The Big Bang Theory (Page 4)
Geoff: Absolutely. It's been easier to come up with things like 'Cold Dark Matter' than to go back over the fundamentals.
raffa_7: It's kind of hypocritical...
How science challenges religious belief due to the lack of hard evidence, but it comes up with a theory of an implosion? and that an specimen so dominant and unique as humans evolved from bacteria, fish, monkeys?
MultifariousEntity: If you think that's hypocritical, than you clearly haven't educated yourself on WHY those ideas are commonly held.
Godzirra: I'm gonna marry sheldon, and sing him the kitty song, and drive him to the comic store, and tell him how brilliant he is, and then one day while he's sleeping steal some of his *special stuff* and make some genious whasian babies.
Can I point out that this thread is in the 'Science' forum, not the entertainment forum.
Godzirra: can *I* point out that forums are subjective, for all we know this could in fact be in the science forum...in fact in another dimension this could be anything.
derp, sheldon moment lol
Das Waltz: Just go read about 'systems sciences' and how the chaos theory to escape velocity - Isaac Newton's approach. Big Bang nucleosynthesis is only a theory, not an answer.
Geoff: If I see the phrase "only a theory" many more times, I think I shall have to consider that this Earth is somewhere I'd be embarrassed to call my home.
xubix: well according to mcgaugh(and others) the big bang and relativety theory need to be reviewed. eg in stead of , slowing down after an explosion the univers is expanding faster while it should slow down. And we are mising matter....
adamleath27: why are there giant rocks still woundering space? and what are those rocks made of ? can chimistry come from nothing ?