Darkforum.com - Dark Stories, Dark Art, Poetry, Photography, Debates and Discussions
Home Register FAQ
Go Back   Darkforum.com - Dark Stories, Dark Art, Poetry, Photography, Debates and Discussions > Discussions > Topic Discussions
Reload this Page Science Disproves Evolution
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-01-15   #1601
Pahu
Feared by the Devil
 
Pahu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 723
Pahu is on a distinguished road
Credits: 169,402

Big Bang? 1

The big bang theory, now known to be seriously flawed (a), was based on three observations: the redshift of light from distant stars, the cosmic microwave background (CMB) radiation, and the amount of helium in the universe. All three have been poorly understood.

Redshift.* The redshift of starlight is interpreted as a Doppler effect (b); that is, stars and galaxies are moving away from Earth, stretching out (or reddening) the wavelengths of light they emit. Space itself expands—so the total potential energy of stars, galaxies, and other matter increases today with no corresponding loss of energy elsewhere (c). Thus, the big bang violates the law of conservation of energy, probably the most important of all physical laws. Furthermore, these galaxies, in their recession from us, should be decelerating. Measurements show the opposite; they are accelerating. [See “Dark Thoughts” on page*34.]

“Observations only recently made possible by improvements in astronomical instrumentation have put theoretical models of the Universe [the big bang] under intense pressure. The standard ideas of the 1980s about the shape and history of the Universe have now been abandoned—and cosmologists are now taking seriously the possibility that the Universe is pervaded by some sort of vacuum energy, whose origin is not at all understood.” Peter Coles, “The End of the Old Model Universe,” Nature, Vol. 393, 25 June 1998, p. 741.

“Three years ago, observations of distant, exploding stars blew to smithereens some of astronomers’ most cherished ideas about the universe[the big bang theory]. To piece together an updated theory, they’re now thinking dark thoughts about what sort of mystery force may be contorting the cosmos.

“According to the standard view of cosmology, the once infinitesimal universe has ballooned in volume ever since its fiery birth in the Big Bang, but the mutual gravitational tug of all the matter in the cosmos has gradually slowed that expansion.

“In 1998, however, scientists reported that a group of distant supernovas were dimmer, and therefore farther from Earth, than the standard theory indicated. It was as if, in the billion or so years it took for the light from these exploded stars to arrive at Earth, the space between the stars and our planet had stretched out more than expected. That would mean that cosmic expansion has somehow sped up, not slowed down. Recent evidence has only firmed up that bizarre result.”Ron Cowen, “A Dark Force in the Universe,”Science News,Vol.*159, 7 April 2001, p.*218.

“Not only don’t we see the universe slowing down; we see it speeding up.”Adam Riess, as quoted by James Glanz, “Astronomers See a Cosmic Antigravity Force at Work,”Science,Vol.*279, 27 February 1998, p.*1298.

“In one of the great results of twentieth century science, NSF-funded astronomers have shown both that the universe does not contain enough matter in the universe to slow the expansion, and that the rate of expansion actually increases with distance. Why? Nobody knows yet.”National Science Foundation Advertisement, “Astronomy: Fifty Years of Astronomical Excellence,”Discover,September 2000, p. 7.

“The expansion of the universe was long believed to be slowing down because of the mutual gravitational attraction of all the matter in the universe. We now know that the expansion is accelerating and that whatever caused the acceleration (dubbed “dark energy”) cannot be Standard Model physics.”Gordon Kane, “The Dawn of Physics Beyond the Standard Model,”Scientific American,Vol.*288, June 2003, p.*73.

“Astronomy, rather cosmology, is in trouble. It is, for the most part, beside itself. It has departed from the scientific method and its principles, and drifted into the bizarre; it has raised imaginative invention to an art form; and has shown a ready willingness to surrender or ignore fundamental laws, such as the second law of thermodynamics and the maximum speed of light, all for the apparent rationale of saving the status quo. Perhaps no ‘science’ is receiving more self-criticism, chest-beating, and self-doubt; none other seems so lost and misdirected; trapped in debilitating dogma.” Roy C. Martin Jr., Astronomy on Trial: A Devastating and Complete Repudiation of the Big Bang Fiasco (New York: University Press of America, 1999), p. xv.

b. Redshifts can be caused by other phenomena. [See Jayant V. Narlikar, “Noncosmological Redshifts,” Space Science Reviews, Vol. 50, August 1989, pp. 523–614.] However, large redshifts are probably the result of the Doppler effect.

c. “...energy in recognizable forms (kinetic, potential, and internal) in an expanding, spatially unbounded, homogeneous universe is not conserved.” Edward R. Harrison, “Mining Energy in an Expanding Universe,” The Astrophysical Journal, Vol. 446, 10 June 1955, p. 66.

[From “In the Beginning” by Walt Brown]
__________________
Truth Frees! Evolution is evidence free speculation masquerading as science.
is Offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-15   #1602
Dark Messiah
Half-Wit Intellectual
Admin
 
Dark Messiah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Beautiful Sona-nyl
Posts: 14,827
Dark Messiah will become famous soon enough
Credits: 2,458
Hasn't the Big Bang been the scientific consensus for like, seventy years or something?
__________________
Like any spelling mistake, mutations cannot give rise to information, but rather damage that which already exists.
is Offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-15   #1603
Evil Fred II
The Price is Wrong bitch!
 
Evil Fred II's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: *twitches*
Posts: 307
Evil Fred II is on a distinguished road
Credits: 7,139
I want to evolve into a pokemon
__________________
Become the light in your path.
is Offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-15   #1604
Evil Fred II
The Price is Wrong bitch!
 
Evil Fred II's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: *twitches*
Posts: 307
Evil Fred II is on a distinguished road
Credits: 7,139
I want to evolve into a pokemon
__________________
Become the light in your path.
is Offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-15   #1605
Pahu
Feared by the Devil
 
Pahu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 723
Pahu is on a distinguished road
Credits: 169,402
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Messiah View Post
Hasn't the Big Bang been the scientific consensus for like, seventy years or something?
Yes, but that doesn't mean it is true, as the information I shared shows. Scientists believed in a flat earth and spontaneous generation for hundreds of years.
__________________
Truth Frees! Evolution is evidence free speculation masquerading as science.
is Offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-04-15   #1606
Dark Messiah
Half-Wit Intellectual
Admin
 
Dark Messiah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Beautiful Sona-nyl
Posts: 14,827
Dark Messiah will become famous soon enough
Credits: 2,458
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pahu View Post
Yes, but that doesn't mean it is true, as the information I shared shows. Scientists believed in a flat earth and spontaneous generation for hundreds of years.
Ignoring every other reason this is dumb for a moment, that still makes it both dumb and misleading to treat, "The universe has a beginning" as a gotcha when that is already a premise of modern physics.
__________________
Like any spelling mistake, mutations cannot give rise to information, but rather damage that which already exists.
is Offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-04-15   #1607
Pahu
Feared by the Devil
 
Pahu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 723
Pahu is on a distinguished road
Credits: 169,402
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Messiah View Post
Ignoring every other reason this is dumb for a moment, that still makes it both dumb and misleading to treat, "The universe has a beginning" as a gotcha when that is already a premise of modern physics.
Right! And since the universe had a beginning, it didn't exist before that beginning and there was nothing from which the universe appeared, which is impossible by any natural cause. Therefor the cause was supernatural.
__________________
Truth Frees! Evolution is evidence free speculation masquerading as science.
is Offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-15   #1608
Dark Messiah
Half-Wit Intellectual
Admin
 
Dark Messiah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Beautiful Sona-nyl
Posts: 14,827
Dark Messiah will become famous soon enough
Credits: 2,458
"and there was nothing from which the universe appeared" is a wild leap from, "The universe began when the universe began."
__________________
Like any spelling mistake, mutations cannot give rise to information, but rather damage that which already exists.
is Offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-15   #1609
Pahu
Feared by the Devil
 
Pahu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 723
Pahu is on a distinguished road
Credits: 169,402
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Messiah View Post
"and there was nothing from which the universe appeared" is a wild leap from, "The universe began when the universe began."
There is no wild leap. Before the universe existed there was nothing from which the universe appeared, which is impossible by any natural cause, therefor the cause was supernatural.
__________________
Truth Frees! Evolution is evidence free speculation masquerading as science.
is Offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-15   #1610
Dark Messiah
Half-Wit Intellectual
Admin
 
Dark Messiah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Beautiful Sona-nyl
Posts: 14,827
Dark Messiah will become famous soon enough
Credits: 2,458
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pahu View Post
There is no wild leap. Before the universe existed there was nothing from which the universe appeared
This is the wild leap

Also not even what you're suggesting, which is that before the universe existed there was a sentient being who created the universe somehow.
__________________
Like any spelling mistake, mutations cannot give rise to information, but rather damage that which already exists.
is Offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-15   #1611
Pahu
Feared by the Devil
 
Pahu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 723
Pahu is on a distinguished road
Credits: 169,402

Big Bang? 2

Many objects with high redshifts seem connected, or associated, with objects having low redshifts. They could not be traveling at such different velocities and stay connected for long. [See "Connected Galaxies" and "Galaxy Clusters" on page*41.] For example, many quasars have very high redshifts, and yet they statistically cluster with galaxies having low redshifts (d). Some quasars seem to be connected to galaxies by threads of gas (e). Many quasar redshifts are so great that the massive quasars would need to have formed too soon after the big bang—a contradiction of the theory (f).

Finally, redshifted light from galaxies has some strange features inconsistent with the Doppler effect. If redshifts are from objects moving away from Earth, one would expect redshifts to have continuous values. Instead, redshifts tend to cluster at specific, evenly-spaced values (g). Much remains to be learned about redshifts.

d. “The evidence is accumulating that redshift is a shaky measuring rod.” Margaret Burbidge (former director of the Royal Greenwich Observatory and past president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science), as quoted by Govert Schilling, “Radical Theory Takes a Test,” Science, Vol. 291, 26 January 2001, p. 579.

e. Halton M. Arp, Quasars, Redshifts, and Controversies (Berkeley, California: Interstellar Media, 1987).

f. “It clearly took a while after that primordial explosion for clouds of gas to congeal into a form dense enough for stars and quasars to ignite, and the Sky Survey is already prompting astronomers to question some of the assumptions about how that process unfolded [i.e, the big bang theory].” Michael D. Lemonick, “Star Seeker,” Discover, November 2001, p.*44.

g. William G. Tifft, “Properties of the Redshift,” The Astrophysical Journal, Vol. 382, 1 December 1991, pp. 396–415.

[From “In the Beginning” by Walt Brown]
__________________
Truth Frees! Evolution is evidence free speculation masquerading as science.

Last edited by Pahu; 07-08-15 at 14:22.
is Offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-15   #1612
Pahu
Feared by the Devil
 
Pahu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 723
Pahu is on a distinguished road
Credits: 169,402

Big Bang? 3

CMB.* All matter radiates heat, regardless of its temperature. Astronomers can detect an extremely uniform radiation, called cosmic microwave background (CMB) radiation, coming from all directions. It appears to come from perfectly radiating matter whose temperature is 2.73*K—nearly absolute zero. Many incorrectly believe that the big bang theory predicted this radiation (h).

h. “The big bang made no quantitative prediction that the ‘background’ radiation would have a temperature of 3 degrees Kelvin (in fact its initial prediction [by George Gamow in 1946] was 30 degrees Kelvin); whereas Eddington in 1926 had already calculated that the ‘temperature of space’ produced by the radiation of starlight would be found to be 3 degrees Kelvin.” Tom Van Flandern, “Did the Universe Have a Beginning?” Meta Research Bulletin, Vol. 3, 15 September 1994, p. 33.

“Despite the widespread acceptance of the big bang theory as a working model for interpreting new findings, not a single important prediction of the theory has yet been confirmed, and substantial evidence has accumulated against it.” Ibid., p. 25.

“History also shows that some BB [big bang] cosmologists’ ‘predictions’ of MBR [microwave background radiation] temperature have been ‘adjusted’ after-the-fact to agree with observed temperatures.” William C. Mitchell, “Big Bang Theory Under Fire,” Physics Essays, Vol. 10, June 1997, pp. 370–379.

“What’s more, the big bang theory can boast of no quantitative predictions that have subsequently been validated by observation.” Eric J. Lerner et al., “Bucking the Big Bang,” New Scientist, Vol. 182, 22 May 2004, p. 20. [This blistering article critiquing the big bang theory was originally signed by 33 scientists from 10 countries. Later 374 other scientists, engineers, and researchers endorsed the article. See www.cosmologystatement.org]

[From “In the Beginning” by Walt Brown]
__________________
Truth Frees! Evolution is evidence free speculation masquerading as science.
is Offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-15   #1613
Pahu
Feared by the Devil
 
Pahu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 723
Pahu is on a distinguished road
Credits: 169,402

Big Bang? 4

Matter in the universe is highly concentrated into galaxies, galaxy clusters, and superclusters—as far as the most powerful telescopes can see (i).

“In each of the five patches of sky surveyed by the team, the distant galaxies bunch together instead of being distributed randomly in space. ‘The work is ongoing, but what we’re able to say now is that galaxies we are seeing at great distances are as strongly clustered in the early universe as they are today,’ says Steidel, who is at the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena.” Ron Cowen, “Light from the Early Universe,” Science News, Vol. 153, 7 February 1998, p. 92.

“One of the great challenges for modern cosmology is to determine how the initial power spectrum evolved into the spectrum observed today. ... the universe is much clumpier on those scales [600–900 million light-years] than current theories can explain.”Stephen D. Landy, “Mapping the Universe,”Scientific American,Vol.*280, June 1999, p.*44.

“There shouldn’t be galaxies out there at all, and even if there are galaxies, they shouldn’t be grouped together the way they are.”James Trefil,The Dark Side of the Universe(New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1988), p.*3.

Geoffrey R. Burbidge, “Was There Really a Big Bang?” Nature,Vol.*233, 3*September 1971, pp.*36–40.

Ben Patrusky, “Why Is the Cosmos ‘Lumpy’?”Science 81, June 1981, p.*96.

Stephen A. Gregory and Laird A. Thompson, “Superclusters and Voids in the Distribution of Galaxies,” Scientific American, Vol.*246, March 1982, pp.*106–114.

“In fact, studies we have done show that the distribution of matter is fractal, just like a tree or a cloud.” [Patterns that repeat on all scales are called fractal.] Francesco Sylos Labini, as quoted by Marcus Chown, “Fractured Universe,” New Scientist, Vol. 163, 21 August 1999, p. 23.

“If this dissenting view is correct [that the universe is fractal] and the Universe doesn’t become smoothed out on the very largest scales, the consequences for cosmology are profound. ‘We’re lost,’ says [Professor of Astrophysics, Peter] Coles. ‘The foundations of the big bang models would crumble away. We’d be left with no explanation for the big bang, or galaxy formation, or the distribution of galaxies in the Universe.’ ” Ibid.

[From “In the Beginning” by Walt Brown]
__________________
Truth Frees! Evolution is evidence free speculation masquerading as science.
is Offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-15   #1614
Pahu
Feared by the Devil
 
Pahu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 723
Pahu is on a distinguished road
Credits: 169,402

Big Bang? 5

Because the CMB is so uniform, many thought it came from evenly spread matter soon after a big bang. But such uniformly distributed matter would hardly gravitate in any direction; even after tens of billions of years, galaxies and much larger structures would not evolve. In other words, the big bang did not produce the CMB (j). [See pages 434–436.]

j. Margaret J. Geller and John P. Huchra, “Mapping the Universe,” Science, Vol. 246, 17 November 1989, pp. 897–903. [See also M. Mitchell Waldrop, “Astronomers Go Up Against the Great Wall,” Science, Vol.*246, 17*November 1989, p.*885.]

John Travis, “Cosmic Structures Fill Southern Sky,” Science, Vol.*263, 25*March 1994, p.*1684.

Will Saunders et al., “The Density Field of the Local Universe,” Nature, Vol. 349, 3 January 1991, pp. 32–38.

“But this uniformity [in the cosmic microwave background radiation, CMB] is difficult to reconcile with the obvious clumping of matter into galaxies, clusters of galaxies and even larger features extending across vast regions of the universe, such as ‘walls’ and ‘bubbles’. ” Ivars Peterson, “Seeding the Universe,” Science News, Vol. 137, 24 March 1990, p. 184.

As described below, one of the largest structures in the universe, “The Great Wall,” was discovered in 1989. It consists of tens of thousands of galaxies lined up in a wall-like structure, stretching across half a billion light-years of space. It is so large that none of its edges have been found. An even larger structure, the Sloan Great Wall, was discovered in 2003 and is the largest structure known in the universe.

“The theorists know of no way such a monster [the Great Wall] could have condensed in the time available since the Big Bang, especially considering that the 2.7 K background radiation reveals a universe that was very homogeneous in the beginning.” M. Mitchell Waldrop, “The Large-Scale Structure of the Universe Gets Larger—Maybe,” Science, Vol. 238, 13 November 1987, p. 894.

“The map’s most eye-catching feature is the Sloan Great Wall of galaxies, a clustering of galaxies that stretches 1.37 billion light-years across the sky and is the largest cosmic structure ever found. Astronomers worried that such a humongous structure, 80 percent bigger than the famous Great Wall of galaxies first discerned in a sky survey 2 decades ago, might violate the accepted model of galaxy evolution.” Ron Cowen, “Cosmic Survey,” Science News, Vol. 164, 1 November 2003, p. 276.

James Glanz, “Precocious Structures Found,” Science, Vol. 272, 14 June 1996, p. 1590.

For many years, big bang theorists searched in vain with increasingly precise instruments for temperature concentrations in the nearly uniform CMB. Without concentrations, matter could never gravitationally contract around those concentrations to form galaxies and galaxy clusters. Finally, in 1992, with great fanfare, an announcement was made in the popular media that slight concentrations were discovered.* Major shortcomings were not mentioned:

The concentrations were only one part in 100,000—not much more than the errors in the instruments. Such slight concentrations could not be expected to initiate much clustering. As Margaret Geller stated, “Gravity can’t, over the age of the universe, amplify these irregularities enough [to form huge clusters of galaxies].” , p.*1684.

“[The]data are notoriously noisy, and the purported effect looks remarkably like an instrumental glitch: it appears only in one small area of the sky and on an angular scale close to the limit of the satellite’s resolution.” George Musser, “Skewing the Cosmic Bell Curve,”Scientific American,Vol.*281, September 1999, p.*28.

Slight errors or omissions in the many data processing steps could easily account for the faint signal.

Reported variations in the CMB spanned areas of the sky that were 100 or 1,000 times too broad to produce galaxies.

“... mysterious discrepancies have arisen between [the inflationary big bang]theory and observations ... It looks like inflation is getting into a major jam.” Glen D. Starkman and Dominik J. Schwarz, “Is the Universe Out of Tune?” Scientific American,Vol.*293, August 2005, pp.*49, 55.

The slight temperature variations (0.00003°C) detected have a strong statistical connection with the solar system. [Ibid., pp.*52–55.] They probably have nothing to do with a big bang.

[From “In the Beginning” by Walt Brown]
__________________
Truth Frees! Evolution is evidence free speculation masquerading as science.
is Offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-15   #1615
neonwraith
Voice of Unerring Reason
 
neonwraith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: In the Cold Harsh North
Posts: 3,408
neonwraith
Credits: 108,935
Given how little traffic this site gets, is al this posting just some unusual mastibatory aid?

Neon
__________________
"I've oft been told by learned friars
That wishing and the crime were one
And heaven punishes desires
As much as if the deed were done.

If wishing damns us, you and I
Are damned to all our hearts content.
Come then we may at least enjoy
Some pleasure for our punishment..."

Sir Thomas More
is Offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-15   #1616
neonwraith
Voice of Unerring Reason
 
neonwraith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: In the Cold Harsh North
Posts: 3,408
neonwraith
Credits: 108,935
Given how little traffic this site gets, is al this posting just some unusual mastibatory aid?

Neon
__________________
"I've oft been told by learned friars
That wishing and the crime were one
And heaven punishes desires
As much as if the deed were done.

If wishing damns us, you and I
Are damned to all our hearts content.
Come then we may at least enjoy
Some pleasure for our punishment..."

Sir Thomas More
is Offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-15   #1617
Pahu
Feared by the Devil
 
Pahu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 723
Pahu is on a distinguished road
Credits: 169,402

Big Bang? 7

Helium.* Contrary to what is commonly taught, the big bang theory does not explain the amount of helium in the universe; the theory was adjusted to fit the amount of helium (k). Ironically, the lack of helium in certain types of stars (B type stars) (l) and the presence of beryllium and boron in “older” stars (m) contradicts the big bang theory.

k. “And no element abundance prediction of the big bang was successful without some ad hoc parameterization to ‘adjust’ predictions that otherwise would have been judged as failures.” Van Flandern, p. 33.

“It is commonly supposed that the so-called primordial abundances of D, 3He, and 4He and 7Li provide strong evidence for Big Bang cosmology. But a particular value for the baryon-to-photon ratio needs to be assumed ad hoc to obtain the required abundances.” H. C. Arp et al., “The Extragalactic Universe: An Alternative View,” Nature, Vol. 346, 30 August 1990, p. 811.

“The study of historical data shows that over the years predictions of the ratio of helium to hydrogen in a BB [big bang] universe have been repeatedly adjusted to agree with the latest available estimates of that ratio as observed in the real universe. The estimated ratio is dependent on a ratio of baryons to photons (the baryon number) that has also been arbitrarily adjusted to agree with the currently established helium to hydrogen ratio. These appear to have not been predictions, but merely adjustments of theory (‘retrodictions’) to accommodate current data.” William C. Mitchell, p.*375.

l. Steidl, pp. 207–208.

D. W. Sciama, Modern Cosmology (London: Cambridge University Press, 1971), pp. 149–155.

m. “Examining the faint light from an elderly Milky Way star, astronomers have detected a far greater abundance [a thousand times too much] of beryllium atoms than the standard Big Bang model predicts.” Ron Cowen, “Starlight Casts Doubt on Big Bang Details,” Science News, Vol. 140, 7 September 1991, p. 151.

Gerard Gilmore et al., “First Detection of Beryllium in a Very Metal Poor Star: A Test of the Standard Big Bang Model,” The Astrophysical Journal, Vol. 378, 1 September 1991, pp. 17–21.

Ron Cowen, “Cosmic Chemistry: Closing the Gap in the Origin of the Elements,” Science News, Vol. 150, 2 November 1996, pp. 286–287.

[From “In the Beginning” by Walt Brown]
__________________
Truth Frees! Evolution is evidence free speculation masquerading as science.
is Offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-15   #1618
Pahu
Feared by the Devil
 
Pahu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 723
Pahu is on a distinguished road
Credits: 169,402

Big Bang? 8

A big bang would produce only hydrogen, helium, and lithium, so the first generation of stars to somehow form after a big bang should consist only of those elements. Some of these stars should still exist, but despite extensive searches, none has been found (n).

n. “One might expect Population III stars [stars with only hydrogen and helium and no heavier elements] to have the same sort of distribution of masses as stars forming today, in which case some should be small enough (smaller than 0.8 the mass of the Sun) still to be burning their nuclear fuel. The problem is that, despite extensive searches, nobody has ever found a zero-metallicity star.” Bernard Carr, “Where Is Population III?” Nature, Vol. 326, 30 April 1987, p. 829.

“Are there any stars older than Population II [i.e., Population III stars]? There should be, if our ideas about the early history of the universe [i.e., the big bang theory] are correct....There is no statistically significant evidence for Population III objects [stars].” Leif J. Robinson, “Where Is Population III?” Sky and Telescope, July 1982, p. 20.

“Astronomers have never seen a pure Population III star, despite years of combing our Milky Way galaxy.” Robert Irion, “The Quest for Population III,” Science, Vol. 295, 4 January 2002, p. 66.


Supposedly, Population II stars, stars having slight amounts of some heavy elements, evolved after Population III stars. Predicted characteristics of Population II stars have never been observed.

“Spectral studies of ancient [Population II] stars in the Milky Way haven’t turned up anything so distinctive [as the chemical elements that should be present], [Timothy] Beers notes, but the search continues.” Ibid., p. 67.

[From “In the Beginning” by Walt Brown]
__________________
Truth Frees! Evolution is evidence free speculation masquerading as science.
is Offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-15   #1619
Pahu
Feared by the Devil
 
Pahu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 723
Pahu is on a distinguished road
Credits: 169,402

Big Bang? 9

Two Lithium Problems. The total amount of lithium seen in and outside our galaxy is only a third of what the big bang theory predicts (o). Also,“old stars contain one-quarter to one-half as much lithium-7 (made of three protons and four neutrons) as [the big bang] theory predicts and contain 1,000 times more lithium-6 (three protons and three neutrons) than expected[by the big bang theory]” (p).

o. “Our result shows that this discrepancy is a universal problem concerning both the Milky Way and extra-galactic systems.”A. Mucciarelli et al., “The Cosmological Lithium Problem Outside the Galaxy,” Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, Vol.*444, 21 October 2014, p. 1812.

“... stars in M54 have just as little lithium as stars in the Milky Way, suggesting that the lithium problem is universal.”Christopher Crockett, “Mystery of the Missing Lithium Extends Beyond the Milky Way,” Science News,Vol.*186, 18 October 2014, p.*15.

p. Andrew Grant, “Lab Tests Mystery of Lithium Levels,” Science News,Vol.*186, 9 August 2014, p.6.

http://www.creationscience.com/onlin...ciences17.html
__________________
Truth Frees! Evolution is evidence free speculation masquerading as science.
is Offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-15   #1620
----LysoL----
4 12 06
 
----LysoL----'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Abyss (out of time)
Posts: 155
----LysoL---- is on a distinguished road
Credits: 11,169
I used to take lithium. Kurt cobain and Amy Lee wrote songs about the element, my guess is they were as depressed as I was. lithium makes you not kill yourself.
__________________
Spellbound
is Offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The last person to post on this thread is the WINNER!!! pt2 gArGOyLe^^ Topic Discussions 4130 07-22-17 12:06
Interesting Science News articles. Panthera66 Topic Discussions 3 05-28-10 08:10
the evolution debate ShotDownStar Topic Discussions 66 12-08-06 20:14
The warped minds of the wholesome christians. Lenina Topic Discussions 122 09-21-05 02:18
Science 101! Dyshade Topic Discussions 39 07-07-04 21:37

Recent Threads
What Are you Listening...
03-21-05 07:40
By Cucking Funt
Last post by Sic Simon
2 Days Ago 22:56
Obama sends a letter.
4 Weeks Ago 22:42
Last post by Sic Simon
2 Days Ago 22:28
My doctor
4 Days Ago 00:29
Last post by Sic Simon
2 Days Ago 21:27
How Do I Access the...
03-17-07 22:48
Last post by Sic Simon
3 Days Ago 01:55
Put your liter of cola...
08-06-17 20:53
Last post by Sic Simon
4 Days Ago 00:25
vote or die
10-07-17 02:56
Last post by Sic Simon
4 Days Ago 00:06
Science Disproves...
11-01-10 15:38
by Pahu
Last post by Pahu
4 Days Ago 10:45
long Sunday
09-24-17 19:00
by DaxterK
Last post by Sic Simon
1 Week Ago 21:20
Ask me a question game
12-13-02 18:13
Last post by Sic Simon
1 Week Ago 21:14
Whats your job?
11-20-07 15:57
Last post by Sic Simon
1 Week Ago 21:03
Online Users: 59
0 members and 59 guests
No Members online
Most users ever online was 1928, 06-09-15 at 19:20.
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.0 RC2


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBulletin Skin developed by: vBStyles.com

© 2006 - 2016 Dark Forum | About Dark Forum | Advertisers | Investors | Legal | A member of the Crowdgather Forum Community