Australian Politics Forum

Jasin

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 52770
Gender: male

Re: Atheism Jokes
Reply #60 - Sep 2^nd, 2022 at 12:24pm

John_Taverner wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2022 at 7:26am:

Jasin wrote on Sep 1^st, 2022 at 9:41pm:

Jasin wrote on Mar 30^th, 2018 at 3:30pm:

You have Religion - that matters.
You have Athiesm - that Anti-matters.

Grin

Science will show you via NASA and its Telescopes a Universe that 'doesn't exist' either.
At the most, via the closest star - it existed from 4.5 light years ago to 13 billion years ago.

An Atheist and Scientist will tell you that the Earth is not the center of the Universe and in a way - they are right.
But a Spiritualist will tell you that the Earth IS the center of OUR Universe and they too - are right.

So while admiring James Webb Telescopes of a Universe that no longer exists and of far away worlds you'll never get to experience. Just remember, a Spiritualist is busy trying to make 'this Universe' here - matter.

Joking aside, an infinite universe has no centre.

It does John... from where you're standing.
That's the best way to understand 'it all'. Wink

Back to top

AIMLESS EXTENTION OF KNOWLEDGE HOWEVER, WHICH IS WHAT I THINK YOU REALLY MEAN BY THE TERM 'CURIOSITY', IS MERELY INEFFICIENCY. I AM DESIGNED TO AVOID INEFFICIENCY.

IP Logged

John_Taverner

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2212
Gender: male

Re: Atheism Jokes
Reply #61 - Sep 2^nd, 2022 at 2:05pm

Jasin wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2022 at 12:24pm:

It does John... from where you're standing.
That's the best way to understand 'it all'. Wink

That's a special case. The centre of the observable universe is always the observer, whether he's on Earth, on the moon or some distant planet. However the universe is expanding at the same rate in all directions, so there is no centre of expansion.

Back to top

IP Logged

Frank

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 51464
Gender: male

Re: Atheism Jokes
Reply #62 - Sep 2^nd, 2022 at 3:22pm

John_Taverner wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2022 at 2:05pm:

Jasin wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2022 at 12:24pm:

It does John... from where you're standing.
That's the best way to understand 'it all'. Wink

That's a special case. The centre of the observable universe is always the observer, whether he's on Earth, on the moon or some distant planet. However the universe is expanding at the same rate in all directions, so there is no centre of expansion.

That's a little gauche way of changing step.
.
Yes, for the observer, he is the centre. But the universe, presumably, exists without being observed and if it is expanding then it has to be expanding from somewhere.

Unless you mean God as the unobserved observer, the centre from which it all started and from which it all expands. But I very much doubt that you mean that, although the concept with the name of God is necessary to imagine an expanding universe.

I won't even ask what the universe is expanding into. Tongue

billions of years of expansion means that today the universe is in - what's the word? spaces, areas, vacuums?? - where there was no universe a billion years ago. What was there then?

Back to top

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.

IP Logged

Jasin

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 52770
Gender: male

Re: Atheism Jokes
Reply #63 - Sep 2^nd, 2022 at 7:26pm

Well for the record recently.
NASA is in a bit of a confused state.
Many are now saying that the Big Bang theory just doesn't click with what they are discovering of late.
Like how the universe is expanding in some places, but contracting in others.
Of how there are now objects discovered that are far older than the 'formula' that worked out the age of the Big Bang.

Also, its getting to the point that we are now seeing Religion's influence on even Scientists as they grapple to understand the universe and are somewhat depicting a heaven/hell duality and other religious facets towards understanding.
It's that or the Christians are infiltrating Science to 'bend' things their way? Huh

Back to top

AIMLESS EXTENTION OF KNOWLEDGE HOWEVER, WHICH IS WHAT I THINK YOU REALLY MEAN BY THE TERM 'CURIOSITY', IS MERELY INEFFICIENCY. I AM DESIGNED TO AVOID INEFFICIENCY.

IP Logged

John_Taverner

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2212
Gender: male

Re: Atheism Jokes
Reply #64 - Sep 2^nd, 2022 at 10:12pm

Frank wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2022 at 3:22pm:

John_Taverner wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2022 at 2:05pm:

Jasin wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2022 at 12:24pm:

It does John... from where you're standing.
That's the best way to understand 'it all'. Wink

That's a special case. The centre of the observable universe is always the observer, whether he's on Earth, on the moon or some distant planet. However the universe is expanding at the same rate in all directions, so there is no centre of expansion.

That's a little gauche way of changing step.
.
Yes, for the observer, he is the centre. But the universe, presumably, exists without being observed and if it is expanding then it has to be expanding from somewhere.

Unless you mean God as the unobserved observer, the centre from which it all started and from which it all expands. But I very much doubt that you mean that, although the concept with the name of God is necessary to imagine an expanding universe.

I won't even ask what the universe is expanding into. Tongue

billions of years of expansion means that today the universe is in - what's the word? spaces, areas, vacuums?? - where there was no universe a billion years ago. What was there then?

It’s expanding from everywhere.

There was no “then” just as there was no “before”. That’s the point of the Big Bang. Space/Time started at that point in time. There is no location that you can say was the origin, and you can tell that from cosmic background radiation. By the way, it’s 13.8 billion years ago, give or take.

I take it that you don’t want a mathematical explanation.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Sep 2^nd, 2022 at 10:19pm by John_Taverner »

IP Logged

issuevoter

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 9200
The Great State of Mind
Gender: male

Re: Atheism Jokes
Reply #65 - Sep 3^rd, 2022 at 6:53am

John_Taverner wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2022 at 10:12pm:

Frank wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2022 at 3:22pm:

John_Taverner wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2022 at 2:05pm:

Jasin wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2022 at 12:24pm:

It does John... from where you're standing.
That's the best way to understand 'it all'. Wink

That's a special case. The centre of the observable universe is always the observer, whether he's on Earth, on the moon or some distant planet. However the universe is expanding at the same rate in all directions, so there is no centre of expansion.

That's a little gauche way of changing step.
.
Yes, for the observer, he is the centre. But the universe, presumably, exists without being observed and if it is expanding then it has to be expanding from somewhere.

Unless you mean God as the unobserved observer, the centre from which it all started and from which it all expands. But I very much doubt that you mean that, although the concept with the name of God is necessary to imagine an expanding universe.

I won't even ask what the universe is expanding into. Tongue

billions of years of expansion means that today the universe is in - what's the word? spaces, areas, vacuums?? - where there was no universe a billion years ago. What was there then?

It’s expanding from everywhere.

There was no “then” just as there was no “before”. That’s the point of the Big Bang. Space/Time started at that point in time. There is no location that you can say was the origin, and you can tell that from cosmic background radiation. By the way, it’s 13.8 billion years ago, give or take.

I take it that you don’t want a mathematical explanation.

The problem I have with the BBT is not the math, which I would not understand anyway; its the singularity. As I understand it, expansion is observable and therefore proves the math, but how does math prove the singularity existed? And, if there was nothing before the BB, and physics did not exist, why is the universe not-homogeneous or at least evenly distributed?

Back to top

« Last Edit: Sep 3^rd, 2022 at 6:59am by issuevoter »

No political allegiance. No philosophy. No religion.

IP Logged

Jasin

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 52770
Gender: male

Re: Atheism Jokes
Reply #66 - Sep 3^rd, 2022 at 7:17am

Don't shoot me John. I'm just putting forth what is developing out there. Seems James Webb and some other satellites are discovering anomalies that basically make the BBT a bit of a flawed theory.
I think it's very 'human' to see something like a Big Bang.
But the Universe doesn't exist to comfort human understanding and all that this world has given up to develop that understanding.
Black 'Holes' are not holes. They are spheres of immense gravity that like Neutron Stars, destroy the particles around them, condense the gases and then 90% eject them via their poles. Black Spheres do absorb some matter and hence grow in size, but it isn't much and 'radiation' does escape their gravity, where light can not.

As for the Universe expanding. Yes it is and no it isn't - is now where the scientists are at.
And yes, many Scientists see the Universe as 'Flat'.

I can only see the Big Bang Theory as incorrect, only due mainly to the human perception of religious influences over the centuries on the mind.
You know, there was only Darkness and then 'bang' there was light.
Well chemosynthesis proves that life began in the dark here, not the light.

Back to top

AIMLESS EXTENTION OF KNOWLEDGE HOWEVER, WHICH IS WHAT I THINK YOU REALLY MEAN BY THE TERM 'CURIOSITY', IS MERELY INEFFICIENCY. I AM DESIGNED TO AVOID INEFFICIENCY.

IP Logged

John_Taverner

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2212
Gender: male

Re: Atheism Jokes
Reply #67 - Sep 3^rd, 2022 at 3:19pm

Jasin wrote on Sep 3^rd, 2022 at 7:17am:

Don't shoot me John. I'm just putting forth what is developing out there. Seems James Webb and some other satellites are discovering anomalies that basically make the BBT a bit of a flawed theory.
I think it's very 'human' to see something like a Big Bang.
But the Universe doesn't exist to comfort human understanding and all that this world has given up to develop that understanding.
Black 'Holes' are not holes. They are spheres of immense gravity that like Neutron Stars, destroy the particles around them, condense the gases and then 90% eject them via their poles. Black Spheres do absorb some matter and hence grow in size, but it isn't much and 'radiation' does escape their gravity, where light can not.

As for the Universe expanding. Yes it is and no it isn't - is now where the scientists are at.
And yes, many Scientists see the Universe as 'Flat'.

I can only see the Big Bang Theory as incorrect, only due mainly to the human perception of religious influences over the centuries on the mind.
You know, there was only Darkness and then 'bang' there was light.
Well chemosynthesis proves that life began in the dark here, not the light.

There are a lot of articles in the popular press that claim otherwise, but the Big Bang Theory remains the most likely. It's not influenced by religion in any way. It's solely a result of observations.

https://www.newswise.com/factcheck/images-from-the-james-webb-telescope-do-not-d...

As I said before, the cosmic background radiation is the main evidence of the singularity and the fact that conditions were ... well lumpy afterwards, which gave rise to the galaxies we see today.

We also have a singularity at the centre of our galaxy. It's called Sagittarius A.

Quote:

The singularity at the center of a black hole is the ultimate no man's land: a place where matter is compressed down to an infinitely tiny point, and all conceptions of time and space completely break down. And it doesn't really exist.

(Carl Sagan)

Do we have all the answers? No. Unlike what was written in a book by monks with bad teeth and BO centuries ago, there is no claim of absolute truth.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Sep 3^rd, 2022 at 3:30pm by John_Taverner »

5ab0c9c0679eb.jpg (35 KB | 22 )

IP Logged

Frank

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 51464
Gender: male

Re: Atheism Jokes
Reply #68 - Sep 3^rd, 2022 at 3:59pm

John_Taverner wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2022 at 10:12pm:

Frank wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2022 at 3:22pm:

John_Taverner wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2022 at 2:05pm:

Jasin wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2022 at 12:24pm:

It does John... from where you're standing.
That's the best way to understand 'it all'. Wink

That's a special case. The centre of the observable universe is always the observer, whether he's on Earth, on the moon or some distant planet. However the universe is expanding at the same rate in all directions, so there is no centre of expansion.

That's a little gauche way of changing step.
.
Yes, for the observer, he is the centre. But the universe, presumably, exists without being observed and if it is expanding then it has to be expanding from somewhere.

Unless you mean God as the unobserved observer, the centre from which it all started and from which it all expands. But I very much doubt that you mean that, although the concept with the name of God is necessary to imagine an expanding universe.

I won't even ask what the universe is expanding into. Tongue

billions of years of expansion means that today the universe is in - what's the word? spaces, areas, vacuums?? - where there was no universe a billion years ago. What was there then?

It’s expanding from everywhere.

There was no “then” just as there was no “before”. That’s the point of the Big Bang. Space/Time started at that point in time. There is no location that you can say was the origin, and you can tell that from cosmic background radiation. By the way, it’s 13.8 billion years ago, give or take.

I take it that you don’t want a mathematical explanation.

The immaculate conception is significantly more imaginable and acceptable to the human mind. I say this thinking of Kant's Critique of Pure Reason where he demonstrates that time, space, causation etc are part of the cognitive architecture of the mind, not qualities or quantities outside it, in nature.

https://www.gutenberg.org/files/4280/4280-h/4280-h.htm
https://www.gutenberg.org/files/52821/52821-h/52821-h.htm

Back to top

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.

IP Logged

John_Taverner Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 2212 Gender:	Re: Atheism Jokes Reply #69 - Sep 3^rd, 2022 at 4:08pm Isn't Kant's Critique of Pure Reason also part of the cognitive architecture of the mind? Trivial poking stick: Quote: Harry Potter : Is this all real? Or is it just happening inside my head? Professor Albus Dumbledore : Of course it's happening inside your head, Harry. Why should that mean that it's not real?
Back to top	IP Logged

John_Taverner Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 2212 Gender:	Re: Atheism Jokes Reply #70 - Sep 3^rd, 2022 at 4:30pm Frank wrote on Sep 3^rd, 2022 at 3:59pm: The immaculate conception is significantly more imaginable and acceptable to the human mind. So, Mr Søren Kierkegaard, how was church last Sunday? Catholic, I presume from your wording?
Back to top	IP Logged

Frank

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 51464
Gender: male

Re: Atheism Jokes
Reply #71 - Sep 3^rd, 2022 at 4:48pm

John_Taverner wrote on Sep 3^rd, 2022 at 4:30pm:

Frank wrote on Sep 3^rd, 2022 at 3:59pm:

The immaculate conception is significantly more imaginable and acceptable to the human mind.

So, Mr Søren Kierkegaard, how was church last Sunday? Catholic, I presume from your wording?

It was great. The lesson/sermon was on space, would you believe. Went something like this:

Space is big. Really big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist, but that's just peanuts to space.

Food for thought, that (Not Catholic, as you can see.)

Back to top

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.

IP Logged

Frank

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 51464
Gender: male

Re: Atheism Jokes
Reply #72 - Sep 3^rd, 2022 at 5:11pm

John_Taverner wrote on Sep 3^rd, 2022 at 4:08pm:

Isn't Kant's Critique of Pure Reason also part of the cognitive architecture of the mind?

Trivial poking stick:
Quote:

Harry Potter : Is this all real? Or is it just happening inside my head? Professor Albus Dumbledore : Of course it's happening inside your head, Harry. Why should that mean that it's not real?

Interesting dilemma. Is the mind, are ideas, real in the sense matter is real with predicates like dimentions, in time, place, relations, causality etc. Does the mind have such material qualities? How big is a big idea? What makes you think that a big idea is bigger than another idea?

Or is the mind - pure reason as Kant called it - organises the world according to its own inbuilt, a priori architecture to enable a perception and comprehension. The mind brings these attributes to the world by which the non-material dimension (the mind) can commune and engage with the material dimension and apprehend it.

Back to top

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.

IP Logged

Jasin

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 52770
Gender: male

Re: Atheism Jokes
Reply #73 - Sep 3^rd, 2022 at 5:58pm

Black Holes should be called Dark Stars, because they are not 'holes' in any sense (or gateways to parrallel universes Roll Eyes

).
The original word used centuries ago was indeed 'Dark Star', but one Scientist stole the word 'Black Hole' from the infamous 'Black Hole of Calcutta' (a prison cell) and a few other Scientists (even Einstein) used it for its 'Media savvy catch'.
Totally inaccurate and irresponsible of those Scientists to use such two words, especially considering where it originated from.
But this is a good example of how 'frail' the human mind and perception is and why so many 'mistakes' have been made in understanding the Universe.

There is no 'center' of the Universe, from which a Big Bang occurred. Maybe there is in the minds of military/politically minded people because they like things that go 'bang' - it makes more sense to them.
The Cosmic Radiation Background, isn't a background in the sense that it might be the first 'barrier' of the expansion of the Universe. It's just the furthest point our 'abilities' via technology, have been able to perceive and remember - a lot has gone through many changes in over 13 Billion years - if going by the CRB. But because there are much 'older' things being discovered within that periphereal boundary, its obvious that there could not be a Big Bang from a finite point.

The Big Bang is redundant as Dark Stars being Black Holes.

Back to top

AIMLESS EXTENTION OF KNOWLEDGE HOWEVER, WHICH IS WHAT I THINK YOU REALLY MEAN BY THE TERM 'CURIOSITY', IS MERELY INEFFICIENCY. I AM DESIGNED TO AVOID INEFFICIENCY.

IP Logged

Jasin Gold Member Offline Posts: 52770 Gender:	Re: Atheism Jokes Reply #74 - Sep 3^rd, 2022 at 7:35pm This link will explain it better than I. https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Dr.+Becky+Smethurst+&&view=detail&mid=53AC5...
Back to top	AIMLESS EXTENTION OF KNOWLEDGE HOWEVER, WHICH IS WHAT I THINK YOU REALLY MEAN BY THE TERM 'CURIOSITY', IS MERELY INEFFICIENCY. I AM DESIGNED TO AVOID INEFFICIENCY. IP Logged