plesiosaurs, and pterodons went extinct but mammals, birds, and crocodilians survived. How could this be if extinction events have so much power and what is the point I am making? My point is that if genesis is nothing more than something that your god used to inform us about his rebuilding of earth than some life would have survived.

(05-11-2014 01:04 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  Test 2: This described event indicates that the atmosphere was cluttered and darkened to the point no light could filter through. A large abundance of Water also was mixed in with the description of contents within the atmosphere. This is tested again according to the same evidence indicating mass extinction events in the past.

Result: It is quite evident for instance because of the crater in Yucatan, that this earth has seen MULTIPLE extinction events and that some of these events would have erupted large amounts of water into the atmosphere, along with earth and ash and etc, and that this indeed went on to possibly be the cause for the extinction of the dinosaur. There certainly is no disagreement within the scientific community that this earth has seen disaster that darkened the skies, killed off all plant life, starving out the plant eaters, and then starving out the predators. Genesis 1 in no way conflicts with and is verified.


The problem with this test here is that it is not the only extinction event. The astroid is still in controversy on whether it killed the dinosaurs completely or not. It may have played a major part or a part. http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/diapsids/extinctheory.html

So the comet at the time did not cause the sky to be black or killed of all plant life(flowers for example) it instead killed off those organisms that could not survive the environmental change. No black cloud involved in the extinction. Plus many extinctions where do to environmental changes, other organisms, and even the species itself. The extinction of much of the life on earth was not always meteors.

(05-11-2014 01:04 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  Test 3: Now regarding the atmosphere placed between the waters we see in the 2nd day, we can see that waters settled below and around the atmosphere. This is nothing new at all. We see example of this many times. A recent giant planet was recently found with strange plasma like water hanging into the lower levels of the atmosphere, while another dwarf planet was recently found with an enveloping water vapor layer.

Result: Again we verify that this indeed is not an extremely unusual occurrence, it is not at all outlandish, and we do observe in nature, this event taking place around us elsewhere.

There are problems with this.

First:As I have shown before the earth has always had an atmosphere. Your bible says that god made water with the atmosphere as shown above in bold. So what part of science verifies that water was made with the atmosphere.

Second:We found planets with water vapor? That seems to mean that planets can have water without god involved then.


(05-11-2014 01:04 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  Test 5: We should be able to expect basic plant life, both marine and on land, to begin to flourish, now that the earth begins to warm and a bit of life begins to allow photosynthesis to give us back our paradise.

Result: This is the exact order given to us in the passages of scripture, and it is the correct order shown in the fossil record. Genesis 1 is calling correctly the order we see in stone.

Seeing as animals have been around longer than plants seems to ruin your bible, seeing as it says plants came before animals. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plant
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal

It would be accurate to see other organisms giving oxygen before the cambrian and not plants, so there is that to take into account.

(05-11-2014 01:04 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  Test 6: Most amazingly during the 5th age we see EVOLUTION. We see that after this extinction event, and after the light could once again begin to filter through, life begins to spring forth from the oceans. Genesis 1 states that life began evolving in the seas first and that even the birds descended from the sea:

First, birds did not descended from the sea in the way you think. You can say they did as all tetrapods did, but that is getting very specific. The part that says birds are not from the sea is the fact the first tetrapod evolved in the Devonian and birds in the Jurassic.

Also the bible says plants came before animals and they didn't.

(05-11-2014 01:04 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  Again... NOBODY KNOWS what detonated this Cambrian explosion. Now we must reason that when theory departs from unchanging stone records, we need to begin to reconsider certain dogmas. The fossil record is our WITNESS... to what really occurred. WHERE did this sudden explosion of life come from?

Guess my name is nobody then. The Cambrian explosion is not that fast relative to time, taking 80 million years. Another thing is that many organisms where around before the Cambrian. Lobopods are an example of an animal that existed before the cambrian explosion and was a transitional group. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lobopodia

The reason for it is because of the sudden change in environment, allowing life to evolve at rates faster than before.

Also to add many of your sources have nothing to them(literally click on them)

(05-11-2014 01:04 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  David B. Kitts. PhD (Zoology) is Head Curator of the Department of Geology at the Stoval Museum. In an evolutionary trade journal, he wrote:

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/quotes/m...rt1-1.html

It is the last one, you used a quote mine.

(05-11-2014 01:04 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  1) Darwin was wrong when he predicted gradualism. He also blamed the holes in the fossil record on the lack of a complete fossil record. In light of the articles above, in regards to Darwin's gradualism not lining up with the fossil record, please explain both the sudden bursts of life, and the holes in the fossil record, specifically in the many tens of thousands of obvious transitionals we should have found but HAVENT.

I my address this first, I think darwin is irrelevant. Darwin is unimportant and is ignorant of what we have today(well he is dead but still) so get him out of your head, as he will never be as good as we are today with this knowledge. Hell darwin during his time was not the first person to realize natural selection, he was just the first to publish it. Anyway, there are transitional fossils, like tiktaalik and sphecomyima look them up.

(05-11-2014 01:04 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  2) How have the predictions of the big bang AND string been tested?

http://www.physicalgeography.net/fundamentals/5a.html Here ya go

(05-11-2014 01:04 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  3) What problems do the current model of the universe have when you take away inflationary and string theory?

Well you take away the best explanation for the beginning of the current universe(and don't go without god because this theory was made by a pastor and muslims try to use it as proof of the quran, so it is not a theist vs atheist thing when I say that.

(05-11-2014 01:04 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  4) Why is string theory called by many notable theoretical physicists "the theory of everything?"

I don't thing string theory is something that is even well developed, cjlr said it before, there have not been many test, if any, for string theory

(05-11-2014 01:04 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  5) How is the rate of the sudden expansion we call "inflation", the length of time this expansion occurred, and the point and rate of sudden Deceleration, relevant and relative to the age of the universe?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflation_(cosmology)

This should cover it.

Welp your turn.

[Image: Guilmon-41189.gif] https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOW_Ioi2wtuPa88FvBmnBgQ my youtube
Find all posts by this user
[+] 2 users Like Metazoa Zeke's post
05-11-2014, 08:00 PM (This post was last modified: 05-11-2014 08:08 PM by Wolfbitn.)
RE: So wolfbin are doing this or not?
(05-11-2014 05:11 PM)Metazoa Zeke Wrote:  
(05-11-2014 01:04 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  Simply as a reminder, My theory is that Genesis 1, begins in verse 2 to relay to us a brief history of an extinction event and the subsequent clearing of the atmosphere and healing of the earth.

An extinction event eh? Let us look at this genesis book first:

1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.

5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.

7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.

8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.

I may have only put eight but within those eight there are two give away. First whether earth was barren or not night and day would still exist as they are what the earths rotation is, so if that is the case why did this book mentioning this god making night and day when those things would have already existed if the earth was barren? Because it is not talking about the earth being renewed but instead is talking about how this god made day and night as something new.

I don't know if you caught it or not, but there is no denying whatsoever that Genesis 1:2 is properly translated as "And the earth BECAME destroyed and laid waste"... you can check that link to the old targum I just provided in the last post to verify this.

Its a matter of the Hebrew definitions.

Secondly, as you know many of the most notable paleontologists and scholars believe that the extinction that ended the dinosaur was because of an asteroid impact and volcanic activity. THEY theorize that the atmosphere was filled with water and debris and volcanic ash to the point that the sky darkened and photosynthesis ended. The plant eaters died and the flesh eaters then died.

http://www.latimes.com/science/scienceno...story.html

Quote:May 13, 2014, 7:00 AM

The asteroid that wiped out the dinosaurs also caused a temporary but devastating "impact winter" -- darkening the sky, cooling the Earth and inhibiting photosynthesis, new research suggests..

So if you saw in my OP... the atmosphere began to clear of debris and water, to the point day and night could be observed... This allowed for the DAY to be seen, and the "end and the beginning were the first age".

Which of course exactly fits what we find written in the fossil record Smile


you Wrote:Second bold one is firmament. Firmament basically means sky but if we want to be scientific it would have to mean atmosphere. Earth has always had an atmosphere, though it has been different from before. Now you might say that god is mentioning how he is using the firmament for water but the verse says god made the firmament as in made, not so much kept. So if earth had an actually atmosphere, but the bible says that god made it later, what does that mean? It means one is wrong and one is right. The earths atmosphere has always been around as shown here http://forces.si.edu/atmosphere/02_02_01.html . So my point, god didn't use a old atmosphere to use for water, but was trying to say he created it.

Again you seemed to miss the OP. ...no offence Smile

The asteroid hitting the Yucatan, spewed debris AND a massive amount of water into the atmosphere. THIS is what is described by the chaos of atmosphere and water. As said in the OP, things began to settle, the atmosphere began to settle, the debris was clearing, some water settled to the earth, and SOME water was trapped in the atmosphere in a layer enveloping the earth, and there was an ATMOSPHERE BETWEEN the waters and the earth. THAT would be the atmosphere where the birds fly.

I also mentioned 2 recent planets that were found BOTH having an envelope of water in the atmosphere.

http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1304/1304.5058.pdf

Quote:1. Introduction
The possible existence of Earth and super-
Earths1-size planets covered completely by
a water envelope
has long fascinated
scientists and the general public alike
(Kuchner 2003, Leger et al.2004, Selsis et
al 2007).

The earth STILL has water in the atmosphere. There was just more of it then.



(05-11-2014 01:04 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  Test 1: If this holds any water, then the first thing we should be able to verify VERY quickly whether or not this earth has ever undergone an extinction event.

Result: I believe that there is nearly 100 percent agreement within the scientific community, that this earth has endured extinction events. Geology AND paleontology PROVE that this earth has seen extinction events... My theory regarding Genesis 1 holds up under this point. This test against the facts in stone verify Genesis 1.


Quote:Well of course the earth has had many extinction events, but it effected most life during the time. For example the final extinction of non-avian dinosaurs. Non-avian dinosaurs, plesiosaurs, and pterodons went extinct but mammals, birds, and crocodilians survived.

You need to brush up on your paleontology. It was generally only the smaller animals that survived... mostly mammals while the larger animals died out. That's just ONE extinction event though. This earth has seen SEVERAL EXTINCTION events, as the fossil record indicates.

It could be the Jurassic extinction event was the lesser of another like it. We certainly have large impact evidence other than that at the Yucatan.

From Wikipedia, just a few of the larger Comet impacts:

Vredefort crater, 300km
Sudbury Basin, 250km
Chicxulub crater, 180km
Kara crater, 120km
Manicouagan crater, 100km
Popigai crater, 100km
Acraman crater, 85-90km
Chesapeake Bay impact crater, 85km
Puchezh-Katunki crater, 80km
Charlevoix crater, 54km
Siljan Ring, 52km
Karakul, 52km

I personally believe it is talking about an extinction event prior to the Jurassic, although some peers believe it's referring to the Jurassic.

The point is made however, Genesis 1 is verified by both the fossil record AND Geology, when it states that the world became laid waste and destroyed.


(05-11-2014 01:04 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  Test 2: This described event indicates that the atmosphere was cluttered and darkened to the point no light could filter through. A large abundance of Water also was mixed in with the description of contents within the atmosphere. This is tested again according to the same evidence indicating mass extinction events in the past.

Result: It is quite evident for instance because of the crater in Yucatan, that this earth has seen MULTIPLE extinction events and that some of these events would have erupted large amounts of water into the atmosphere, along with earth and ash and etc, and that this indeed went on to possibly be the cause for the extinction of the dinosaur. There certainly is no disagreement within the scientific community that this earth has seen disaster that darkened the skies, killed off all plant life, starving out the plant eaters, and then starving out the predators. Genesis 1 in no way conflicts with and is verified.


Quote:The problem with this test here is that it is not the only extinction event. The astroid is still in controversy on whether it killed the dinosaurs completely or not. It may have played a major part or a part. http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/diapsids/extinctheory.html

So the comet at the time did not cause the sky to be black or killed of all plant life(flowers for example) it instead killed off those organisms that could not survive the environmental change. No black cloud involved in the extinction. Plus many extinctions where do to environmental changes, other organisms, and even the species itself. The extinction of much of the life on earth was not always meteors.

I bolded the parts where I said there were MULTIPLE extinction events. I am STRESSING that the Jurassic was just ONE of the possibilities out of SEVERAL. lol


As pointed out, scholars agree almost without exception that at times photosynthesis came to a near halt. This was because of a darkened sky obviously. At least THEY agree lol, do you? AND as I pointed out IN THE OP, there were MULTIPLE extinction events Wink There was no need to correct me on that point, it was part of the point I'm making, but I am glad we could emphasize it regardless. Smile


(05-11-2014 01:04 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  Test 5: We should be able to expect basic plant life, both marine and on land, to begin to flourish, now that the earth begins to warm and a bit of life begins to allow photosynthesis to give us back our paradise.

Result: This is the exact order given to us in the passages of scripture, and it is the correct order shown in the fossil record. Genesis 1 is calling correctly the order we see in stone.

you Wrote:Seeing as animals have been around longer than plants seems to ruin your bible, seeing as it says plants came before animals. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plant
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal

It would be accurate to see other organisms giving oxygen before the cambrian and not plants, so there is that to take into account.

... It only reinforces the fact that this was an extinction event and a percentage of life still existed in the seas. We can narrow this with the fact that this also had to be a time predating birds, as the birds are shown to eventually evolve from the seas in Genesis 1. Again, Genesis 1 verified.

(05-11-2014 01:04 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  Test 6: Most amazingly during the 5th age we see EVOLUTION. We see that after this extinction event, and after the light could once again begin to filter through, life begins to spring forth from the oceans. Genesis 1 states that life began evolving in the seas first and that even the birds descended from the sea:

Quote:First, birds did not descended from the sea in the way you think. You can say they did as all tetrapods did, but that is getting very specific. The part that says birds are not from the sea is the fact the first tetrapod evolved in the Devonian and birds in the Jurassic.

What about descended from the seas do you think I didn't understand? I KNOW they didn't just fly up out of the seas... the POINT is that they ARE descended FROM the seas when you carry their ancestry back.... Again, Genesis Verified.

(05-11-2014 01:04 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  Again... NOBODY KNOWS what detonated this Cambrian explosion. Now we must reason that when theory departs from unchanging stone records, we need to begin to reconsider certain dogmas. The fossil record is our WITNESS... to what really occurred. WHERE did this sudden explosion of life come from?

Quote:Guess my name is nobody then. The Cambrian explosion is not that fast relative to time, taking 80 million years. Another thing is that many organisms where around before the Cambrian. Lobopods are an example of an animal that existed before the cambrian explosion and was a transitional group. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lobopodia

I'm sorry but you don't know better than credible zoologists and paleontologists. I never said there aren't ANY transitionals, I said you don't have NEAR what you should have.

You CANNOT deny that MOST modern scholars agree Darwin was wrong about gradualism. You cannot deny that SCHOLARS AGREE there are EXTREMELY FEW actual transiationals. There is a LOT of hypothesizing, but no... the transitionals are just not there like they should be AS I noted in SEVERAL quotes from Scholars in the OP.

from https://www.google.com/#q=darwin+wrong+m...nsitionals

Quote:Richard Dawkins said:
"the Cambrian strata of rocks, vintage about 600 million years, are the oldest in which we find most of the major invertebrate groups. And we find many of them already in an advanced state of evolution, the very first time they appear. It is as though they were just planted there, without any evolutionary history. Needless to say, this appearance of sudden planting has delighted creationists" Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker, 1987, p 229

Quote:Despite the tremendous increase in geological activity in every corner of the globe and despite the discovery of many strange and hitherto unknown forms, the infinitude of connecting links has still not been discovered and the fossil record is about as discontinuous as it was when Darwin was writing the Origin. The intermediates have remained as elusive as ever and their absence remains, a century later, one of the most striking characteristics of the fossil record." (13)

Thus the sudden abrupt appearances of entire classes of organisms appearing in all levels of the fossil record since Darwin's time has remained the most serious objection to his theory, something Darwin said should be fatal to his ideas. Denton went on to say:


"An enormous effort has been made over the past century to find missing links in these rocks which might bridge the deep divisions in the animal kingdom. Yet no links have ever been found and the relationships of the major groups are as enigmatic today as one hundred years ago . . . As we have seen, newly discovered hitherto unknown groups, whether living or fossilized, invariably prove to be distinct and isolated and can in no way be construed as connecting links in the sense required by evolution theory."

Here are some more quotes from present day evolutionists, taken in context, in other words these references express the honest opinions of these men:


"One hundred and twenty years of paleontological research later, it has become abundantly clear that the fossil record will not confirm this part of Darwin’s predictions. Nor is the problem a miserably poor record. The fossil record simply shows that this prediction is wrong." Eldredge & Tattersall, The Myths of Human Evolution, 1982, p45-46


"The old Darwinian view of evolution as a ladder of more and more efficient forms leading up to the present is not borne out by the evidence." N.D. Newell, Why Scientists believe in Evolution, 1984, p 10, American Geological Institute pamphlet


"Many fossils have been collected since 1859, tons of them, yet the impact they have had on our understanding of the relationships between living organisms is barely perceptible. _ In fact, I do not think it unfair to say that fossils, or at least the transitional interpretation of fossils, have clouded rather than clarified our attempts to reconstruct phylogeny" P.L. Forey, Neontological Analysis Versus Palaeontological Stories, 1982, p 120-121

Indeed, what was the major dilemma in Darwin's day continues to be the major closet secret among evolutionists today: The sudden, abrupt appearance of every major phylum in the Cambrian period and the abrupt appearance of all other forms of life as well, lending evidence that life did not evolve, but was created:


"One of the most difficult problems in evolutionary paleontology has been the almost abrupt appearance of the major animal groups" A. G. Fisher, Grolier Multimedia Encyclopedia, 1998, fossil section

Steven Jay Gould, Professor of Geology and Paleontology at Harvard, wrote in Natural History, Vol LXXXVI (6), June-July, 1977, "All paleontologists know that the fossil record contains precious little in the way of intermediate forms; transitions between major groups are characteristically abrupt."(14)

Senior paleontologist at the British Museum of Natural History in London, Dr. Colin Patterson, wrote a personal letter to Luther Sunderland, the late aerospace engineer and author of the excellent book, Darwin's Enigma, dated April 10, 1979, in which he said, ". . . I fully agree with your comments on the lack of direct illustration of evolutionary transitions in my book. If I knew of any, fossil or living, I would certainly have included them." (15)

Phylogenic "trees" are used by evolutionists as props to lend support to their theory that all life forms on earth descended from a common ancestor. The Tree of Life Project on the internet is a very popular representation of just such a phylogenic tree. The illustration is meant to suggest that all of the different species shown in the tree can be traced to a common ancestor, and the branches are meant to illustrate the evolutionary history of our common descent. What is not mentioned though is that all of the branches of the tree both in the main illustration and in the linked secondary pages where the phylogeny of organisms is supposedly represented don't exist in real life!
The branches of the tree are merely drawn in to represent the supposed evolutionary history of the various families of organisms according to evolutionist speculation, but there are no transitional forms between humans and other apes, or between mammals and reptiles, or between any of the major families of animals at all. There is no evidence of their existence today and there is no evidence that they ever existed in the past!


(05-11-2014 01:04 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  1) Darwin was wrong when he predicted gradualism. He also blamed the holes in the fossil record on the lack of a complete fossil record. In light of the articles above, in regards to Darwin's gradualism not lining up with the fossil record, please explain both the sudden bursts of life, and the holes in the fossil record, specifically in the many tens of thousands of obvious transitionals we should have found but HAVENT.

you Wrote:I my address this first, I think darwin is irrelevant. Darwin is unimportant and is ignorant of what we have today(well he is dead but still) so get him out of your head, as he will never be as good as we are today with this knowledge. Hell darwin during his time was not the first person to realize natural selection, he was just the first to publish it.


So then you agree with me that Genesis 1 shows life abruptly developing, whereas Darwin was wrong... Good to go.

(05-11-2014 01:04 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  2) How have the predictions of the big bang AND string been tested?

Quote:http://www.physicalgeography.net/fundamentals/5a.html Here ya go


That's not presenting your tests. I want you to TELL me or post the quotes please, HOW has the big Bang, and string been tested?

(05-11-2014 01:04 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  3) What problems do the current model of the universe have when you take away inflationary and string theory?

Quote:Well you take away the best explanation for the beginning of the current universe(and don't go without god because this theory was made by a pastor and muslims try to use it as proof of the quran, so it is not a theist vs atheist thing when I say that.

This is an absolutely nonsensical answer. I get to tack this onto my next 5... You didn't answer a thing.



(05-11-2014 01:04 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  4) Why is string theory called by many notable theoretical physicists "the theory of everything?"

Quote:I don't thing string theory is something that is even well developed, cjlr said it before, there have not been many test, if any, for string theory

Yes I told him to hand that to you to help you out when he said it in another thread... because he is wrong and was showing his ignorance of the subject. It HAS had its predictions tested, just as the big bang has had some of it's predictions tested.

From http://io9.com/5714210/string-theory...erimental-test

Quote:
String theory fails first major experimental test



From: http://www.popsci.com/science/articl...d...hysicis...

Quote:
Physicists working at the Large Hadron Collider report that after a series of tests, they have not seen any mini black holes, to the chagrin of string theorists and the relief of disaster theorists.

Researchers working on the Compact Muon Solenoid team have been crunching numbers to test a form of string theory that calls for the creation and instant evaporation of miniature black holes. They report that the telltale signs of these black holes are disappointingly absent, however.



And again... Another failure...


http://www.science.slashdot.org/stor...o...ell-tro...


Quote:
"Paul Steinhardt, an astrophysicist at Princeton University in New Jersey, and colleagues have posted a controversial paper on ArXiv arguing, based on the latest Higgs data and the cosmic microwave background map from the Planck mission, that the leading theory explaining the first moments of the Big Bang ('inflation') is fatally flawed. In short, Steinhardt says that the models that best fit the Planck data — known as 'plateau models' because their potential-energy profiles level off at relatively low energies — are far less likely to occur naturally than the models that Planck ruled out. Secondly, he says, the news for these plateau models gets dramatically worse when the results are analyzed in conjunction with the latest results about the Higgs field coming from CERN's Large Hadron Collider. Particle physicists working at the LHC have calculated that the Higgs field is likely to have started out in a high-energy, 'metastable' state rather than in a stable, low-energy configuration. Steinhardt likens the odds of the Higgs field initially being perched in the precarious metastable state as to those of dropping out of the sky over the Matterhorn and conveniently landing in a 'dimple near the top,' rather than crashing down to the mountain's base."




In other words, the Higgs data doesnt resemble standard predictions made by inflation. The data, more resemble plateau models... but then the Particle Physicists at CERN have noted that plateau models have problems of their own that prevent them from being verified... In other words again, the predicted models do not fit the observations... they are totally failing in every test in every respect.


Remember that string touted itself as "The theory of everything", by greats like Alan Guth and Michio Kako. They amazed the word with their claims, yet Kako admits that string followed no scientific method whatsoever. It claimed to answer the mystery of what banged in the big bang... it claimed to answer several of the big bang's inconsistencies.

But... we can bury the theory of everything now... and BB has lost any hope of answering these problems... as Guth and Kako both admit, String is the only game in town trying to answer these inconsistencies... and now string as you can see, has not just one, but REPEATEDLY been falsified..


http://planetsave.com/2012/12/03/sup...d...ts-phys...


Quote:
‘Super Symmetry’ Theory Fails Collider Tests – Physicists Must Seek New ‘Theories of Everything’

...The theory posited ‘super partner particles’ — exotic particles that accompany every known particles and what provide the ‘symmetry’ in super symmetry — that would indirectly confirm such controversial ‘New Physics’ theories as String Theory.

But with recent high energy collision experiments at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) producing (most likely) the fabled Higgs Boson — but none of the partner particles expected to appear within the energies ranges utilized — physicists are now having to reconsider one of their most prized theoretical models of the universe.

SUSY Fails the Test

According to physicist Mikhail Shifman, a once enthusiastic advocate of SUSY and author of an essay published on arXiv.org,, “…nature apparently doesn’t want it. At least, not in its original form.”



So yes, String has been repeatedly falsified, and whats worse, Great notable scholars who were for decades proponents of string, are now it's biggest detractors and skeptics.

It gets worse for BB and string... Because of certain observational inconsistencies with both hypotheses, they had to assume that there were obviously differences between the model and what is actually observed. To fill in THIS gap the pull out another untestable hypothesis from their bag of endless imagination that just keeps failing... Dark matter and dark energy



(05-11-2014 01:04 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  5) How is the rate of the sudden expansion we call "inflation", the length of time this expansion occurred, and the point and rate of sudden Deceleration, relevant and relative to the age of the universe?

Quote:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflation_(cosmology)

This should cover it.

Welp your turn.

No that doesn't cover it. Very cheap actually, but that's ok... it is another one that will be tacked to your 5

Your questions:

1) Without posting a link, tell me How is the inflationary theory, rate of speed of the sudden inflation, and the amount of time it kept up this speed, and the rate of deceleration relative to determining the age of the universe? Pretend that other mature people might be reading this and not posting to it... and answer this for THEM, so they can see you actually know something about the subject Smile

2) Without posting a link, WHY was string theory known as "the theory of everything"? Tell the reader please Smile

3) Since I provided YOUR information regarding the testing and failure of string theory predictions, you tell me ...and the readers Smile ...what predictions have been made and tested regarding the big bang?

4) Explain to the reader without posting a link, WHY the big bang has so many problems without inflationary/string theory.

5) Define the qualities one would have to possess in order to be called a "Creator God ". What powers would it take to create a singularity and bring about everything we see of one were a God and wanted to do so?

6) Is there anything you really know about this subject? Show me.


Thanks Meta and peace out
Wolfbitn
Find all posts by this user
06-11-2014, 04:46 PM
RE: So wolfbin are doing this or not?
Banned.

So now I can wade in.

Nicely done Meta, he was grasping at straws and spinning BS. Thumbsup

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Thread Closed 
Forum Jump: