300,000,000,000,000,000,000,000. That's 300 sextillion stars in the Universe. Think we're alone?

Well, we're here... and that's all we have. Ever.

So, I take it that you've never read the bible, or that (if you have) you certainly haven't understood it.

oh, i wasnt agreeing with that individual, i was simply speechless, thus the "............"

All we have as proof ***

None of them want to waste the time.

I think we are not alone ... but I also think those out there are too far away to visit us.

I am looking forward to the day when we atheists start to slaughter the Religitards.

Let me guess east german who was abused behind the iron curtain ?

Evidence for a Young World/Universe
by Dr. Russell Humphreys, Ph.D., ICR associate professor of physics

1. Galaxies wind themselves up too fast.
2. Too few supernova remnants.
3. Comets disintegrate too quickly.
4. Not enough mud on the sea floor.
5. Not enough sodium in the sea.
6. The earth’s magnetic field is decaying too fast.
7. Many strata are too tightly bent.
8. Biological material decays too fast.
9. Fossil radioactivity shortens geologic “ages” to a few years.
10. Too much helium in minerals.
11. Too much carbon 14 in deep geologic strata.
12. Not enough Stone Age skeletons.
13. Agriculture is too recent.
14. History is too short.
15. Major waterfall erosion rates.
16. Coral reef growth rate.
17. Continent erosion.
[link to www.icr.org]
101 evidences for a young age of the earth and the universe
[link to creation.com]








Babylonian Astronomy
[link to en.wikipedia.org]







ATHEISM from the the Jesuits
[link to atheists.org]
[link to en.wikipedia.org]

YES I do........

""There are 900,000 species living in the water. There are also 2,000,000 nonmoving living entities (sthavara), such as trees and plants. There are also 1,100,000 species of insects and reptiles, and there are 1,000,000 species of birds. As far as quadrupeds are concerned, there are 3,000,000 varieties, and there are 400,000 human species.""

Sri Caitanya Caritamrta Madhya 19.138

Accept the Truth, reject the new world order who teach these pagan lies in their government schools and controlled media!
...
..
.

Claim:
Billions of years ago something close to nothing exploded and formed everything in the universe including you and I.


Reply:
This is pure dogma. There are many conflicting and contradicting data not even addressed making the entire theory or belief in 'big bang' impossible.


What we see in the universe is great order not disorder that come from explosions. Planets with moons and galaxies are round and rotate in an orderly fashion. Meteors, asteroids and comets on the otherhand are not round. All are claimed to be similar ages.


THE BIG BANG EXPLOSION


1. - The Big Bang theory is based on theoretical extremes. It may look good in math calculations, but it can’t actually happen. A tiny bit of nothing packed so tightly together that it blew up and produced all the matter in the universe. Seriously now, this is a fairy tale. It is a bunch of armchair calculations, and nothing else.

The planets and solar systems would not be the logical result of any explosion, indeed, it has not been repeated in any lab.

2. - Such an equation would have produced not a universe but a hole. Roger L. St. Peter in 1974 developed a complicated mathematical equation that showed that the theorized Big Bang could not have exploded outward into hydrogen and helium. In reality, St. Peter says the theoretical explosion (if one could possibly take place) would fall back on itself and make a theoretical black hole! This means that one imaginary object would swallow another one!

3. - There is not enough antimatter in the universe. This is a big problem for the theorists. The original Big Bang would have produced equal amounts of positive matter (matter) and negative matter (antimatter). But only small amounts of antimatter exist. There should be as much antimatter as matter—if the Big Bang was true.

"Since matter and antimatter are equivalent in all respects but that of electromagnetic charge oppositeness, any force [the Big Bang] that would create one should have to create the other, and the universe should be made of equal quantities of each. This is a dilemma. Theory tells us there should be antimatter out there, and observation refuses to back it up." —Isaac Asimov, Asimov’s New Guide to Science, p. 343.

"We are pretty sure from our observations that the universe today contains matter, but very little if any antimatter." —Victor Weisskopf, "The Origin of the Universe," American Scientist, 71, p. 479.

4. - The antimatter from the Big Bang would have destroyed all the regular matter. This fact is well-known to physicists. As soon as the two are produced in the laboratory, they instantly come together and annihilate one another.

We have mentioned a few reasons why matter could not be made by a supposed Big Bang. But now we will discuss what would happen IF it actually had.

Many more problems with the big bang theory and stellar evolution
[link to evolutionfacts.com]


Facts vs their interpretation
Interview with Dr. John Hartnett in Creation magazine called Exploding the big bang!

When we view distant stars that are millions of light-years away from the earth, many folk, including Christians, have trouble accepting the biblical account that God created the universe about 6,000 years ago. But believing the Bible right from the start is not a problem for John, which puts him at odds with his evolutionary counterparts.

Often they will accuse him of denying reality (‘look, we can see it—it’s obvious’). But John explains that when looking at the universe, it’s no different to looking at the fossil record. ‘It’s the interpretation of the evidence’, he says. ‘Sure, distant stars and galaxies might be millions of light-years away, but that doesn’t mean that it took the light millions of years, by our standards, to get here. A light-year is a measurement of distance, not time. In other words, it’s just an expression used to tell us how far away something is—not how long it took the light to get here.’

Big bang founded on unprovable assumptions

Interestingly, most people think that the big bang has already been worked out, but they don’t realize that there are differing versions of the big bang model—and not everyone agrees. By inserting a few unprovable assumptions at your starting point, you can end up with virtually any model you like. The big bang assumes that the universe has no centre or edge. Not only is this not proven, some recent research on redshift patterns have badly damaged its credibility by indicating that our galaxy is at, or near to, the centre of the universe.

‘What I really find amusing’, he says, ‘is the way people from various other fields of science often quote the big bang as if it’s set in stone. I don’t wish to sound unkind, but because they are not experts in this field, many of them have no idea what the big bang is really all about and misunderstand it.’

In fact, John thinks this is an exciting time to be a Christian, particularly in the area of cosmology. He thinks that Dr Russell Humphreys’ book Starlight and Time has broken new ground for creation researchers in this area.

‘What Humphreys has done’, he says, ‘is show us another parameter of something that most people view as a constant, and that is time itself. Using Einstein’s Theory of General Relativity, he has shown how time can vary depending on your position in space—it affects your viewpoint. Time is slowed by gravitational forces. A clock at sea level has been shown to run more slowly than one on top of a mountain, because the one at sea level is affected by more gravity. This is an effect known as time dilation, and has been experimentally demonstrated.
[link to creation.com]
[link to creation.com]
[link to en.wikipedia.org]









We can date our own galaxy within a biblical range with observed supernovas.

ACCORDING TO ASTRONOMICAL OBSERVATIONS, galaxies like our own experience about one supernova (a violently-exploding star) every 25 years. The gas and dust remnants from such explosions (like the Crab Nebula) expand outward rapidly and should remain visible for over a million years. Yet the nearby parts of our galaxy in which we could observe such gas and dust shells contain only 274 supernova remnants. That number is consistent with only about 7,000 years worth of supernovas.

According to their [astronomers] model, the SNR should reach a diameter of about 300 light years after 120,000 years. So if our galaxy was billions of years old, we should be able to observe many SNRs this size. But if our galaxy is 6,000-10,000 years old, no SNRs would have had time to reach this size. So the number of observed SNRs of a particular size is an excellent test of whether the galaxy is old or young. In fact, the results are consistent with a universe thousands of years old, but are a puzzle if the universe has existed for billions of years.
[link to creation.com]
The detailed listings for all 274 SNRs
[link to www.mrao.cam.ac.uk]

Hmm, it is a time of tribulation indeed.

Baseless claim. There's no evidence supporting hman evolution. Man has always been man.

And 'species' is subjective.

I agree. I firmly believe the Earth was seeded.

Like it or not, we are someone or something's ant farm.

It doesn't matter how many stars there are if the probability of life is 1/infinity.

bump :)

I am alone

What a complete and utter fucktard.

oh gosh it feels like some really do.

mommy i want to go baaack , rofl.

well ehm why so misterious anyway whole groups act like angry mobs and run in one direction.

say ehm i sure like the lets not listen just go on with earth thing also.

:/ auw my ball.

lets forget it all in favor of the new kingdom.

hey those are my balls there next to s-america.

You are kidding, right?

im not , court is not furtile.

silly even but hey you could try to keep it up youre in the lake of something anyway.

Why is your thinking so limited as to not accept the possibility that we are?

Show me God.