Still, PROVE it. Prove that they are right. It is light. Analyze it all you want, but without direct evidence that their methods are correct, then
it is just words.
Can you honestly say you fully understand the math involved and can show it, the numbers, and how they drew their conclusions. That the evidence is
so grand, that it is completely believable, without a doubt the truth, and we will never have a discovery that finds anything to prove otherwise?
If the universe is growing, where are we? In the middle? The opposite end? If this was 13 billion light years away, 13 billion years ago, how far
away is it now? So, less than a billion years after being an infinitesimal size of near infinite mass, the universe was a bare minimum of 13 billion
light years across, just from this point to our current location. How big is the universe at this moment?
They say that they discovered a galaxy current estimates of about 13.5 billion light years away. The possibility that some are further than that, but
haven't been able to verify it yet.
That is a claim, make proof. (not you personally)
I make no claims, just stating doubts and that there is no way to empirically back up statements claiming something is 13 billion light years away and
the universe is 14 billion years old, or any of THEIR claims have substantial, irrefutable proof.
There is not a consensus of how the universe came to be. Is it membrane theory? Did the big bang happen because in a multi-dimensional existence two
things clashed to make something new? Is the universe all alone in some inconceivable emptyness? If not, what space is that space in? It must be in
space, if it is expanding, even a vacuum has volume, and that volume is greater than the object that is expanding within it. Are there other
universes? Will we collide with one?
Where is all the answers from science?
You know, if I have a program, I can plug in data until I find the combination that nets the results I want, and claim that the errors prior to that
was finding the proper calibration and adjustments for the programs inaccuracies.
What makes the galaxies stay together, there is not enough visible mass for our current theory. Must be invisible matter. That works. When Plasma
Cosmology is just as valid.
Rogue planets, they shouldn't exist because our model of relatively spherical objects depends on accretion surrounding a young star. Although we
find systems that don't fit the model as we like it to, those must be anomalies.
What I am really saying is, our perceptions are limited, that leads to our analysis and conclusions to be limited as well. Things have to react this
way or that. But, just because we have observed requirements for our short time, with our limited equipment ... we don't know everything. If we
did, then it is a sad day, because there will be no more advancement.
See, I am saying that the Big Bang aging the universe and galaxies rely on things that cannot be proven. I am not saying they are impossible.
ANYTHING is possible.
If you start to pick apart science, as it picks apart other things, you will find holes in it. But that is a good thing. Nothing should go without
having been analyzed properly.
You can't record data for 1000 years and think you have the answers for all of existence.
And, until some serious proof can be given that your cells and mine were both on the head of a pin 14 billion years ago, with no offense, then how am
I to believe it just because someone with a degree says it to be so.
Don't limit yourself, and don't believe everything you hear. You don't have to believe me either. I still respect your opinion and your views.
I think you misinterpret my stance. You think I am just rambling at the mouth, though I may not explain myself well in this topic, I do know of what
I intend to imply. I take no offense to your rebuttal, but, they may claim their mathematics are spot on, but, of course, I could stare at a picture
and figures and come up with a brilliant story as well.
You may be trying to take a shot at me, thinking, this weirdo believes people who wrote the Torah over people with computers and calculators.
What I believe has NO relevance. What I am asking is for people to realize, they may not know nearly as much as you think they do.
I am just tired of silly claims by science with no real evidence to back it up. Such as they do for everything. They claim to know the core, but, we
discover new things about it. We barely know what is under our oceans and below the cosmetic layers of the surface (find old buried cities
consistently that require redating the beginning of civilizations and societies because past science fact has become outdated and ultimately wrong),
but we supposedly can detail exactly what other planets are made of, their environments, etc. and there are not billions of people crawling all over
Look, I don't care what you believe. Just respect others views, I mean, you don't have to respect mine I suppose, not telling you what to do
You like the big bang, think that the universe is 14 billion years old, and science already has most of the answer, fine with me. I think it is great
you have that security in your convictions and belief in the science and system.
and your sarcasm, didn't work, because it IS just a theory ... down to 10 ms
brilliant, are they not? /sarcasm ... physical proof is not
light waves that have traveled through space and been manipulated any number of times, no matter how they try to mathematically explain it, the math
may be right, but the inputs and how the inputs were derived don't need to be.
I will hold my doubts. Math is much more solid than science, that is why I always loved the subject, even before school (bit of a math nerd back in
the day). Until some real, tangible evidence comes up. We can star gaze and hypothesize and dream away. It is quite fun, but it is not fact.