Ben Stein Stumps Richard Dawkins.

[edthecynic]

obviously it could be nothing more than a previous Big Bang, so again, what caused that one.....

The Big Bang is the expansion phase in the cycle of the universe of energy, and the Big Crunch is the compression phase. Gravity is the engine.

I'll be honest, I've not paid that much attention to the New Age religions.....they lack cohesion.......obviously then your "Big Crunch" is pre-Big Bang but post Time Origination......you've said energy created matter at the Big Bang.......what was gravity crunching and what generated gravity......generally speaking, gravity is a product of large masses of matter, which hadn't been created yet......

If you WERE honest, you would admit you know nothing about time.

I said energy = matter times a constant e=mc2. All mass, no matter the size, is attracted to another, that is grammar school science. You are beyond communication.

 

[DriftingSand]

The Big Bang is the expansion phase in the cycle of the universe of energy, and the Big Crunch is the compression phase. Gravity is the engine.

I'll be honest, I've not paid that much attention to the New Age religions.....they lack cohesion.......obviously then your "Big Crunch" is pre-Big Bang but post Time Origination......you've said energy created matter at the Big Bang.......what was gravity crunching and what generated gravity......generally speaking, gravity is a product of large masses of matter, which hadn't been created yet......

If you WERE honest, you would admit you know nothing about time.

I said energy = matter times a constant e=mc2. All mass, no matter the size, is attracted to another, that is grammar school science. You are beyond communication.

energy = matter times a constant e=mc2

If energy is "matter X a constant" then how is energy described or defined if there is no matter?

 

[edthecynic]

Just a couple of questions for "Big Bang" theorists?

1) Approximately what area of space did the Big Bang take place? Which sun, planets, etc. are closest to that location?

2) Is it logical to believe that the particles flying away from a major explosion would become round rather than jagged-edged?

3) If time has a beginning but energy is timeless what time was it a year before time began?

Another who does not understand space/time. Time exists only in terms of motion. The moment "before" the Big Bang the universe of energy was neither expanding nor contracting and for that singularity, time did not exist. Space/time began with the Big Bang, any previous space/time was obliterated in the singularity.

Imagine tossing a ball straight up in the air. As it rises it slows down and at its apex, for a singular moment it is neither rising or falling, like the singularity of the universe neither expanding from the Big Bang or contracting to the Big Crunch.

The Big Bang is not an explosion, as the name suggests.

 

[edthecynic]

I'll be honest, I've not paid that much attention to the New Age religions.....they lack cohesion.......obviously then your "Big Crunch" is pre-Big Bang but post Time Origination......you've said energy created matter at the Big Bang.......what was gravity crunching and what generated gravity......generally speaking, gravity is a product of large masses of matter, which hadn't been created yet......

If you WERE honest, you would admit you know nothing about time.

I said energy = matter times a constant e=mc2. All mass, no matter the size, is attracted to another, that is grammar school science. You are beyond communication.

energy = matter times a constant e=mc2

If energy is "matter X a constant" then how is energy described or defined if there is no matter?

Energy and matter are both conserved, so there is no such thing as no energy/matter.

 

[DriftingSand]

If you WERE honest, you would admit you know nothing about time.

I said energy = matter times a constant e=mc2. All mass, no matter the size, is attracted to another, that is grammar school science. You are beyond communication.

energy = matter times a constant e=mc2

If energy is "matter X a constant" then how is energy described or defined if there is no matter?

Energy and matter are both conserved, so there is no such thing as no energy/matter.

Fair answer. So you're saying that matter existed before the Big Bang which means that energy and matter are both eternal.

 

[edthecynic]

energy = matter times a constant e=mc2

If energy is "matter X a constant" then how is energy described or defined if there is no matter?

Energy and matter are both conserved, so there is no such thing as no energy/matter.

Fair answer. So you're saying that matter existed before the Big Bang which means that energy and matter are both eternal.

As proven by the First Law of Thermodynamics, AKA the Law Of Conservation of Matter and Energy.

 

[DriftingSand]

Energy and matter are both conserved, so there is no such thing as no energy/matter.

Fair answer. So you're saying that matter existed before the Big Bang which means that energy and matter are both eternal.

As proven by the First Law of Thermodynamics, AKA the Law Of Conservation of Matter and Energy.

So energy and matter are eternal but time has a beginning?

 

[edthecynic]

Fair answer. So you're saying that matter existed before the Big Bang which means that energy and matter are both eternal.

As proven by the First Law of Thermodynamics, AKA the Law Of Conservation of Matter and Energy.

So energy and matter are eternal but time has a beginning?

Yes.

 

[Hollie]

so before you argued that time was the causal factor, now you say its gravity....okay then......since gravity triggered the Big Bang, where did gravity come from......by the way, since gravity results from proximity to large masses of matter, and you've argued that matter did not yet exist, do you sense a problem?.......

Gravity is not a function of large masses of matter. Gravity is a force even among small masses. This type of error is the danger you encounter when your science comes from Harun Yahya.

so the pea under your mattress crunched energy?.....

It's pretty obvious that you are wanting for the most basic precepts in science.

It's pretty stereotypical of extremists to lash out when their simple-minded understanding of the natural world is so abysmally naive.

 

[Hollie]

as before Hollie.....if you don't have the ability to play the game, don't sit in the bleachers and throw your paper cups onto the field......

I'm trying to help you understand that analogies attempting to connect supernatural entities and rational reality will always fail.

well played.....your assertion that I failed is so compelling an argument.....

Thanks. I need only let you stumble through a sentence and you do the rest.

 

[asterism]

By the way Holly, is "energy" your god like it seems to be for everyone else?

All you have done is taken energy and given it a human personality and called it God.

Energy has always existed and everything in the universe comes from it.
Energy exists in three forms, kinetic (the father), potential (the son), and heat (the spirit).

So your God is nothing but personified energy.

That could be true though.

So which is more plausible, an unintelligent entity that is energy that spontaneously spawns all this other stuff or an intelligent entity that is energy which creates all this other stuff according to some plan?

It appears to come down to some other external bias, but neither concept can be (currently) proven to be true or false.

 

[DriftingSand]

As proven by the First Law of Thermodynamics, AKA the Law Of Conservation of Matter and Energy.

So energy and matter are eternal but time has a beginning?

Yes.

What time was it 5 years before time began? It would seem to me that if "existence" is eternal then time is eternal as well (using your scientific methodology).

 

[asterism]

Energy and matter are both conserved, so there is no such thing as no energy/matter.

Fair answer. So you're saying that matter existed before the Big Bang which means that energy and matter are both eternal.

As proven by the First Law of Thermodynamics, AKA the Law Of Conservation of Matter and Energy.

The laws of thermodynamics is not universal though.

Do Black Holes Destroy Information? - The Nature of Reality

 

[asterism]

So energy and matter are eternal but time has a beginning?

Yes.

What time was it 5 years before time began? It would seem to me that if "existence" is eternal then time is eternal as well (using your scientific methodology).

Time is a perceived construct from our frame of reference. Both the Bible and scientific research reflect this.

 

[DriftingSand]

Yes.

What time was it 5 years before time began? It would seem to me that if "existence" is eternal then time is eternal as well (using your scientific methodology).

Time is a perceived construct from our frame of reference. Both the Bible and scientific research reflect this.

edthecynic says that energy and matter are both eternal but that time has a specific beginning. That makes absolutely ZERO sense so I've been asking him how he can reach that conclusion.

 

[edthecynic]

So energy and matter are eternal but time has a beginning?

Yes.

What time was it 5 years before time began? It would seem to me that if "existence" is eternal then time is eternal as well (using your scientific methodology).

I already answered this. Time exists ONLY in terms of motion. For a singular moment in between the Big Crunch and the Big Bang, there was no motion and therefore no time.

 

[edthecynic]

What time was it 5 years before time began? It would seem to me that if "existence" is eternal then time is eternal as well (using your scientific methodology).

Time is a perceived construct from our frame of reference. Both the Bible and scientific research reflect this.

edthecynic says that energy and matter are both eternal but that time has a specific beginning. That makes absolutely ZERO sense so I've been asking him how he can reach that conclusion.

Actually it makes perfect sense if you understand that time only exists in terms of motion. What makes ZERO sense is virgin birth.

 

[edthecynic]

Maybe this will help, it is a video adaptation of the freshman physics course from Cal Tech.

 

[PostmodernProph]

The fireman does not enter the burning building under the assumption that his losing his life in the fire will save the child, whereas the guilty person knows an innocent will be punished in their place when they agree to it.

Come on, be honest and admit that the price of Christian salvation is moral bankruptcy.

???....can you see the error in your reasoning?.......you've made a mismash of the roles in the two stories.....instead of seeing us as the child in the burning building you're trying to turn us into the fire that killed the fireman......we didn't "agree" to anything before Jesus went to the cross, just as the child did not agree to go into a burning building and wait for a fireman to come along......

You didn't commit any evil before Jesus "went to the cross" either. To be "saved" you must agree to accept an innocent punished in your place. Again, the fireman analogy is meaningless.

not at all.....again, imagine the firefighter rescues the child but dies from injuries sustained......imagine also that the fire began because the child was playing with matches.....can the child honor the sacrifice of the fireman who saved his life by calling him morally bankrupt?.....also, oddly, the ones who are punishing the innocent who chose to make the sacrifice are those who are rejecting him, thus making it meaningless at least as far as they are concerned.....

 

[Hollie]

Yes.

What time was it 5 years before time began? It would seem to me that if "existence" is eternal then time is eternal as well (using your scientific methodology).

Time is a perceived construct from our frame of reference. Both the Bible and scientific research reflect this.

That's true in the sense that it confirms the completely human origin of the bibles and gods. One or more gods could have snapped their eternal digits and *poofed* all of creation into existence in a mere instant (as it appears happened via the un-supernatural Big Bang), as opposed to taking days for supernatural creation.

The writers of the bibles used language and time frames completely in concert with the limited science vocabulary available at the time.