It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Religion Test For Nerds

page: 1
4
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 26 2014 @ 05:35 PM
link   
Religion test:

Do you believe material systems can display strongly emergent properties?

Do you believe some matter exists that cannot be detected optically or by other electromagnetic means?

Do you believe, in some areas of the universe, stable matter exists that violates the island of stability in nuclear chemistry?

Do you believe infinitely dense point-mass particles exist, in violation of special relativity?

Do you believe something can spring forth from nothing?

Do you believe the bending of nothing can impart force on something?

Do you believe the Earth got its oceans by being bombarded by comets or from volcanoes?

Do you believe its possible for a gas giant planet to form from an accretion disk, "migrate" to within 0.015 AU of its host star, and be in a retrograde orbit?

Do you believe the Earth formed from kilometer-sized boulders smashing into each other in space, which then turned into a gigantic pile of magma 400 km deep?

Do you believe objects the size of a large asteroid exist, that can spin around on their axis at 1200 hz, and emit a focused beam of energy that is detectable across galactic distances?

Bonus question:

What does the quantity r represent in the so-called “Schwarzschild solution?”


----------

Give yourself 1 point for each question you answered yes to.

10-9 points = Pope

8-6 points = Archbishop

5-4 points = Priest

3-2 points = Alter Boy

1-0 points = Lake of Hell Fire


For the bonus question, if you answered:

"The inverse square root of the Gaussian curvature of the spherically symmetric geodesic surface in the spatial section of the manifold."

Not only will you burn in a lake of eternal hell fire, you will also be subjected to the untold horrors of academic ostracism for being guilty of speaking the truth.


edit on 6/26/2014 by AnarchoCapitalist because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 26 2014 @ 06:12 PM
link   
a reply to: AnarchoCapitalist

I can not say using any Fact's that any Questions listed can be either Yes or No! As for the R Value, it is just an idea so R could hold true or R has no meaning whatsoever.

Now I could say I've seen Spirits, Odd Things. Yet most are in my head as far as I can Tell. If say a few people claim to see the same, does it mean it's real? People come up with many Ideas to something they haven't a clue. It happens, might as well allow things to be instead of Definding them into something.

Yet, One Question that has me wondering. Does the Sun actually move while all the Planets Follow in a Sprial as we move out into Space? Anything could be Possible, so every question is either Yes/No.

That's if ones mind is Open.

Peace



posted on Jun, 26 2014 @ 06:15 PM
link   
a reply to: AnarchoCapitalist


Give yourself 1 point for each question you answered yes to.

10-9 points = Pope


So...I take it all the 'Pope's failed the test with flying colors.

edit on 26-6-2014 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2014 @ 06:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: AfterInfinity
a reply to: AnarchoCapitalist


Give yourself 1 point for each question you answered yes to.

10-9 points = Pope


So...I take it all the 'Pope's failed the test with flying colors.


heh

The real Pope has more science behind his beliefs than the academics do these days.



posted on Jun, 26 2014 @ 06:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: AnarchoCapitalist

originally posted by: AfterInfinity
a reply to: AnarchoCapitalist


Give yourself 1 point for each question you answered yes to.

10-9 points = Pope


So...I take it all the 'Pope's failed the test with flying colors.


heh

The real Pope has more science behind his beliefs than the academics do these days.



Which is why Africans are still spreading AIDS, right?

edit on 26-6-2014 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2014 @ 06:37 PM
link   
What the questions represent:

Do you believe material systems can display strongly emergent properties?

Answering yes means you believe consciousness is a by-product of organized unconscious matter, even though this violates reductionist principles.

Do you believe some matter exists that cannot be detected optically or by other electromagnetic means?

Answering yes means you believe dark matter exists.

Do you believe, in some areas of the universe, stable matter exists that violates the island of stability in nuclear chemistry?

Answering yes means you believe "strange matter" or "neutronium" or objects made out of pure neutrons (neutron stars) exist.

Do you believe infinitely dense point-mass particles exist, in violation of special relativity?

Answering yes means you believe in black holes.

Do you believe something can spring forth from nothing?

Answering yes means you believe in "fiat lux" or the Big Bang.

Do you believe the bending of nothing can impart force on something?

Answering yes means you believe gravity is a function of curving "spacetime."

Do you believe the Earth got its oceans by being bombarded by comets or from volcanoes?

Answering yes means you believe the story told by mainstream science.

Do you believe its possible for a gas giant planet to form from an accretion disk, "migrate" to within 0.015 AU of its host star, and be in a retrograde orbit?

Answering yes means you believe the story told by mainstream science. (This is just flat-out impossible no matter how it is modeled by mainstream scientists, yet we observe this happening in space.)

Do you believe the Earth formed from kilometer-sized boulders smashing into each other in space, which then turned into a gigantic pile of magma 400 km deep?

Answering yes means you believe the story told by mainstream science.

Do you believe objects the size of a large asteroid exist, that can spin around on their axis at 1200 hz, and emit a focused beam of energy that is detectable across galactic distances?

Answering yes means you believe the mainstream story about pulsars.


edit on 6/26/2014 by AnarchoCapitalist because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2014 @ 06:43 PM
link   
a reply to: AnarchoCapitalist

I'm no astronomer, so maybe we should get an actual astronomer in here to discuss this. Because I'm not sure you're an astronomer either.



posted on Jun, 26 2014 @ 06:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: AfterInfinity
a reply to: AnarchoCapitalist

I'm no astronomer, so maybe we should get an actual astronomer in here to discuss this. Because I'm not sure you're an astronomer either.


I certainly hope an "actual" astronomer shows up here. I come prepared to wage academic jihad on their religious beliefs.



posted on Jun, 26 2014 @ 06:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: AnarchoCapitalist

originally posted by: AfterInfinity
a reply to: AnarchoCapitalist

I'm no astronomer, so maybe we should get an actual astronomer in here to discuss this. Because I'm not sure you're an astronomer either.


I certainly hope an "actual" astronomer shows up here. I come prepared to wage academic jihad on their religious beliefs.



By the way, the Big Bang theory does NOT say that something comes from nothing. According to the theory, all of the matter in the universe was condensed into one tiny space before it exploded in the Big Bang. That's not "nothing".

Strike one for your test.

But at the very least, you have provided an opportunity to be educated on the finer points of cosmology. The thread is not without its benefits.

edit on 26-6-2014 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2014 @ 06:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: AfterInfinity

originally posted by: AnarchoCapitalist

originally posted by: AfterInfinity
a reply to: AnarchoCapitalist

I'm no astronomer, so maybe we should get an actual astronomer in here to discuss this. Because I'm not sure you're an astronomer either.


I certainly hope an "actual" astronomer shows up here. I come prepared to wage academic jihad on their religious beliefs.



By the way, the Big Bang theory does NOT say that something comes from nothing. According to the theory, all of the matter in the universe was condensed into one tiny space before it exploded in the Big Bang. That's not "nothing".

Strike one for your flawed test.


So where did the "one tiny space" come from?



posted on Jun, 26 2014 @ 06:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: AnarchoCapitalist

originally posted by: AfterInfinity

originally posted by: AnarchoCapitalist

originally posted by: AfterInfinity
a reply to: AnarchoCapitalist

I'm no astronomer, so maybe we should get an actual astronomer in here to discuss this. Because I'm not sure you're an astronomer either.


I certainly hope an "actual" astronomer shows up here. I come prepared to wage academic jihad on their religious beliefs.



By the way, the Big Bang theory does NOT say that something comes from nothing. According to the theory, all of the matter in the universe was condensed into one tiny space before it exploded in the Big Bang. That's not "nothing".

Strike one for your flawed test.


So where did the "one tiny space" come from?



Where did "God" come from?



posted on Jun, 26 2014 @ 07:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: AfterInfinity

originally posted by: AnarchoCapitalist

originally posted by: AfterInfinity

originally posted by: AnarchoCapitalist

originally posted by: AfterInfinity
a reply to: AnarchoCapitalist

I'm no astronomer, so maybe we should get an actual astronomer in here to discuss this. Because I'm not sure you're an astronomer either.


I certainly hope an "actual" astronomer shows up here. I come prepared to wage academic jihad on their religious beliefs.



By the way, the Big Bang theory does NOT say that something comes from nothing. According to the theory, all of the matter in the universe was condensed into one tiny space before it exploded in the Big Bang. That's not "nothing".

Strike one for your flawed test.


So where did the "one tiny space" come from?



Where did "God" come from?


Don't know, don't care. I do care where the one tiny space came from though.

Just a little FYI:

The Big Bang theory originally came from a Catholic Priest as a way of tying religion and mainstream cosmology together.

en.wikipedia.org...


edit on 6/26/2014 by AnarchoCapitalist because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2014 @ 07:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: AnarchoCapitalist

originally posted by: AfterInfinity

originally posted by: AnarchoCapitalist

originally posted by: AfterInfinity

originally posted by: AnarchoCapitalist

originally posted by: AfterInfinity
a reply to: AnarchoCapitalist

I'm no astronomer, so maybe we should get an actual astronomer in here to discuss this. Because I'm not sure you're an astronomer either.


I certainly hope an "actual" astronomer shows up here. I come prepared to wage academic jihad on their religious beliefs.



By the way, the Big Bang theory does NOT say that something comes from nothing. According to the theory, all of the matter in the universe was condensed into one tiny space before it exploded in the Big Bang. That's not "nothing".

Strike one for your flawed test.


So where did the "one tiny space" come from?



Where did "God" come from?


Don't know, don't care. I do care where the one tiny space came from though.

Just a little FYI:

The Big Bang theory originally came from a Catholic Priest as a way of tying religion and mainstream cosmology together.

en.wikipedia.org...



The theory arose due to observations and analysis. It had nothing to do with unity between opposing parties.

I don't know where the space came from. Maybe from the implosion of a previous universe.
edit on 26-6-2014 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2014 @ 07:18 PM
link   
a reply to: AfterInfinity

I just showed you that it did not come from observation and analysis, it came from a priest BEFORE any observation or analysis was conducted. The wiki article is explicit about that much.

So where did the previous universes come from?

Again, something from nothing. The Big Bang theory is all about creating something from nothing, just like the Bible and the Catholic Priest who came up with it say.



posted on Jun, 26 2014 @ 07:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: AnarchoCapitalist
a reply to: AfterInfinity

I just showed you that it did not come from observation and analysis, it came from a priest BEFORE any observation or analysis was conducted. The wiki article is explicit about that much.

So where did the previous universes come from?

Again, something from nothing. The Big Bang theory is all about creating something from nothing, just like the Bible and the Catholic Priest who came up with it say.


Not necessarily. There's a reason it's still a theory - that means we're still working on it.

Also:


Ten years later, Alexander Friedmann, a Russian cosmologist and mathematician, derived the Friedmann equations from Albert Einstein's equations of general relativity, showing that the universe might be expanding in contrast to the static universe model advocated by Einstein at that time. Independently deriving Friedmann's equations in 1927, Georges Lemaître, a Belgian physicist and Roman Catholic priest, proposed that the inferred recession of the nebulae was due to the expansion of the universe.


en.wikipedia.org...

See, there was math involved, not just politics. That's what I call "observations and analysis".

edit on 26-6-2014 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2014 @ 07:31 PM
link   
a reply to: AfterInfinity

BZZZZZZZZ

Hubble didn't post his observational data until 1929. Lemaître came up with the Big Bang theory because of his religious beliefs, THEN he set about playing with Friedmann's equations until he came up with some math to support his pre-conceived ideas.

When Hubble came out with data that seemed to support Lemaître's pre-conceived ideas, the academics (all spiritual men) jumped on it as supporting the Big Bang theory.

At the time, alternative causes of red shift, such as the CREIL effect or the Wolf effect, were not known to science.


edit on 6/26/2014 by AnarchoCapitalist because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2014 @ 07:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: AnarchoCapitalist
a reply to: AfterInfinity

BZZZZZZZZ

Hubble didn't post his observational data until 1929. Lemaître came up with the Big Bang theory because of his religious beliefs, THEN he set about playing with Friedmann's equations until he came up with some math to support his pre-conceived ideas.

When Hubble came out with data that seemed to support Lemaître's pre-conceived ideas, the academics (all spiritual men) jumped on it as supporting the Big Bang theory.



"Because of his religious beliefs" Do you have proof for this? Proof that it was explicitly his religious beliefs, and not the equations he discovered?
edit on 26-6-2014 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2014 @ 07:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: AnarchoCapitalist
What the questions represent:

Do you believe material systems can display strongly emergent properties?

Answering yes means you believe consciousness is a by-product of organized unconscious matter, even though this violates reductionist principles.

Do you believe some matter exists that cannot be detected optically or by other electromagnetic means?

Answering yes means you believe dark matter exists.

Do you believe, in some areas of the universe, stable matter exists that violates the island of stability in nuclear chemistry?

Answering yes means you believe "strange matter" ...[SNIP]


I don't understand the point system you listed. Does this mean that the pope IS knowledgeable in science?



Give yourself 1 point for each question you answered yes to.
10-9 points = Pope
8-6 points = Archbishop
5-4 points = Priest
3-2 points = Alter Boy
1-0 points = Lake of Hell Fire



posted on Jun, 26 2014 @ 07:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: AfterInfinity
"Because of his religious beliefs" Do you have proof for this? Proof that it was explicitly his religious beliefs, and not the equations he discovered?


The man was a priest who insisted that he kept his scientific theories separate from his theology.

That's like Bill Clinton insisting that he "did not have sex with that woman" or Barack Obama insisting that he would "close the detention facility at Guantanamo."

It can be assumed, prior to his theorizing, that he believed in the Bible's version of fiat lux, or "let there be light."

Lemaître was one of two things, either a mega-hypocrite or he was fishing for a theory to justify his pre-existing beliefs.

I vote for the later.

It's important to remember that relativity can be manipulated to suit any agenda. As Einstein said of Lemaître, "Your calculations are correct, but your physics is atrocious." By that he meant that, even though Lemaître had come up with calculations to support his presupposition, it did not mean the theory was actually representative of what was occurring in reality. Anyone can come up with a mathematically correct model, but not every mathematically correct model is correct.

Peer-reviewed publications are littered with old models that were disregarded in favor of new data, which means the old models, while correct mathematically, were not representative of what is occurring in reality.



edit on 6/26/2014 by AnarchoCapitalist because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2014 @ 08:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: Lipton
I don't understand the point system you listed. Does this mean that the pope IS knowledgeable in science?



heh - I'm pointing out the "faith" mainstream cosmology requires from its adherents.

Mainstream cosmology is a religious belief system, not unlike Christianity.




top topics



 
4
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join