Scientific Facts: Truth in Science; Big Bang Theory Facts; God as Creator

Questions about Science:

Truth in Science; Big Bang Theory Facts; God as Creator

God as Creator. All things denote there is a God; yea, even the earth, and all things that are upon the face of it, yea, and its motion, yea, and also all the planets which move in their regular form do witness that there is a Supreme Creator. ~Alma 30:44

Rush Limbaugh

 

Many Scientists reject God as Creator

There is no God in scientific… There is no God. (interruption) Huh-uh. No, God didn’t put it there, ’cause if God put it there then it’s somewhere other than the universe, and since God is not scientific — that’s religious — the scientific community does not go there. Professor Hawking didn’t. Professor Hawking said the notion of an afterlife is a fairy tale. Professor Hawking said that the notion of a heaven or an afterlife is… He said the human brain is nothing but a computer, and it’s gonna fail and shut down when its components cease to exist.

There’s no afterlife for broken-down computers, for failed computers. This is what Professor Hawking said. So this is it. This… Do you think Stephen Hawking had every question he had answered? I guarantee you he didn’t. He died still thirsting and questing for knowledge. We all do and we all will. And remaining, there will always be questions that we can’t answer. Not on earth, anyway. Not as we exist today. We’ll never be able to ever to answer them.

Colonize . . .Where?

A guy says to me, “We’re toast in 200 years unless we figure out how to colonize X.” What? The moon? Mars? We’re gonna have to create global warming someplace, wherever we go, to be able to live there. You ever stop to think about that? I mean, and everybody swoons and thinks, “Wow, man! He’s so far ahead of all of us.” And I don’t doubt that, in his field, there’s no question he was light years ahead of everybody and there’s no way to prove it. We just all accepted it. But this colonizing someplace else?

It’s not just him. Elon Musk is on this. You know, all of these Silicon Valley brain wizards say, “The earth is gonna destroy us! Global warming, climate change are gonna destroy us. We’re gonna run out of this, run out of that.” We’re not running out of anything. Natural resources are increasing. Life expectancy is increasing. Life on earth has never been better than it is today in any statistical way that you want to measure it, and yet the doom-and-gloom crowd says, “Two hundred years! Two hundred…” That means the people who are gonna eventually colonize have not been born yet.

“How are we gonna get two billion people there? How are we gonna get 500,000 people there?” You know what Musk said? Musk said he’s gonna have a Mars trip next year, and if you sign up you’re likely to die making the trip. Well, sign me up! Put me on that first vessel. I can’t wait to die in the quest to colonize Mars. People swoon. “Oh, my!” because he can make a rocket land back on earth just as it took off. You know what? I’m going to go on Musk’s first mission to Mars. I will gladly die to facilitate this effort to colonize someplace.

Why would you go on a trip to Mars if you’re likely to die on the trip? Wouldn’t that kind of mean failure if you don’t get there and you’re not able to start…? (interruption) Yeah. Okay. Yeah, but Columbus didn’t know where he was going. We do know where we’re going. That makes us dumber than Columbus. We know we’re going to nothing! We know we’re going to where we can’t live. We know we’re going to where there isn’t a damn thing to keep us alive and we’re gonna do it anyway.

Columbus at least, you know, back then they thought the earth was flat (some idiots still do) and they feared falling off the edge of the earth. That’s the thing he faced. Columbus didn’t even know where he was when he got there, and look what they say about him now. Can you imagine the reports on Mars in 200 years about Elon Musk, what they’re gonna say about him if he does get there and colonize this place? They’re wanting to take down every Columbus statue all over the country now for racism, sexism, bigotry, homophobia, anti-Italian, whatever it is, prejudice.

Big Bang Theory Facts

I have all kinds of… You know, the Big Bang. Let’s look at the Big Bang. People accept that the Big Bang is how all of this began. Now, again, folks, I have a belief. One of the ways I have proven to myself… ‘Cause I think we’ve all tried to do this. We accept the faith, but then we still test it. As long as there are questions that we can ask… Meaning, we have been created with the intelligence to create or ask these questions, this quest for knowledge.

If there are questions we can ask to which we will never have the answers, then that gives me confidence that

there is more than just life on earth.

What is the point of creating beings who can ponder such places if they don’t exist? Certainly the Big Bang. Again, I’ll admit I’m just a college dropout radio guy, okay? I’m not a professional physicist. I’m not a professional scientist. I do not own a lab coat, white or light blue. So they tell me that the Big Bang is where everything began. Hawking says it’s the Big Bang and we’re still expanding.

The Big Bang was the size of what’s in a thimble. Massive energy we can’t even comprehend. Boom! Still expanding. But gravity and other stellar forces are going to cause the universe to contract. Once it expands, it’s gonna reach its max size and come back down to earth, so to speak, and we’re all gonna end up back in a thimble. Except you and I won’t be alive when that happens, and our sun will burn out. Now, I have what I think are common-sense questions. Okay, the Big Bang. There was this whatever-size — call it a golf ball-, tennis ball-size — piece of matter that big banged and we’re all here.

Where was it?

Where was this glob of matter that banged that created the universe?

Where was it?

No, no, no. You can’t say, “It was in the void.” You can’t say it was in another dimension, parallel or otherwise, astral plane. It had to be somewhere. Where was it? What was around it? Could you see it? Could somebody see this golf-ball-size bit of energy if they were not part of that? Could you be somewhere and see it? Could you be somewhere and witness this Big Bang instead of being a part of it? If so, where were you? Well, since nobody could see it, how the hell do they know it really happened?

But I’m not supposed to ask that. Another question. I ask scientists these questions. They cannot answer them for me. Another question I have: The universe. Well, definition of the universe is everything that is, but it has to be somewhere. Where is it? Can you get outside the universe and look at the universe as a non-part of it? If you can’t, then where is it? Space-time? What is space-time? Is that the speed the USS Enterprise moves through the galaxies with? What is space…?

My question is, “Where is it? Where is the universe?”

Big Bang Theory Facts: Theory vs. Law

Hawking’s Theory of Spontaneous Self-Assembly violates known laws of Physics

RUSH: Martin in Gainesville, Florida, you’re next. It’s great to have you, sir.

CALLER: Thank you, Rush. I wanted to touch on a couple of points you made regarding Stephen Hawking and the Big Bang Theory. For all of his intellect and all of his intelligence and knowledge,

his premise about the spontaneous self-assembly of matter steps on the a priori laws — not theories, laws — of physics that says that matter and energy don’t spontaneously come from nowhere; magically, they’re there.

So your notion that this tennis ball-sized bit of matter that represents all of the universe just came from nowhere — magically, it was there (nothing put it there; it wasn’t created) and then it just all of a sudden it just exploded with no external source of energy) — defies the laws of physics. Not the theories of physics, the basic laws. When you base your premise by trampling on the underpinnings of the laws of physics, what you say holds no water. It’s a theory based on a fallacy that the basic laws are not true.

CALLER: I’m a botanist and a high school science teacher. I’ve got several degrees in botany. I love science and I read and pay attention to a lot of things that go on in the scientific community.

Why Youth Need to Understand Biblical Creation  Click Here

Advertisements

Scientific Facts: Truth about Climate Change, Climate Change Hoax

Scientific Facts:

Truth about Climate Change, Climate Change Hoax

Lunacy from the Climate Stack

Rush Limbaugh

In science there is no consensus because scientific reality is not up for a vote.

Not Scientific Fact

Now to the Climate Change Stack. I’ve been alluding to this, and here’s the value of this. You know, when you boil it down, folks, what is climate change? Climate change is a political issue. It is not scientific fact. It is not settled science. It requires them to say they have a “consensus of scientists” that agree that X = Y = Z.

But in science there is no consensus because scientific reality is not up for a vote.

  • Water is H2O. It’s not something else.
  • The earth is round, it’s not flat, and if somebody thinks it’s flat and you put it up for a vote, it doesn’t mean that the earth is round because there’s a consensus of scientists who say so. It’s round because it is and it has been established and proven scientifically.

Well, climate change can’t be proven scientifically because the predictions of it say it will not happen for the next 30 to 40 years. It’s all computer models.

There is no empirical data.

There is none. These people don’t realize it but they tell us climate change is gonna happen the next 30 to 50 years, maybe even the end of this century.

 

Other Climate Change Hoax Lunacies

STUDY: Concern Over Climate Change Linked to Depression, Anxiety — ‘Restless nights, feelings of loneliness and lethargy.

Cleaning Up Air Pollution May Strengthen Global Warming.”

FOXNews: CNN Claim that an Unmonitored Asteroid Could Slam into Earth During Government Shutdown is Debunked

Wikipedia Censorship

Wikipedia Erases Record of Accomplished Scientist — ‘Censored’ for His Intelligent Design Position

 

Gallery

Culture Wars: Scientific Facts about Transgender Facts, Child Abuse

This gallery contains 2 photos.

Culture Wars: Scientific Facts about Transgender Facts, Child Abuse Pediatrician drops a bomb on idea that transgenderism is real — completely destroys it with truth A pediatrician recently dismantled the cultural theory about transgenderism in kids. Chris Enloe A pediatrician … Continue reading

Scientific Facts: Evolutionary Theory Debunked—again; Truth About Climate Change; Truth About Drugs, Legalized Pot in Colorado

Scientific Facts:

Evolutionary Theory Debunked—again

Oops! Scientific retraction a major blow to evolutionary theory

Experts admit they were ‘totally blinded by our belief’

Biblical Worldview. The more honest research that scientists do, the more it confirms Intelligent Design. Truth Matters.~C.D.

It was heralded as decisive proof of the theory of evolution. But Harvard biologist and Nobel Prize laureate Jack Szostak now has retracted a major paper that claimed to explain one of the most important questions about the origin of human life.

In 2016, Szostak published a paper claiming he had found a way for ribonucleic acid (RNA) to replicate itself.

Many proponents of evolutionary theory believe RNA was one of the first molecules to develop. However, RNA requires its own enzymes to replicate.

Szostak and others were looking for evidence of “non-enzymatic replication of RNA,” which could supposedly assemble by irradiating materials that would have been present on Earth in an earlier time.

Find the REAL story at the WND Superstore, in “Eden to Evil,” “Biblical Creationism,” “Kent Hovind’s Creation Seminar,” “In Six Days,” “Scientific Creationism” and more.

If this could be created, it would show RNA could copy itself and could have evolved before DNA or proteins, bolstering the naturalistic explanation of life’s origins.

However, Szostak recently retracted his paper after colleague Tivoli Olsen couldn’t replicate the findings. Szostak said the debacle was “definitely embarrassing.”

Scientific Method Neglected

“In retrospect, we were totally blinded by our belief [in our findings] … we were not as careful or rigorous as we should have been (and as Tivoli was) in interpreting these experiments,” Szostak told the publication Retraction Watch.

http://www.wnd.com/2018/01/oops-scientific-retraction-a-major-blow-to-evolution-theory/

 

Truth about Climate Change:

Forest Fires and Climate Change policies

Rush Limbaugh

About those forest fires. One other quick observation about this. You may be shocked to learn that a state like Georgia is more densely forested than California. I’m not talking about total acreage. I’m talking about forestation per acre. Here’s the difference. In Georgia, where they have much more forestation as a percentage of the state than in California, do you ever hear about these fires? Very rarely.

Do you ever see scenes from Georgia or other southeastern states with — fly over some of these states, you can’t even see the roads beneath them, the forests are so thick, including in upstate New York, it’s incredible. You wonder how whatever’s below the forest ever gets any sunlight. It’s thick as hell. You know what the difference is? In Georgia and a lot of places the southeast, most of that is privately owned. (interruption) What? No, it’s not rainfall.

It’s private ownership versus state ownership.

In California the state owns it and you’ve got idiots thinking that it is against nature to clear out deadwood, which is timber for fires, kindling. If you have wackos who think doing anything to prevent fires from spreading or growing or even starting is a violation of nature, well, then I’m sorry, you’re cooking your own goose.

But privately owned land, the people that own that land have a much greater sense of worth and value. They protect it, they clear it, they take the stuff out of it that could cause a fire to spread if it starts. None of that happens in California because they’re run by a bunch of left-wing lunatics. And so when these fires start out there, coupled with the Santa Ana winds, when they happen, much of this forestation is literal kindling wood because they’re not allowed to clear it out. It’s considered a violation.

In some of these western states, the leftists, the environmentalists don’t even want you putting out a fire because that’s artificial. A fire starts, it’s natural. What burns is natural. The more it burns, the better for the stupid climate change agenda that they’ve got. Then you couple that with a governor telling people that live there, “Sorry. New normal. Can’t do anything about it. Climate Change.” People that vote for people like that deserve to be paying higher taxes because of the stupidity, if you ask me.

If Global Warming Were Science, It Wouldn’t Need a PR Campaign

 

Truth About Drugs:

Stoned: How Colorado’s 5 Years of Legalized Pot Is ‘Devastating Communities’

Dale Hurd

CBN

This week marks the fifth anniversary of Colorado’s legalization of the commercial marijuana trade, and the reviews aren’t good.

An editorial in the Colorado Springs Gazette reports, “Five years of retail pot coincide with five years of a homelessness growth rate that ranks among the highest rates in the country. Directors of homeless shelters, and people who live on the streets, tell us homeless substance abusers migrate here for easy access to pot.”

The paper says, “Five years of Big Marijuana ushered in a doubling in the number of drivers involved in fatal crashes who tested positive for marijuana, based on research by the pro-legalization Denver Post. Five years of commercial pot have been five years of more marijuana in schools than teachers and administrators ever feared.”

Rocky Mountain PBS reports that an investigation in 2016 showed that “drug violations reported by Colorado’s K-12 schools have increased 45 percent in the past four years, even as the combined number of all other violations has fallen.”

The investigation found that drug violations by high school aged students had increased by 71 percent since legalization.

Colorado ranks first in the country for marijuana use among teens, according to the National Survey on Drug Use and Health.

The head of Colorado’s Marijuana Accountability Coalition said, “It’s one thing to decriminalize marijuana, it’s an entirely different thing to legalize an industry that has commercialized a drug that is devastating our kids and devastating whole communities.”

The Gazette editorial concludes, “Commercial pot’s five-year anniversary is an odious occasion for those who want safer streets, healthier kids and less suffering associated with substance abuse.”

A father reads to his three young children from the Holy Bible.

Are you concerned about your children’s future?

How to keep your kids healthier, guard against substance abuse, and have more peace of mind