Stop Forcing Their Religion…

[daveman]

….down American’s throats.


Time and again we find some government school grad railing against religious folks ‘ramming their religion down my throat,’ or ‘imposing your religious beliefs blah blah blah.’

“You Bible thumpers ARE trying to ram your superstitions down our throats.” Does America Need Be Saved From Theocracy?

And demands that opposing thought be shut down:

"Hatred is not just an "opinion." It is an attempt to hurt others.
These venues have no obligation to give this fraud a forum. Judging from the posted link, the city councils concluded that his speech would offend their community values."
Wales has banned parents from stopping their children learning about sex, religion and LGBT people



Careful consideration of this subject, and so very many more, prove rule #2:
To know what the Left is guilty of, just watch what they blame the other side of doing.

And nowhere is that more clear than in demanding others adhere to their beliefs.




1.”Barr: The Real People Trying To ‘Impose Their Values’ On Others Are ‘Militant Secularists’

It has been long convenient for secularists to insist that it is possible for government to be neutral about religion by imposing their religion on everyone.

2. …religion is being driven out of the marketplace of ideas and there’s a organized militant secular effort to drive religion out of our lives” “To me the problem today is not that religious people are trying to impose their views on nonreligious people, it’s the opposite — it’s that militant secularists are trying to impose their values on religious people and they’re not accommodating the freedom of religion of people of faith.”
Barr: The People Trying To 'Impose Their Values' Are 'Militant Secularists'

Remember, these are the people who think the word "god" should only precede "damn America".

 

[Lysistrata]

My atheism or agnosticism is not a religion. To my mind, it is obvious and empirically documented that there is no convincing evidence FOR a God or any other supernatural phenomenon.

she's insane.

she spends HOURS writing lies, half truths, misrepresentations, false accusations.....She is really good at VOLUMINOUS CONTENT of nonsense and BS.


Rational people probably shouldn't waste any time arguing with the insane.

When she writes about "religion," she only means Christianity, and then only her brand of it. She never mentions what her brand is, but she did go hysterical yesterday when some British venues declined to host frankie graham, and she titled her thread "Christianity BANNED in the UK," which I don't think either the queen or the Archbishop of Canterbury or parliament would ever allow to happen. She just has a weird hobby.

You spout the gaia theory of the living breathing earth and then through documents like the Bible deball the natural instincts of men. The result is the Asians with their men are eating our lunch in the race for supremacy. We have a large head start but they are closing.

Well, I do know some people who believe in Gaia. It's a religious belief and they are entitled to it. Otherwise, your post is just plain weird. It's not even remotely connected to anything I wrote. The "deball" thing is particularly strange. It was PoliticalChic who wrote that the UK had banned Christianity, not me.

Actually, it was Caldron Pool....

"Christianity BANNED in the United Kingdom"
Christianity BANNED in the United Kingdom · Caldron Pool




Now....are you ready to retract your lie about conservatives, and admit that it is you Fascists who are in favor of suppressing speech that doesn't conform to your views?

You wrote this lie yesterday, when I pointed out that your sort deprived a preacher of auditoriums that had agreed to let him speak....

I asked you for any examples of conservatives doing what you support, suppressing free speech.....as of yet, you haven't provided any.



"People who refer to themselves as "conservatives" demand lock-step conformity on every subject. One cannot speak of being pro-choice or on behalf of equality of the races, sexes, religions, or sexual orientations without being subjected to a barrage of name-calling and obscenity.

Anyway, this discussion does not involve crime of any sort. This guy can speak as long as he can find a venue. Piccadilly Circus maybe?

So what if my views are moderate-to-liberal? It depend on the issue. Am I committing a "thought crime"?"Wales has banned parents from stopping their children learning about sex, religion and LGBT people


Are you ready to admit you're a Fascist?

You really are out of your mind.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Actually.....totally accurate, point for point.
Now...about the origin of the universe.....and the fact that modern science now accepts the very same order of events as Genesis.....

1. God’s first command in Genesis is “Let there be light.” Nor is this the only introduction of light in the Genesis creation account, but it is the first, it represents the beginning of the formation of our solar system. And that was ‘The Big Bang’…some 13,700 million years ago. Quite an event…it lasted just 10 to the minus 35th seconds, beginning the universe, generating time and space, as well as all the matter and energy that the universe would ever, ever, contain! Big Bang…explosion….energy….light. But no atoms to form the sun for some time. Light…but no sun? So says science. And so says Genesis. Parker, “The Genesis Enigma,” chapter two.

a. For reference, Genesis 1, verses 1-4: In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. 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. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.

Not totally accurate. In Genesis God created the Earth before he made the Big Bang. Science does not agree.

"In Genesis God created the Earth before he made the Big Bang. "


False, and absurd.

 

[PoliticalChic]

she's insane.

she spends HOURS writing lies, half truths, misrepresentations, false accusations.....She is really good at VOLUMINOUS CONTENT of nonsense and BS.


Rational people probably shouldn't waste any time arguing with the insane.

When she writes about "religion," she only means Christianity, and then only her brand of it. She never mentions what her brand is, but she did go hysterical yesterday when some British venues declined to host frankie graham, and she titled her thread "Christianity BANNED in the UK," which I don't think either the queen or the Archbishop of Canterbury or parliament would ever allow to happen. She just has a weird hobby.

You spout the gaia theory of the living breathing earth and then through documents like the Bible deball the natural instincts of men. The result is the Asians with their men are eating our lunch in the race for supremacy. We have a large head start but they are closing.

Well, I do know some people who believe in Gaia. It's a religious belief and they are entitled to it. Otherwise, your post is just plain weird. It's not even remotely connected to anything I wrote. The "deball" thing is particularly strange. It was PoliticalChic who wrote that the UK had banned Christianity, not me.

Actually, it was Caldron Pool....

"Christianity BANNED in the United Kingdom"
Christianity BANNED in the United Kingdom · Caldron Pool




Now....are you ready to retract your lie about conservatives, and admit that it is you Fascists who are in favor of suppressing speech that doesn't conform to your views?

You wrote this lie yesterday, when I pointed out that your sort deprived a preacher of auditoriums that had agreed to let him speak....

I asked you for any examples of conservatives doing what you support, suppressing free speech.....as of yet, you haven't provided any.



"People who refer to themselves as "conservatives" demand lock-step conformity on every subject. One cannot speak of being pro-choice or on behalf of equality of the races, sexes, religions, or sexual orientations without being subjected to a barrage of name-calling and obscenity.

Anyway, this discussion does not involve crime of any sort. This guy can speak as long as he can find a venue. Piccadilly Circus maybe?

So what if my views are moderate-to-liberal? It depend on the issue. Am I committing a "thought crime"?"Wales has banned parents from stopping their children learning about sex, religion and LGBT people


Are you ready to admit you're a Fascist?

You really are out of your mind.

Now....are you ready to retract your lie about conservatives, and admit that it is you Fascists who are in favor of suppressing speech that doesn't conform to your views?

You wrote this lie yesterday, when I pointed out that your sort deprived a preacher of auditoriums that had agreed to let him speak....

I asked you for any examples of conservatives doing what you support, suppressing free speech.....as of yet, you haven't provided any.



"People who refer to themselves as "conservatives" demand lock-step conformity on every subject. One cannot speak of being pro-choice or on behalf of equality of the races, sexes, religions, or sexual orientations without being subjected to a barrage of name-calling and obscenity.

Anyway, this discussion does not involve crime of any sort. This guy can speak as long as he can find a venue. Piccadilly Circus maybe?

So what if my views are moderate-to-liberal? It depend on the issue. Am I committing a "thought crime"?"Wales has banned parents from stopping their children learning about sex, religion and LGBT people


Are you ready to admit you're a Fascist?

 

[alang1216]

Actually.....totally accurate, point for point.
Now...about the origin of the universe.....and the fact that modern science now accepts the very same order of events as Genesis.....

1. God’s first command in Genesis is “Let there be light.” Nor is this the only introduction of light in the Genesis creation account, but it is the first, it represents the beginning of the formation of our solar system. And that was ‘The Big Bang’…some 13,700 million years ago. Quite an event…it lasted just 10 to the minus 35th seconds, beginning the universe, generating time and space, as well as all the matter and energy that the universe would ever, ever, contain! Big Bang…explosion….energy….light. But no atoms to form the sun for some time. Light…but no sun? So says science. And so says Genesis. Parker, “The Genesis Enigma,” chapter two.

a. For reference, Genesis 1, verses 1-4: In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. 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. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.

Not totally accurate. In Genesis God created the Earth before he made the Big Bang. Science does not agree.

"In Genesis God created the Earth before he made the Big Bang. "

False, and absurd.

Really? Then how do you interpret this is a quote from your very own post:

Genesis 1, verses 1-4: In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. 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. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.​

You wrote “Let there be light” was ‘The Big Bang’. Please explain.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Actually.....totally accurate, point for point.
Now...about the origin of the universe.....and the fact that modern science now accepts the very same order of events as Genesis.....

1. God’s first command in Genesis is “Let there be light.” Nor is this the only introduction of light in the Genesis creation account, but it is the first, it represents the beginning of the formation of our solar system. And that was ‘The Big Bang’…some 13,700 million years ago. Quite an event…it lasted just 10 to the minus 35th seconds, beginning the universe, generating time and space, as well as all the matter and energy that the universe would ever, ever, contain! Big Bang…explosion….energy….light. But no atoms to form the sun for some time. Light…but no sun? So says science. And so says Genesis. Parker, “The Genesis Enigma,” chapter two.

a. For reference, Genesis 1, verses 1-4: In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. 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. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.

Not totally accurate. In Genesis God created the Earth before he made the Big Bang. Science does not agree.

"In Genesis God created the Earth before he made the Big Bang. "

False, and absurd.

Really? Then how do you interpret this is a quote from your very own post:

Genesis 1, verses 1-4: In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. 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. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.​

You wrote “Let there be light” was ‘The Big Bang’. Please explain.

That is the Big Boom, you dunce.



God created that out of nothing.....



Light was there at the moment of the Big Boom.....but could not be seen from Earth.....


Read carefully:

Genesis 1.2 says there was ‘darkness.’

Theories about the earth’s earliest atmosphere are in flux, but the young earth was bombarded by collisions with other celestial bodies; a dense mixture of gases, dust, and debris enveloped the early earth; and the sun was a considerably dimmer star than it is today. All that rendered the earth’s atmosphere essentially opaque—the “darkness” described in this verse.

“You would not have been able to see much, just clouds covering everything,” is how the early earth was described by Dave Stevenson, a Caltech professor of planetary science. It is also generally believed the earth was nearly or completely covered with water from a very early point. “Early earth was covered in a global ocean and had

no mountains” reads a headline from the British science magazine New Scientist. This is the “surface of the deep” described in this verse.


"Earth’s Water Is Older Than the Sun
The sun, at 4.6 billion years old, predates all the other bodies in our solar system. But it turns out that much of the water we swim in and drink here on Earth is even older.

A new model of the chemistry of the early solar system finds that up to half the water now on Earth was inherited from an abundant supply of interstellar ice as our sun formed. That means our solar system’s moisture wasn’t the result of local conditions in the proto-planetary disk, but rather a regular feature of planetary formation ....

Interstellar ice has a very high ratio of deuterium to hydrogen because it formed in very cold temperatures.

... researchers estimate, 30 to 50 percent of our solar system’s water was already a part of the ancient molecular cloud that spawned the Sun and planets. They published their findings today in the journal Science."
Earth's Water Is Older Than the Sun - D-brief


No light had yet appeared on earth because in earth’s earliest period, the earth’s atmosphere was opaque, either from clouds or cosmological dust and debris, or both. In the words of former MIT physicist and member of the United States Atomic Energy Commission Gerald Schroeder: “There was light, but no sources of light were visible from the earth due to the cloud cover over the still-warm earth. Warm earth = high vapor pressure = clouds.”




And that raises an interesting question: how did Genesis know, more than three thousand years ago, that the nascent planet was submerged in darkness and water?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Here is the answer to those militant secularists, neo-Fascists:

"My Administration is also defending religious liberty, and that includes the Constitutional right to pray in public schools. In America, we do not punish prayer. We do not tear down crosses. We do not ban symbols of faith. We do not muzzle preachers and pastors. In America, we celebrate faith. We cherish religion. We lift our voices in prayer, and we raise our sights to the Glory of God!"
Trump, SOTU 2020

 

[anynameyouwish]

14. “ ”Barr: The Real People Trying To ‘Impose Their Values’ On Others Are ‘Militant Secularists’

It has been long convenient for secularists to insist that it is possible for government to be neutral about religion by imposing their religion on everyone.
…religion is being driven out of the marketplace of ideas and there’s a organized militant secular effort to drive religion out of our lives” “To me the problem today is not that religious people are trying to impose their views on nonreligious people, it’s the opposite — it’s that militant secularists are trying to impose their values on religious people and they’re not accommodating the freedom of religion of people of faith.”
Barr: The People Trying To 'Impose Their Values' Are 'Militant Secularists'




[A.G.] Barr is just a representative of the half of America that believes in natural rights, in a written Constitution that restrains the government, and a God whose universe is explicable, orderly, and undergirds the whole shebang.


Those who embrace a “living Constitution,” on the contrary, despise external rules, order, and anything else that might work to limit their passions, which they sometimes style politics. These are the two polar opposite metaphysical positions that drive our culture clash.


Far worse than the rule of law is the rule of the powerful over the weak. Far worse than the law of God are the so-called laws of men. On one side is freedom. On the other is totalitarianism. It is no irony that the real totalitarians project the label their position deserves onto opponents as a smear.” Barr: The People Trying To 'Impose Their Values' Are 'Militant Secularists'



Far worse than the law of God are the so-called laws of men. On one side is freedom. On the other is totalitarianism.

Yup.....those militant secularists who silence opposing voices.

"are you ready to retract your lie about conservatives, and admit that it is you Fascists who are in favor of suppressing speech that doesn't conform to your views?"


do you realize just how insane a person has to be to work on a daily basis to suppress the speech of everyone you disagree with while claiming THEY are trying to suppress YOUR speech?


it's called...."accusing your enemies of your own crimes"

 

[BlindBoo]

That is the Big Boom, you dunce.



God created that out of nothing.....



Light was there at the moment of the Big Boom.....but could not be seen from Earth.....

There was no light until there were stars. There was no earth when the first stars ignited.

When did the first stars form in the universe?

 

[alang1216]

Actually.....totally accurate, point for point.
Now...about the origin of the universe.....and the fact that modern science now accepts the very same order of events as Genesis.....

1. God’s first command in Genesis is “Let there be light.” Nor is this the only introduction of light in the Genesis creation account, but it is the first, it represents the beginning of the formation of our solar system. And that was ‘The Big Bang’…some 13,700 million years ago. Quite an event…it lasted just 10 to the minus 35th seconds, beginning the universe, generating time and space, as well as all the matter and energy that the universe would ever, ever, contain! Big Bang…explosion….energy….light. But no atoms to form the sun for some time. Light…but no sun? So says science. And so says Genesis. Parker, “The Genesis Enigma,” chapter two.

a. For reference, Genesis 1, verses 1-4: In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. 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. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.

Not totally accurate. In Genesis God created the Earth before he made the Big Bang. Science does not agree.

"In Genesis God created the Earth before he made the Big Bang. "

False, and absurd.

Really? Then how do you interpret this is a quote from your very own post:

Genesis 1, verses 1-4: In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. 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. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.​

You wrote “Let there be light” was ‘The Big Bang’. Please explain.

That is the Big Boom, you dunce.



God created that out of nothing.....



Light was there at the moment of the Big Boom.....but could not be seen from Earth.....


Read carefully:

Genesis 1.2 says there was ‘darkness.’

Theories about the earth’s earliest atmosphere are in flux, but the young earth was bombarded by collisions with other celestial bodies; a dense mixture of gases, dust, and debris enveloped the early earth; and the sun was a considerably dimmer star than it is today. All that rendered the earth’s atmosphere essentially opaque—the “darkness” described in this verse.

“You would not have been able to see much, just clouds covering everything,” is how the early earth was described by Dave Stevenson, a Caltech professor of planetary science. It is also generally believed the earth was nearly or completely covered with water from a very early point. “Early earth was covered in a global ocean and had

no mountains” reads a headline from the British science magazine New Scientist. This is the “surface of the deep” described in this verse.


"Earth’s Water Is Older Than the Sun
The sun, at 4.6 billion years old, predates all the other bodies in our solar system. But it turns out that much of the water we swim in and drink here on Earth is even older.

A new model of the chemistry of the early solar system finds that up to half the water now on Earth was inherited from an abundant supply of interstellar ice as our sun formed. That means our solar system’s moisture wasn’t the result of local conditions in the proto-planetary disk, but rather a regular feature of planetary formation ....

Interstellar ice has a very high ratio of deuterium to hydrogen because it formed in very cold temperatures.

... researchers estimate, 30 to 50 percent of our solar system’s water was already a part of the ancient molecular cloud that spawned the Sun and planets. They published their findings today in the journal Science."
Earth's Water Is Older Than the Sun - D-brief


No light had yet appeared on earth because in earth’s earliest period, the earth’s atmosphere was opaque, either from clouds or cosmological dust and debris, or both. In the words of former MIT physicist and member of the United States Atomic Energy Commission Gerald Schroeder: “There was light, but no sources of light were visible from the earth due to the cloud cover over the still-warm earth. Warm earth = high vapor pressure = clouds.”




And that raises an interesting question: how did Genesis know, more than three thousand years ago, that the nascent planet was submerged in darkness and water?

I love it when you just make stuff up. Big Boom???

Big Boom:

I got my bowl full of Froot Loops
I'm just lookin' for a clean spoon
I got my girl in the other room
Big dynamite, big boom
I got my bowl full of Froot Loops
I'm just lookin' for a clean spoon
I got my girl in the other room
Big dynamite, big boom​

 

[alang1216]

Here is the answer to those militant secularists, neo-Fascists:

"My Administration is also defending religious liberty, and that includes the Constitutional right to pray in public schools. In America, we do not punish prayer. We do not tear down crosses. We do not ban symbols of faith. We do not muzzle preachers and pastors. In America, we celebrate faith. We cherish religion. We lift our voices in prayer, and we raise our sights to the Glory of God!"
Trump, SOTU 2020

Is there a Constitutional right not to have to pray in public schools?

 

[PoliticalChic]

14. “ ”Barr: The Real People Trying To ‘Impose Their Values’ On Others Are ‘Militant Secularists’

It has been long convenient for secularists to insist that it is possible for government to be neutral about religion by imposing their religion on everyone.
…religion is being driven out of the marketplace of ideas and there’s a organized militant secular effort to drive religion out of our lives” “To me the problem today is not that religious people are trying to impose their views on nonreligious people, it’s the opposite — it’s that militant secularists are trying to impose their values on religious people and they’re not accommodating the freedom of religion of people of faith.”
Barr: The People Trying To 'Impose Their Values' Are 'Militant Secularists'




[A.G.] Barr is just a representative of the half of America that believes in natural rights, in a written Constitution that restrains the government, and a God whose universe is explicable, orderly, and undergirds the whole shebang.


Those who embrace a “living Constitution,” on the contrary, despise external rules, order, and anything else that might work to limit their passions, which they sometimes style politics. These are the two polar opposite metaphysical positions that drive our culture clash.


Far worse than the rule of law is the rule of the powerful over the weak. Far worse than the law of God are the so-called laws of men. On one side is freedom. On the other is totalitarianism. It is no irony that the real totalitarians project the label their position deserves onto opponents as a smear.” Barr: The People Trying To 'Impose Their Values' Are 'Militant Secularists'

hsing voices.

"are you ready to retract your lie about conservatives, and admit that it is you Fascists who are in favor of suppressing speech that doesn't conform to your views?"


do you realize just how insane a person has to be to work on a daily basis to suppress the speech of everyone you disagree with while claiming THEY are trying to suppress YOUR speech?


it's called...."accusing your enemies of your own crimes"

I never 'suppress' the speech of those with whom I disagree....I do the very opposite.

Just yesterday I wrote how happy I am to see you posting, as it proves how truly stupid your side is.


Write soon, y'hear!

 

[PoliticalChic]

That is the Big Boom, you dunce.



God created that out of nothing.....



Light was there at the moment of the Big Boom.....but could not be seen from Earth.....

There was no light until there were stars. There was no earth when the first stars ignited.

When did the first stars form in the universe?

False.

Your link is unclickable.


And....if you imagine (I almost said 'think') that your statement is the 'scientific' view....you moron....how would anyone know that????

State the empirical evidence.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Actually.....totally accurate, point for point.
Now...about the origin of the universe.....and the fact that modern science now accepts the very same order of events as Genesis.....

1. God’s first command in Genesis is “Let there be light.” Nor is this the only introduction of light in the Genesis creation account, but it is the first, it represents the beginning of the formation of our solar system. And that was ‘The Big Bang’…some 13,700 million years ago. Quite an event…it lasted just 10 to the minus 35th seconds, beginning the universe, generating time and space, as well as all the matter and energy that the universe would ever, ever, contain! Big Bang…explosion….energy….light. But no atoms to form the sun for some time. Light…but no sun? So says science. And so says Genesis. Parker, “The Genesis Enigma,” chapter two.

a. For reference, Genesis 1, verses 1-4: In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. 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. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.

Not totally accurate. In Genesis God created the Earth before he made the Big Bang. Science does not agree.

"In Genesis God created the Earth before he made the Big Bang. "

False, and absurd.

Really? Then how do you interpret this is a quote from your very own post:

Genesis 1, verses 1-4: In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. 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. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.​

You wrote “Let there be light” was ‘The Big Bang’. Please explain.

That is the Big Boom, you dunce.



God created that out of nothing.....



Light was there at the moment of the Big Boom.....but could not be seen from Earth.....


Read carefully:

Genesis 1.2 says there was ‘darkness.’

Theories about the earth’s earliest atmosphere are in flux, but the young earth was bombarded by collisions with other celestial bodies; a dense mixture of gases, dust, and debris enveloped the early earth; and the sun was a considerably dimmer star than it is today. All that rendered the earth’s atmosphere essentially opaque—the “darkness” described in this verse.

“You would not have been able to see much, just clouds covering everything,” is how the early earth was described by Dave Stevenson, a Caltech professor of planetary science. It is also generally believed the earth was nearly or completely covered with water from a very early point. “Early earth was covered in a global ocean and had

no mountains” reads a headline from the British science magazine New Scientist. This is the “surface of the deep” described in this verse.


"Earth’s Water Is Older Than the Sun
The sun, at 4.6 billion years old, predates all the other bodies in our solar system. But it turns out that much of the water we swim in and drink here on Earth is even older.

A new model of the chemistry of the early solar system finds that up to half the water now on Earth was inherited from an abundant supply of interstellar ice as our sun formed. That means our solar system’s moisture wasn’t the result of local conditions in the proto-planetary disk, but rather a regular feature of planetary formation ....

Interstellar ice has a very high ratio of deuterium to hydrogen because it formed in very cold temperatures.

... researchers estimate, 30 to 50 percent of our solar system’s water was already a part of the ancient molecular cloud that spawned the Sun and planets. They published their findings today in the journal Science."
Earth's Water Is Older Than the Sun - D-brief


No light had yet appeared on earth because in earth’s earliest period, the earth’s atmosphere was opaque, either from clouds or cosmological dust and debris, or both. In the words of former MIT physicist and member of the United States Atomic Energy Commission Gerald Schroeder: “There was light, but no sources of light were visible from the earth due to the cloud cover over the still-warm earth. Warm earth = high vapor pressure = clouds.”




And that raises an interesting question: how did Genesis know, more than three thousand years ago, that the nascent planet was submerged in darkness and water?

I love it when you just make stuff up. Big Boom???

Big Boom:

I got my bowl full of Froot Loops
I'm just lookin' for a clean spoon
I got my girl in the other room
Big dynamite, big boom
I got my bowl full of Froot Loops
I'm just lookin' for a clean spoon
I got my girl in the other room
Big dynamite, big boom​

What a vapid post.....typical for you.


My post quoted two scientists.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Here is the answer to those militant secularists, neo-Fascists:

"My Administration is also defending religious liberty, and that includes the Constitutional right to pray in public schools. In America, we do not punish prayer. We do not tear down crosses. We do not ban symbols of faith. We do not muzzle preachers and pastors. In America, we celebrate faith. We cherish religion. We lift our voices in prayer, and we raise our sights to the Glory of God!"
Trump, SOTU 2020

Is there a Constitutional right not to have to pray in public schools?

Who is demanding that anyone be mandated to pray in school, liar?


More proof that Liberals can't win an argument without lying.

 

[BlindBoo]

That is the Big Boom, you dunce.



God created that out of nothing.....



Light was there at the moment of the Big Boom.....but could not be seen from Earth.....

There was no light until there were stars. There was no earth when the first stars ignited.

When did the first stars form in the universe?

False.

Your link is unclickable.


And....if you imagine (I almost said 'think') that your statement is the 'scientific' view....you moron....how would anyone know that????

State the empirical evidence.

Link worked just fine.. Here's one from SA

The First Stars in the Universe

Dark Ages The study of the early universe is hampered by a lack of direct observations. Astronomers have been able to examine much of the universe’s history by training their telescopes on distant galaxies and quasars that emitted their light billions of years ago. The age of each object can be determined by the redshift of its light, which shows how much the universe has expanded since the light was produced. The oldest galaxies and quasars that have been observed so far date from about a billion years after the big bang (assuming a present age for the universe of 12 billion to 14 billion years). Researchers will need better telescopes to see more distant objects dating from still earlier times.

Cosmologists, however, can make deductions about the early universe based on the cosmic microwave background radiation, which was emitted about 400,000 years after the big bang. The uniformity of this radiation indicates that matter was distributed very smoothly at that time. Because there were no large luminous objects to disturb the primordial soup, it must have remained smooth and featureless for millions of years afterward. As the cosmos expanded, the background radiation redshifted to longer wavelengths and the universe grew increasingly cold and dark. Astronomers have no observations of this dark era. But by a billion years after the big bang, some bright galaxies and quasars had already appeared, so the first stars must have formed sometime before. When did these first luminous objects arise, and how might they have formed?

Many astrophysicists, including Martin Rees of the University of Cambridge and Abraham Loeb of Harvard University, have made important contributions toward solving these problems. The recent studies begin with the standard cosmological models that describe the evolution of the universe following the big bang. Although the early universe was remarkably smooth, the background radiation shows evidence of small-scale density fluctuations—clumps in the primordial soup. The cosmological models predict that these clumps would gradually evolve into gravitationally bound structures. Smaller systems would form first and then merge into larger agglomerations. The denser regions would take the form of a network of filaments, and the first star-forming systems—small protogalaxies—would coalesce at the nodes of this network. In a similar way, the protogalaxies would then merge to form galaxies, and the galaxies would congregate into galaxy clusters. The process is ongoing: although galaxy formation is now mostly complete, galaxies are still assembling into clusters, which are in turn aggregating into a vast filamentary network that stretches across the universe.

According to the cosmological models, the first small systems capable of forming stars should have appeared between 100 million and 250 million years after the big bang. These protogalaxies would have been 100,000 to one million times more massive than the sun and would have measured about 30 to 100 light-years across. These properties are similar to those of the molecular gas clouds in which stars are currently forming in the Milky Way, but the first protogalaxies would have differed in some fundamental ways. For one, they would have consisted mostly of dark matter, the putative elementary particles that are believed to make up about 90 percent of the universe’s mass. In present-day large galaxies, dark matter is segregated from ordinary matter: over time, ordinary matter concentrates in the galaxy’s inner region, whereas the dark matter remains scattered throughout an enormous outer halo. But in the protogalaxies, the ordinary matter would still have been mixed with the dark matter.

The second important difference is that the protogalaxies would have contained no significant amounts of any elements besides hydrogen and helium. The big bang produced hydrogen and helium, but most of the heavier elements are created only by the thermonuclear fusion reactions in stars, so they would not have been present before the first stars had formed.

 

[PoliticalChic]

That is the Big Boom, you dunce.



God created that out of nothing.....



Light was there at the moment of the Big Boom.....but could not be seen from Earth.....

There was no light until there were stars. There was no earth when the first stars ignited.

When did the first stars form in the universe?

False.

Your link is unclickable.


And....if you imagine (I almost said 'think') that your statement is the 'scientific' view....you moron....how would anyone know that????

State the empirical evidence.

Link worked just fine.. Here's one from SA

The First Stars in the Universe

Dark Ages The study of the early universe is hampered by a lack of direct observations. Astronomers have been able to examine much of the universe’s history by training their telescopes on distant galaxies and quasars that emitted their light billions of years ago. The age of each object can be determined by the redshift of its light, which shows how much the universe has expanded since the light was produced. The oldest galaxies and quasars that have been observed so far date from about a billion years after the big bang (assuming a present age for the universe of 12 billion to 14 billion years). Researchers will need better telescopes to see more distant objects dating from still earlier times.

Cosmologists, however, can make deductions about the early universe based on the cosmic microwave background radiation, which was emitted about 400,000 years after the big bang. The uniformity of this radiation indicates that matter was distributed very smoothly at that time. Because there were no large luminous objects to disturb the primordial soup, it must have remained smooth and featureless for millions of years afterward. As the cosmos expanded, the background radiation redshifted to longer wavelengths and the universe grew increasingly cold and dark. Astronomers have no observations of this dark era. But by a billion years after the big bang, some bright galaxies and quasars had already appeared, so the first stars must have formed sometime before. When did these first luminous objects arise, and how might they have formed?

Many astrophysicists, including Martin Rees of the University of Cambridge and Abraham Loeb of Harvard University, have made important contributions toward solving these problems. The recent studies begin with the standard cosmological models that describe the evolution of the universe following the big bang. Although the early universe was remarkably smooth, the background radiation shows evidence of small-scale density fluctuations—clumps in the primordial soup. The cosmological models predict that these clumps would gradually evolve into gravitationally bound structures. Smaller systems would form first and then merge into larger agglomerations. The denser regions would take the form of a network of filaments, and the first star-forming systems—small protogalaxies—would coalesce at the nodes of this network. In a similar way, the protogalaxies would then merge to form galaxies, and the galaxies would congregate into galaxy clusters. The process is ongoing: although galaxy formation is now mostly complete, galaxies are still assembling into clusters, which are in turn aggregating into a vast filamentary network that stretches across the universe.

According to the cosmological models, the first small systems capable of forming stars should have appeared between 100 million and 250 million years after the big bang. These protogalaxies would have been 100,000 to one million times more massive than the sun and would have measured about 30 to 100 light-years across. These properties are similar to those of the molecular gas clouds in which stars are currently forming in the Milky Way, but the first protogalaxies would have differed in some fundamental ways. For one, they would have consisted mostly of dark matter, the putative elementary particles that are believed to make up about 90 percent of the universe’s mass. In present-day large galaxies, dark matter is segregated from ordinary matter: over time, ordinary matter concentrates in the galaxy’s inner region, whereas the dark matter remains scattered throughout an enormous outer halo. But in the protogalaxies, the ordinary matter would still have been mixed with the dark matter.

The second important difference is that the protogalaxies would have contained no significant amounts of any elements besides hydrogen and helium. The big bang produced hydrogen and helium, but most of the heavier elements are created only by the thermonuclear fusion reactions in stars, so they would not have been present before the first stars had formed.

Thank you.


Now.....why don't you see through this: "Cosmologists, however, can make deductions ...."

It means that there is no more reason to believe what you wrote, than what appears in Genesis.

Science is not conjecture and consensus.....it is based on evidence and experimentation.

A large number of 'scientists' are atheist Marxists.....who will convince the clueless who fear to question their pronouncements....their "just so stories."


Here is an admission, an example:

To correctly understand why Darwinism is given the appreciation it truly does not deserve, consider this admission:

“We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs,” the geneticist Richard Lewontin remarked equably in The New York Review of Books, “in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories.” We are to put up with science’s unsubstantiated just-so stories because, Lewontin explains, “we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door!”


"...the patent absurdity of some of its constructs..."

He's calling you a fool.



If you care to see how far they go to dissuade folks like you from religion....pick up a copy of

A physicist claiming the universe suddenly materialized from nothing.

I bet you're buying it, too.

 

[alang1216]

Not totally accurate. In Genesis God created the Earth before he made the Big Bang. Science does not agree.

"In Genesis God created the Earth before he made the Big Bang. "

False, and absurd.

Really? Then how do you interpret this is a quote from your very own post:

Genesis 1, verses 1-4: In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. 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. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.​

You wrote “Let there be light” was ‘The Big Bang’. Please explain.

That is the Big Boom, you dunce.



God created that out of nothing.....



Light was there at the moment of the Big Boom.....but could not be seen from Earth.....


Read carefully:

Genesis 1.2 says there was ‘darkness.’

Theories about the earth’s earliest atmosphere are in flux, but the young earth was bombarded by collisions with other celestial bodies; a dense mixture of gases, dust, and debris enveloped the early earth; and the sun was a considerably dimmer star than it is today. All that rendered the earth’s atmosphere essentially opaque—the “darkness” described in this verse.

“You would not have been able to see much, just clouds covering everything,” is how the early earth was described by Dave Stevenson, a Caltech professor of planetary science. It is also generally believed the earth was nearly or completely covered with water from a very early point. “Early earth was covered in a global ocean and had

no mountains” reads a headline from the British science magazine New Scientist. This is the “surface of the deep” described in this verse.


"Earth’s Water Is Older Than the Sun
The sun, at 4.6 billion years old, predates all the other bodies in our solar system. But it turns out that much of the water we swim in and drink here on Earth is even older.

A new model of the chemistry of the early solar system finds that up to half the water now on Earth was inherited from an abundant supply of interstellar ice as our sun formed. That means our solar system’s moisture wasn’t the result of local conditions in the proto-planetary disk, but rather a regular feature of planetary formation ....

Interstellar ice has a very high ratio of deuterium to hydrogen because it formed in very cold temperatures.

... researchers estimate, 30 to 50 percent of our solar system’s water was already a part of the ancient molecular cloud that spawned the Sun and planets. They published their findings today in the journal Science."
Earth's Water Is Older Than the Sun - D-brief


No light had yet appeared on earth because in earth’s earliest period, the earth’s atmosphere was opaque, either from clouds or cosmological dust and debris, or both. In the words of former MIT physicist and member of the United States Atomic Energy Commission Gerald Schroeder: “There was light, but no sources of light were visible from the earth due to the cloud cover over the still-warm earth. Warm earth = high vapor pressure = clouds.”




And that raises an interesting question: how did Genesis know, more than three thousand years ago, that the nascent planet was submerged in darkness and water?

I love it when you just make stuff up. Big Boom???

Big Boom:

I got my bowl full of Froot Loops
I'm just lookin' for a clean spoon
I got my girl in the other room
Big dynamite, big boom
I got my bowl full of Froot Loops
I'm just lookin' for a clean spoon
I got my girl in the other room
Big dynamite, big boom​

What a vapid post.....typical for you.


My post quoted two scientists.

Hey, you brought up the Big Boom, not me. I hope you didn't hurt yourself dancing around what you had written. I love when you work backwards from a religious or political truth and distort the facts to fit it.

‘The Big Bang’ lasted just 10 to the minus 35th seconds. From it everything in the universe was formed. The BB was an instantaneous event, a flash of light that was gone before the earth could have formed. How could that be the light of Verse 3? Don't hurt yourself.

 

[PoliticalChic]

"In Genesis God created the Earth before he made the Big Bang. "

False, and absurd.

Really? Then how do you interpret this is a quote from your very own post:

Genesis 1, verses 1-4: In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. 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. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.​

You wrote “Let there be light” was ‘The Big Bang’. Please explain.

That is the Big Boom, you dunce.



God created that out of nothing.....



Light was there at the moment of the Big Boom.....but could not be seen from Earth.....


Read carefully:

Genesis 1.2 says there was ‘darkness.’

Theories about the earth’s earliest atmosphere are in flux, but the young earth was bombarded by collisions with other celestial bodies; a dense mixture of gases, dust, and debris enveloped the early earth; and the sun was a considerably dimmer star than it is today. All that rendered the earth’s atmosphere essentially opaque—the “darkness” described in this verse.

“You would not have been able to see much, just clouds covering everything,” is how the early earth was described by Dave Stevenson, a Caltech professor of planetary science. It is also generally believed the earth was nearly or completely covered with water from a very early point. “Early earth was covered in a global ocean and had

no mountains” reads a headline from the British science magazine New Scientist. This is the “surface of the deep” described in this verse.


"Earth’s Water Is Older Than the Sun
The sun, at 4.6 billion years old, predates all the other bodies in our solar system. But it turns out that much of the water we swim in and drink here on Earth is even older.

A new model of the chemistry of the early solar system finds that up to half the water now on Earth was inherited from an abundant supply of interstellar ice as our sun formed. That means our solar system’s moisture wasn’t the result of local conditions in the proto-planetary disk, but rather a regular feature of planetary formation ....

Interstellar ice has a very high ratio of deuterium to hydrogen because it formed in very cold temperatures.

... researchers estimate, 30 to 50 percent of our solar system’s water was already a part of the ancient molecular cloud that spawned the Sun and planets. They published their findings today in the journal Science."
Earth's Water Is Older Than the Sun - D-brief


No light had yet appeared on earth because in earth’s earliest period, the earth’s atmosphere was opaque, either from clouds or cosmological dust and debris, or both. In the words of former MIT physicist and member of the United States Atomic Energy Commission Gerald Schroeder: “There was light, but no sources of light were visible from the earth due to the cloud cover over the still-warm earth. Warm earth = high vapor pressure = clouds.”




And that raises an interesting question: how did Genesis know, more than three thousand years ago, that the nascent planet was submerged in darkness and water?

I love it when you just make stuff up. Big Boom???

Big Boom:

I got my bowl full of Froot Loops
I'm just lookin' for a clean spoon
I got my girl in the other room
Big dynamite, big boom
I got my bowl full of Froot Loops
I'm just lookin' for a clean spoon
I got my girl in the other room
Big dynamite, big boom​

What a vapid post.....typical for you.


My post quoted two scientists.

Hey, you brought up the Big Boom, not me. I hope you didn't hurt yourself dancing around what you had written. I love when you work backwards from a religious or political truth and distort the facts to fit it.

‘The Big Bang’ lasted just 10 to the minus 35th seconds. From it everything in the universe was formed. The BB was an instantaneous event, a flash of light that was gone before the earth could have formed. How could that be the light of Verse 3? Don't hurt yourself.

Easy peasy, lemon squeasy....


3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day."
Earth's Water Is Older Than the Sun - D-brief


Throughout history, people have understood “Let there be light” to mean “God created light.” And that is an entirely legitimate translation—“Let there be” (yihee) can mean “Come into being.” But there is no verb here meaning “create,” “make,” or “form.” And that may strongly suggest another meaning. There are scientists who believe in the Bible who understand “Let there be light” to mean that God did not create or make light in this verse; He made light appear. (Prager,"The Rational Bible")

No light had yet appeared on earth because in earth’s earliest period, the earth’s atmosphere was opaque, either from clouds or cosmological dust and debris, or both. In the words of former MIT physicist and member of the United States Atom- ic Energy Commission Gerald Schroeder: “There was light, but no sources of light were visible from the earth due to the cloud cover over the still-warm earth. Warm earth = high vapor pressure = clouds.”

…with His words “let there be light,” the atmosphere began to clear, and the light of the sun (but not the sun itself) became visible from the surface of the earth—just as it is visible to us when the skies are overcast: we see the light, but not its source. Thus, …, the sun already exists (but is not seen until Day Four).



NEXT!

 

[BlindBoo]

"In Genesis God created the Earth before he made the Big Bang. "

False, and absurd.

Really? Then how do you interpret this is a quote from your very own post:

Genesis 1, verses 1-4: In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. 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. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.​

You wrote “Let there be light” was ‘The Big Bang’. Please explain.

That is the Big Boom, you dunce.



God created that out of nothing.....



Light was there at the moment of the Big Boom.....but could not be seen from Earth.....


Read carefully:

Genesis 1.2 says there was ‘darkness.’

Theories about the earth’s earliest atmosphere are in flux, but the young earth was bombarded by collisions with other celestial bodies; a dense mixture of gases, dust, and debris enveloped the early earth; and the sun was a considerably dimmer star than it is today. All that rendered the earth’s atmosphere essentially opaque—the “darkness” described in this verse.

“You would not have been able to see much, just clouds covering everything,” is how the early earth was described by Dave Stevenson, a Caltech professor of planetary science. It is also generally believed the earth was nearly or completely covered with water from a very early point. “Early earth was covered in a global ocean and had

no mountains” reads a headline from the British science magazine New Scientist. This is the “surface of the deep” described in this verse.


"Earth’s Water Is Older Than the Sun
The sun, at 4.6 billion years old, predates all the other bodies in our solar system. But it turns out that much of the water we swim in and drink here on Earth is even older.

A new model of the chemistry of the early solar system finds that up to half the water now on Earth was inherited from an abundant supply of interstellar ice as our sun formed. That means our solar system’s moisture wasn’t the result of local conditions in the proto-planetary disk, but rather a regular feature of planetary formation ....

Interstellar ice has a very high ratio of deuterium to hydrogen because it formed in very cold temperatures.

... researchers estimate, 30 to 50 percent of our solar system’s water was already a part of the ancient molecular cloud that spawned the Sun and planets. They published their findings today in the journal Science."
Earth's Water Is Older Than the Sun - D-brief


No light had yet appeared on earth because in earth’s earliest period, the earth’s atmosphere was opaque, either from clouds or cosmological dust and debris, or both. In the words of former MIT physicist and member of the United States Atomic Energy Commission Gerald Schroeder: “There was light, but no sources of light were visible from the earth due to the cloud cover over the still-warm earth. Warm earth = high vapor pressure = clouds.”




And that raises an interesting question: how did Genesis know, more than three thousand years ago, that the nascent planet was submerged in darkness and water?

I love it when you just make stuff up. Big Boom???

Big Boom:

I got my bowl full of Froot Loops
I'm just lookin' for a clean spoon
I got my girl in the other room
Big dynamite, big boom
I got my bowl full of Froot Loops
I'm just lookin' for a clean spoon
I got my girl in the other room
Big dynamite, big boom​

What a vapid post.....typical for you.


My post quoted two scientists.

Hey, you brought up the Big Boom, not me. I hope you didn't hurt yourself dancing around what you had written. I love when you work backwards from a religious or political truth and distort the facts to fit it.

‘The Big Bang’ lasted just 10 to the minus 35th seconds. From it everything in the universe was formed. The BB was an instantaneous event, a flash of light that was gone before the earth could have formed. How could that be the light of Verse 3? Don't hurt yourself.

Not sure there was even a flash.

When was the first light in the universe?

Because the universe has the conditions of the core of a star, it had the temperature and pressure to actually fuse hydrogen into helium and other heavier elements. Based on the ratio of those elements we see in the universe today: 74% hydrogen, 25% helium and 1% miscellaneous, we know how long the universe was in this "whole universe is a star" condition.


It lasted about 17 minutes. From 3 minutes after the Big Bang until about 20 minutes after the Big Bang. In those few, short moments, clowns gathered all the helium they would ever need to haunt us with a lifetime of balloon animals.

The fusion process generates photons of gamma radiation. In the core of our sun, these photons bounce from atom to atom, eventually making their way out of the core, through the sun's radiative zone, and eventually out into space. This process can take tens of thousands of years. But in the early universe, there was nowhere for these primordial photons of gamma radiation to go. Everywhere was more hot, dense universe.

The universe was continuing to expand, and finally, just a few hundred thousand years after the Big Bang, the universe was finally cool enough for these atoms of hydrogen and helium to attract free electrons, turning them into neutral atoms.

This was the moment of first light in the universe, between 240,000 and 300,000 years after the Big Bang, known as the Era of Recombination. The first time that photons could rest for a second, attached as electrons to atoms. It was at this point that the universe went from being totally opaque, to transparent.