Realitycheck

I'm just backing up what this small number of professionals has to say about it.

Some of the things from this story are just so unbelievable. Like the incident where he tried to cut off his genitals. I wonder why he would be doing that? Probably something to do with his parents telling him it doesn't belong there? This case just has total bullshit written all over it, and if it just happens to be true (like how could anyone ever know?), I'd say they only have themselves to blame.

http://www.foxnews.mobi/quickpage.html?page=38321&content=58747955&pagenum=-1 This is really sad, seeing this kid without a father, being led down this road with untold ridiculous molding pressures influencing him. Absolutely ridiculous. I mean, really. In the absence of a bonafide male father figure, just how hard could it conceivably be to brainwash an impressionable little baby into believing just about anything, just add in some coochie coo, a bunch of trips to the salon, and, "Presto! You were really a girl! Happens all of the time! Now, we'll just get this surgery done and everything will be fine and dandy." This is so disgusting, I'm almost at a loss for words. Only in California. I guess all I can really say is that there is likely (hopefully) some level of responsible government supervision going on and that he will punch his mothers in the kisser when he finally wakes up, or maybe he chickens out of the surgery. You'd think that would be a prime reason why they shouldn't allow gay parents to adopt opposite sex children at the very least. I thought we had already established that while nature does play a role, nurture was predominant in these cases. After all, he's got the goods. After all, they're giving him hormone blockers to begin with. Doesn't that sound just a bit inhumane in itself? I thought that children normally went through puberty in CA 3 years before everywhere else anyway.

...

That could be the one main reason why creationists don't accept science's claims.

Ok, so was this like a parallel universe, which isn't very logical, or part of a bubble verse, which is seemingly too far away spatially to be reasonable?

Yeah, white holes, that's the ticket! However, since black holes really aren't holes and just dense conglomerations of matter, I have a really hard time seeing it through. Where is this other place, dimension, universe, etc?

So these scientists that spend all of this money creating these streams of quark gluon plasma under extremely high temperature and pressure, designing and employing the use of complex detectors meant to capture and analyze the results of these collisions, that spend countless hours sifting through the enormous amounts of data produced by all of these collisions, these people that actually do all of the work, you're saying that they don't know what they're working with, don't know what they're doing? If we were just talking about gluons/bosons, I might pay more attention, but its not that simple.

I've read Genesis and it doesn't say that. If you're going to try and argue legitimately, you should really stick to the facts. Dreaming up stories about dreamt up stories hardly helps your cause. I mean, really, why lie? What a complete, absolute bizarro distortion of reality. In other words, I never read that part where Adam and Eve would have been spoonfed and catered for for their entire lives had they not fallen (by imaginary servants who didn't exist yet, or was the food supposed to have been delivered by Q?).

So if quarks and gluons don't exist, then what exactly are they producing in today's colliders? One would expect that they at least knew what they were working with.

You know, there's one aspect of this "perfect design" that I've always had an issue with. I can't imagine why so many people have so much trouble seeing through it. If Adam and Eve had never ate of the fruit, everybody would still be naked, animals tempted by their neighbors' wives raw flesh even more in an even more animalistic world. So how was this design so perfect? Since none of it really never even happened and it's just part of a story to model peoples' lives from, I don't see how it's that big of a deal, but it's really hard to see how "God's" original design was worth much at all.

That's pretty far out there. I think your model needs a little polishing.

In most of the moon models I've seen, water is just a layer, never making up the core, but I suppose it's not impossible. I'm pretty sure that a gas giant of hydrogen and oxygen would have a core of water and ice, among other things.

But that just looks like a bunch of hot gas. Oops. :)grin Ahh, Moontanman, looking back, apparently this "water" was actually 180,000 °F jets of gas streamed out. Is the spectral signature of water really that defined to call a jet water vapor as opposed to hydrogen and oxygen? Does hot hydrogen and oxygen readily form into any other compounds easily? Apparently, I was a bit too excited to read the rest. No need to reply.

6/22/11 Science Articles, physorg.com article, Baby stars emit water, etc.

For every amount of people which science enables people to kill others, it saves more, enables more to live longer by a hundredfold. What kind of justice would you profess?

I posted a recent news article about a stage in the early life cycle of many stars in which the stars emit large prominences of water.

Also, to correct you, while those temperatures were present just after the BB, like I said, only the simplest of elements were formed in it. Only in supernovae are there temperatures necessary to form the heavier metals out of successively lighter elements. There has to be a method for the metals to form. There is no way for them to form after the BB out of quark-gluon plasma, only in supernovae. Sorry for beating around the bush.

But, alas, we can observe that many of the oldest stars have little metal content which fits in with original model pretty well. Also, looking around a bit, there appears to be a bit of disagreement on the specifics of some metallic formation in stars, but that the heaviest elements are formed in the biggest supernovae, which means that Population 3 supernovae seemingly could have burnt up fast and formed iron. To answer your question, right after the BB, the small universe was filled with very hot matter like what is termed quark-gluon plasma. When it cools, it automatically forms the two lightest elements. There is no mechanism for it to form into heavier, more complicated elements.

Heavy elements are generally believed to have been created more recently in Population 1 and 2 stars because in the first generation or Population 3, there was mostly only Hydrogen and Helium, and most of the stars were very big and red, grew very fast and exploded, providing heavier gases for successively heavier stars, which were more metallic. IIRC, I'm pretty sure the life cycle of Population 3 stars were substantially different than later populations. It wouldn't surprise me, however, if this was incorrect. Just because there were hardly any metals created in the BB doesn't necessarily mean that a star(correction: supernova) shouldn't be able to fuse Hydrogen into successively heavier elements all the way down to Iron, without exploding first.

The stuff I've been reading lately lends to the idea that there is a part of the brain which helps you imagine things. You dream up an idea, focus on it for a little while, and a specific part of the brain lights up with activity (not really sure which part that would be.) In fact, I read about a recent study where they were able to draw extremely vague facsmiles of the pictures that people were imagining. How would that be represented in your brain? Maybe if you considered each brain cell in a certain part of the brain as a pixel, and the coordinated effort between the cells as an image, then you might be able to better envision your neural image, though it would have to be rendered custom-made just for your brain as you grew up dreaming things, as opposed to the way a monitor renders images that you see. So basically, when you imagine falling in love with someone, there really isn't any credibility to it unless there is some correlating interaction with an actual person.

Like I said, the infinitely more popular harmful mutations don't succeed in advancing the species, but very rarely, a mutation occurs which is beneficial, like a blonde-haired, blue-eyed beauty. You think God just descended out of thin air and changed the genetic code to make people more fair-skinned? How unholy! What do people's appearances have to do with anything in the realm of holiness? The animals that were born without an arm or whatever simply weren't able to reproduce, not contributing to the gene pool and disappearing, but sometimes things happen that are good, hence we have fairer-skinned people. How unholy!

Ahh, Mr. Ra, I understand your repulsion. Is Ra his real last name? I mean, cmon. How repulsive can you get? Growing your hair long, looking like a Jesus pretender wannabe, naming himself after a false Eqyptian god, positioning himself as a know-it-all revelator? Really, just how repulsive can you get? Who would give such a walking freakshow the time of day? Savior in his own mind? For the uninformed, the antichrist is supposed to mimic Jesus, so why would you expect any Christian to give him the time of day if he names himself Ra? FYI, for future reference, if you really want to convince somebody in the future, i would suggest using the stuffy professor type (no offence intended), complete with pocket protector. Acting jobs don't inherently bestow lots of credibility, nor sincerity either, but I completely understand how some people revel in mocking figureheads of old who never came to be, even if it's just for a claim to fame. Until I see somebody part waters or walk on it, they all kind of look the same, with the exception that Jesus was most likely a lot more sincere. After all, Jesus himself never necessarily lied about his feats, or "miracles". I just have issues with his followers sprucing up his story... just like the Jews. But what can I say? In this day and age, carnival sideshows are kind of the norm.

Arnica Montana, Capsaicin, Menthol ... there are a number of valid products which help, up to an extent, but these three are among the best OTC I've used. Depends on the severity of the trauma.

So then tell us where you think all of the animals came from at all the different times or do you think that carbon dating is a lie or do you think that Noah's story was representative of a doomsday story from another planet or what? And please, don't skimp on the details. As far as I can tell you need to provide lots of details in a really short time about how and why all the animals were delivered to this world at the same time in order to give it any credibility. I don't see it happening. If you're just going to use what's in the Bible, you can save your time, but if you have your own pet theory, let's see what you've got. Oh, and yes, it was late, I was tired, my arguments were not as well constructed as I would have liked. I don't think I made any really big errors but if you want to twist things around to try and suit your cause, then so be it. I just want to hear some answers about when God created all of these animals, just how many did he create, how did he fit ALL of them into the ark, etc., and make sure it all adds up, or I'm pretty sure somebody will catch it. (Can you imagine living within a closed vehicle for 40 days with elephants, giraffes, bison, etc.? I think I want to tally up a total of animals for good measure.)