(January 13, 2019 at 10:43 am)polymath257 Wrote:(January 12, 2019 at 10:36 pm)Angelina Wrote: I do not have any pre-conceived religious ideas. I have a brain and a college education, and you are still pretending that explains why and how it is happening. It does NOT.
Except that the theory and the observations agree. We see the process happening today. We can apply the known laws of gravity to what we see and the results agree with what we see. And that is star formation.
How is that *not* an explanation? A large cloud of gas and dust collapses locally due to gravity, leading to the heating of said cloud and eventually the start of nuclear reactions. Gravity tends to pull things into spheres. And a spherical ball of gas that has nuclear reactions in its center is a star.
Quote:It is not "some deity", it is an intelligent and self-aware force with enough knowledge to bring about LIFE ITSELF and an amazing and beautiful planet. "The Universe itself" does not mean anything. It is flat nothingness and has no capabilitles of accomplishing anything. It is nonsensical to think "nothing" can create all this. Ridiculous beyond belief.
Exactly: some deity. yes, the universe has properties: it has matter, space, time, energy, etc. The matter and energy obey physical laws. Those physical laws determine the types and characteristics of chemistry. And life *is* a complex collection of chemical reactions.
As to this planet, it is a fairly small planet, that is one among thousands we have already found. We don't know if life exists elsewhere, but the bet its that it does because the same processes that happened here should happens other places to get life started.
(January 12, 2019 at 4:28 pm)polymath257 Wrote: No, the universe from nothing is NOT pseudoscience. it is based on known scientific law and has many testable predictions. At this point, those predictions have not yet been tested, but the proposal is still scientific.It is based on nothing but some made up unproven guesses craftily thrown together in order to sell lots of books and make lots of money off the unknowing masses. It is despicable abuse of the field of scientiific inquiry.
Again wrong. Quantum mechanics and general relativity are quite far from being just guesses. And if you think the primary goal is to sell books, you don't know a single thing about how science works. The amount of money made is trivial.
(January 12, 2019 at 6:49 pm)T0 Th3 M4X Wrote: - Bad guess. Observations didn't fit and still don't.
- No observations prove otherwise
- Yep, pseudoscience. No laws or testable predictions have been able to lead to such a conclusion. Also, if the testable predictions haven't been tested, then how can they account for anything? A proposal doesn't prove something, but rather details how you might test it.
Really? Which observations, specifically? How do the observations of, say, the EGGs in the Eagle nebula conflict with the predictions of the theory?
As to causlaity, observations actually show that causality doesn't always apply. That is one of the big lessons of quantum mechanics.
The theory is testable, but has not yet been tested. That makes it scientific but not proven.
[/quote]
- What part of it suggested EGGs? If one has nothing directly to do with the other, then why assume a special relationship between it and what you claim happened billions of years ago?
- Agreed, but was already stated. You can set up a test and do it scientifically, but until you actually do the test, that's all it is, test parameters established scientifically. It doesn't conclude the relationship of the variables until it's actually conducted.
