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

Quote# 58222

[The expansion of the fabric of space is accelerating from an unknown force (dark energy).]

You choose to believe in unknown force that has never been observed, quantified or tested. It is a construct to get the Big Bang theory to work out.

I choose to believe in Jesus, God in the flesh, creator of all things, who lived, was crucified, dead and buried, an rose on the 3rd day to prove His claims, He is attested to in the words of the New Testament.

Who has more faith?

Colossians 1:15-17 reads "He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him. He is before all things, and in him all things hold together.

Ultimately, Jesus is the one (not the inanimate force) that you seek!

JimmyRay, Free Republic 29 Comments [2/9/2009 2:28:40 AM]
Fundie Index: 2
WTF?! || meh
Username:
Comment:



1 2
Berny

We can observe the expansion of space. This is a fact. Dark energy is a theory to explain this expansion.
Do you have evidence of Jesus rising from the dead, or that he even lived? How about contemporary accounts of his resurrection, or of his miracles by chroniclers outside of the Bible?
Didn't think so.


2/9/2009 2:40:56 AM

Zabimaru

Is he saying that Jesus is making the fabric of space accelerate?
That's a neater trick than the regular party tricks he does in the bible.

2/9/2009 2:52:03 AM

Papabear

"Who has more faith?"

If you really believe that bullsh*t, you do, hands down.

2/9/2009 2:57:47 AM

Doctor Whom

I choose to believe in Jesus, God in the flesh, creator of all things, who lived, was crucified, dead and buried, an rose on the 3rd day to prove His claims, He is attested to in the words of the New Testament.

I choose to believe in Hank. He is attested to in Karl's list. Unfortunately, what we choose to believe does not affect reality, and in terms of explaining observation, science is a spectacular success, while the Abrahamic religions are equally spectacular failures.

2/9/2009 2:57:57 AM

John

You choose to believe in unknown force that has never been observed, quantified or tested. It is a construct to get the Big Bang theory to work out.

I choose to believe in unknown force that has never been observed, quantified or tested. It is a construct to get the Bible theory to work out.

This is an example of the "tu quoque" fallacy, a.k.a., the "yeah, well, so's your momma" argument.

2/9/2009 3:10:46 AM

a mind far far away

You choose to believe in unknown force that has never been observed, quantified or tested. It is a construct to get the Big Bang theory to work out

Now, correct me if I'm wrong, I don't know a whole lot about astrophysics, but Einstein proved that the universe was expanding, so that would lend credence to the Big Bang theory, but that doesn't mean that dark energy has anything to do with it. In other words, the universe is expanding whether or not dark energy exists at all.

I choose to believe in Jesus, God in the flesh, creator of all things, who lived, was crucified, dead and buried, an rose on the 3rd day to prove His claims, He is attested to in the words of the New Testament.

This makes your first argument against science to be void. You'd rather accept something that might as well have come from a Brother's Grimm story than reality.

Who has more faith?

Um, that's all you have is faith. At least we have observations and tests on our side. You know, reality, that think that is real that you fucks try to pretend doesn't exist.

Ultimately, Jesus is the one (not the inanimate force) that you seek!

Yeah, ok. You just keep trying to convince yourself of that, and we'll be here laughing at you all the while.

2/9/2009 3:25:31 AM

Tolpuddle Martyr

@a mind far far away

Same here buddy, the Wikipedia entry on the subject states that "Dark energy is the most popular way to explain recent observations that the universe appears to be expanding at an accelerating rate."
Meaning that while Dark Energy has not been directly observed, the theory is gleaned from observation. Of course the earliest gospel, Mark was written some 90 years after Jesus's supposed death and the first non Christian reference to Jesus occurs in 115 CE.

Science 1: For Observation on Dark Energy
JimmyRay 0: For Observation on JC

2/9/2009 3:52:38 AM

John_in_Oz

YOU have more faith. The whole point of Science is that faith is for retards, evidence is what counts.

2/9/2009 5:36:45 AM



Theories keep advancing as more evidence gets uncovered. If more evidence for dark matter is found well, sciencists will keep researching and even more theories will be proposed. Science does not stay still for long(unless fundies are in control). Anyways, if dark matter is invalidated then so what, it doesn't automatically make your side right. For krisna's sake, you still have to compete with thousands of other creation accounts.

2/9/2009 6:55:58 AM

Mitch

There's no evidence in 'dark matter' or 'dark energy' only hypothesis' that they exist due to unaccountable forces. Most atheists and realists in fact choose to disregard 'dark matter' or 'dark energy' as science at this point due to the fact there has been no way of actually detecting it in any form whatsoever.

Of course though, you guys have to do anything, ignore the fundamental principles of the scientific method to pay out a fundie. I've got to admit even though most fundamentalists are bull crap, I'm suprised how many atheists with a supposed appreciation for science will just drop their knowledge in a wild and brutish attack on some poorly underdeveloped and malleable minds of fundamentalists.

Shame on you atheists, I'm a deist and it suprisingly seems that I have more of a respect for scientific evidence and the scientific method than you do.

2/9/2009 7:45:17 AM

aaa

Pseudo-science of the worst type.

2/9/2009 8:29:56 AM

Psittacosis

@ Mitch: all 'dark energy' means is 'unknown force that is causing the expansion of the universe to accelerate'. The evidence is fairly clear that said acceleration happens. Something must be causing it. Until it can be quantified, it remains 'dark'.

2/9/2009 9:16:38 AM

Tolpuddle Martyr

@Mitch

Um, Mitch I never suggested that anybody had directly observed dark matter or dark energy or that these phenomena actually exist. Merely that the theory was deduced from the avaliable evidence. Faith in bible stories is a different matter, it's not deduced from evidence but blind faith in the stories being true. Not the same thing.

2/9/2009 9:17:43 AM

Dan Onymous

Please explain how you know for a fact that God did not create dark matter? Please also give your Bible references where dark matter is shown to be false.

@ Mitch. There is indeed evidence for dark matter - those exact unnacountable forces which you yourself mentioned. Gravity lensing out of proportion to the calculated observable mass of galaxies, the shape and rotation of galaxies, expansion of the Universe... all these point to there being something which we cannot see which accounts for a massive proportion of the mass in the Universe.

There is plenty of evidence that dark matter exists (it's called dark matter purely because there seems to be something there but we cannot yet detect it). It wouldn't have been postulated without there being evidence for something there. What you mean is that there is no real evidence regarding what dark matter actually consists of and that is a different argument.

2/9/2009 12:45:59 PM

Pule Thamex

You. You definitely have more faith than I. I have no faith in the supernatural at all. Not even the least smidgen of belief in God or any other silly fairy stories.

I don't have faith in science. I think science is a powerful tool and a potent method by which we can learn about and discover the natural world. I believe that science explains the natural world incredibly accurately. However, a new discovery could be made tomorrow which invalidates a previous theory or causes it to be modified. So why should I have faith in science.

You choose to believe in something that can not be verified, so you must have faith in your belief instead of any evidence for it. Atheists believe in the potency of science, but they rely on evidence and not faith in order to consolidate their belief.

2/9/2009 12:53:52 PM

Reverend Jeremiah

no..its definitely dark matter we are seeking right now.

And no, we arent trying to worship it ..you fucking cultist.

2/9/2009 2:41:34 PM

Mister Spak

We have the accellerating expansion. We win.

2/9/2009 4:15:16 PM

????

Who has more faith? You have more faith.

2/9/2009 5:19:28 PM

Old Viking

There is ample evidence supporting the dark matter hypothesis. There is no objective evidence supporting the theistic hypothesis.

2/9/2009 5:24:41 PM



I just thought I'd chime in here. Many of you seem to be confusing dark matter and dark energy.

Dark matter is something used to explain why observable galaxies seem to be rotating at a tangential velocity far greater than the strength of the galaxy's gravity would allow. Think of gravity being a string, and the star systems are tied to it spinning, at the rate at which the stars are spinning, the string should have snapped. So, we believe a large portion of the mass of these galaxies is unobservable at this point in time. This unobservable mass, does however still contribute to the gravity, strengthening the string, and balancing things out.

Dark energy has to do with the measured rate of expansion of the universe. When we were first measuring this, we assumed over time it should slow (all of the universe's gravity pulling on everything else), however more recent measurements were found to be higher than previous ones, meaning it was speeding up. We really have no explanation for this, so dark energy was invented, with many, many, many theories for what dark energy is. It is quite possible dark energy may not exist at all, we simply have made erroneous assumptions in our calculations (another theory).

Just thought I'd post.

2/9/2009 8:31:41 PM

Mitch

@Psittacosis, Tolpuddle Martyr, Dan Onymous:

Geez, you caught me, I'm not a physicist. My point is there are plently of other things they could be looking for, they seem very centred on it being caused by an unknown object, have they even considered the possibility that the unknown force could be from a known object which is acting differently from the way we believe it acts? Mostly likely not, people want to look for a magical substance floating around everywhere instead.

Their account of the gravitational forces in our galaxy could be accounted for by other means which they aren't looking at right now, in science, it's fundamental to look at every alternative even in revision.


2/10/2009 3:15:05 AM

Tolpuddle Martyr

@ Mitch

Actually Mitch you have a good point there (btw I'm not a physicist either), there may be alternative hypothesis could be drawn from the same set of facts. That's a fair point.
That said it's part and parcel of the nature of any scientific theory. I believe Steven Hawkings said that scientific theories can never truly be proven, but rather could be disproved if evidence arose to falsify them (I don't know if that's exactly what he said, please correct me if I'm wrong).
I don't know all the avaliable evidence for the existence of dark matter or dark energy but as far as I can tell the hypotheses for the existence of both was inferred from avaliable physical evidence. Again, I'd contend that bible stories don't seem to have any similar parallel. And btw, thanks for raising your point. It did make me question my assumptions which can only be a good thing.

2/10/2009 10:07:11 AM

Quantum Mechanic

Colossians is a well-known forgery, imbecile.
Lie some more.

4/24/2012 5:44:57 PM



Pippi Longstocking is attested to in the words of Astrid Lindgren. You were saying?

4/25/2012 12:17:10 AM

EG

> have they even considered the possibility that the unknown force could be from a known object which is acting differently from the way we believe it acts?

Yes, of course. You don't add a new type of force until you've tried to explain the observations without it (basically Occam's razor).

4/25/2012 2:46:27 AM
1 2