Home Archives Random Quotes Latest Comments Top 100 Submit Quote Search Log In

Quote# 30681

(on the Big Bang)

A collision of that magnitude would be the biggest destructive force that has ever been suggested. Any organisms existing on any bodies in discussion would be wiped out. Furthermore, a collision of that size would not produce spherical masses, nor could less spherical masses be smoothed out over the years, as there is no friction in space.

justinhaddeland, SomethingAwful.com 45 Comments [11/1/2007 3:35:01 AM]
Fundie Index: 10
WTF?! || meh
Username:
Comment:



1 2
Vincent

Collision? ......... That's a new one.

11/1/2007 3:42:46 AM

Rhys

Repeat.

Besides, there was nothing before the big bang, not even time. That's the whole point of it.

11/1/2007 3:46:51 AM

Fanatic-Templar

What makes you think there was nothing before the Big Bang?

11/1/2007 3:48:54 AM

Rhys

Fanatic-Templar I must admit you do have a point. It is something that so far we are unable to determine. It is possible that it was simply the previous universe that had a big crunch, forming a super super massive blackhole that was so powerful it inverted itself in an "explosion" that we call the big bang... or something like that anyway.

11/1/2007 3:59:05 AM

anevilmeme

WTF?

"A collision of that magnitude would be the biggest distructive force that has ever been suggested."

The Big Bang wasn't a collision.

"Any organisms existing on any bodies in discussion would be wiped out."

There were neither organisms nor bodies during the BB.

"Furthermore, a collision of that size would not produce spherical masses, nor could less spherical masses be smoothed out over the years, as there is no friction in space."

Ever heard of gravity? And yes friction can exist anywhere in the universe.

11/1/2007 3:59:24 AM



Did you miss the part on how this explosion took place?, that ALL THE MASS in the universe was concentrated and the pression burst, finally?. Moreover, Do you realise that you don't have ANY BASIS for your claims about the impossibility of "creating" spherical masses?

11/1/2007 4:02:57 AM

Anna Ghislaine

I've never heard it described as a collision before. Where do these people get their ideas? It's as though they think one day something went 'BANG' and then our universe as it is now suddenly appeared.

11/1/2007 4:05:46 AM

dworkin

"A collision of that magnitude would be the biggest destructive force that has ever been suggested. Any organisms existing on any bodies in discussion would be wiped out."

Your point being?

11/1/2007 4:12:07 AM

√ėyvind

That... is awful.

11/1/2007 4:26:46 AM

David B.

Anna Ghislaine wrote: "I've never heard it described as a collision before. Where do these people get their ideas?"

Possibly from the 'ekpyrotic model', the hypothesis of M-theory (string theory) that speculates that the big bang was caused by the collision of two separate 'branes' in the 11 dimensional 'bulk'.

http://www.hcs.harvard.edu/~hsr/pdfswinter2002/04_07_winter2002.pdf

Like evolution before it, fundies probably consider they have mastered the subject after reading one article in American Science, having only understood about one word in ten.

11/1/2007 5:13:56 AM

Adrian

Repeat, but just as dumb as the first time.

11/1/2007 5:23:20 AM

Xotan

Please explain... What was to collide...and with what?

11/1/2007 5:36:36 AM

Caustic Gnostic

There was nothing before the cosmic singularity, in theory. The fact that it was labeled 'Big Bang' is unfortunate, since a certain human subset can not escape the assumption that destructive pyrotechnics were involved.

11/1/2007 6:02:37 AM

MarylandBear

Anyway, its not the "Big Bang", its the "Humongous Space Kablooie".

11/1/2007 6:19:23 AM

MK

@David B. - You probably hit it right on the head, there. Though I very much doubt they cracked open a journal - more likely, they happened to catch part of a "Nova" series on PBS (while monitoring said channel for atheistic influences, mind you) that discussed this in as lay-person terms as possible.

11/1/2007 6:31:14 AM

jleslie48

"Anyway, its not the "Big Bang", its the "Humongous Space Kablooie".

imagine what the fundies would of done if they named it "creation" [of the universe from a singularity]

11/1/2007 6:44:30 AM

Cabal

Wow. Just wow.

Spacetime expansion and gravitational collapse says you fail.

11/1/2007 7:26:41 AM

Mr. Saturday

@MarylandBear

Was that a Calvin & Hobbes reference? I love you for that.

11/1/2007 7:42:15 AM

Ed Hubble

Failed astronomy?

11/1/2007 7:44:50 AM

cyborgtroy

PLANETS DO NOT FORM THAT WAY!

11/1/2007 8:12:31 AM

Robbie

@Everyone naive to think a fundie would pick up a science mag

I doubt it. I think they hear the word "bang" and think "collision". They're just that stupid.

Besides, the singularity comes before the Big Bang - it's a theory of cosmic inflation in the end.

11/1/2007 8:18:43 AM

Mr Smith

I get the impression that justinhaddeland doesn't have the slightest idea about what he's talking about.


11/1/2007 8:25:20 AM

Mister Spak

Collision? What?

11/1/2007 9:15:39 AM

anti-nonsense

The Big Bang Did Not Work That Way!

11/1/2007 9:18:08 AM

Ambrielle

Wow dude. Have you ever got the wrong end of the stick.

11/1/2007 9:37:31 AM
1 2