Some Say Well, fuck. Lets just bet the farm on this one! It must be true. Oh for fuck sake ratty, when are you going to grow a brain?
1 Like
I’ve got one. It just doesn’t work most of the time. Do you know how hard it is pretending that you’re capable of thinking and making critical decisions.
You should see me at interviews. It’s like the jig is basically up the minute they start asking me questions I haven’t prepared for.
Not easy when all of your blood flow is going to your penis.
Did you have a school to attend as a child? Let alone one that included proper science teaching on the curriculum?
Only once again, I see a mythology fanboy demanding to be spoon fed with the basics that I was learning about at the age of 11.
First off, the Big Bang deals with the origin of the EARLY universe, before anything other than subatomic particles existed. Larger structures did not form until later. Indeed, neutral atoms of hydrogen did not form until 379,000 years after the Big Bang.
Before then, the universe was too hot for matter to exist in any form other than an ionised plasma, and indeed, light was unable to traverse macroscopic distances until the temperature fooled sufficiently for neutral hydrogen atoms to form.
This marks the moment when light could travel across macroscopic distances for the first time, and the light that began travelling through the early universe at this point became the cosmic microwave background we observe today.
So, where did all the big objects come from?
The answer is simple. Gravity.
The moment you have entities possessing mass in existence, gravity attracts them to each other. Gravity coalesced the freshly precipitated neutral hydrogen atoms into clusters of ever increasing density, and as said coalescence took hold, it accelerated, courtesy of the well-known behaviour of gravity.
Quite simply, as masses draw closer to each other, the gravitational force increases. Once coalescence of a collection of atoms begins, it continues until that collection of atoms forms a compact object.
And now, we have the first stars forming.
These first stars were large-mass stars (10 to 100 times the mass of the Sun), and burned through their hydrogen via nuclear fusion in around 10 million years. They were large enough to then ignite helium fusion, carbon/oxygen fusion, and finally, silicon fusion, resulting in the formation of nickel/iron cores.
That’s when stellar nucleosynthesis grinds to a halt. Once a large enough nickel/iron core is accumulated, it’s supernova time. Whereupon the universe is seeded with heavier elements that didn’t exist earlier.
Indeed, every atom of elements heavier than helium in your body, and making up this planet, began life in an early star that underwent a supernova detonation. It’s the reason we state that we’re all made of the leftovers of dead stars.
Now that heavier elements are appearing in the universe, the next generation of stars forms from material that includes those heavier elements.
But here’s the rub. The heavier elements might be subject to greater gravitational attraction because of that heavier mass, but they also accelerate more slowly than the lighter elements, so once again, the centre of each new coalescing mass becomes a star consisting mainly of hydrogen and some helium. The other elements form into a disc rotating about the star.
That disc is again subject to gravity internally. The heavier elements coalesce to form dust particles, then lumps the size of gravel particles, and so on, until we have macroscopic rocks. These are attracted to each other, until they build our first planets.
But all of this doesn’t take place until at least 10 million years after the Big Bang.
But … it continues doing so from that point onwards. We can now observe this process in action, in different stages of advancement, in hundreds, if not thousands, of star clusters via space based telescopes.
So, around 8½ billion years after the Big Bang, another one of those clusters of matter seeded by supernova detonations, coalesced, to form a fairly average star and a disc of matter rotating around it.
That star was our Sun.
After about 50 million years or so, the early versions of the planets of the Solar System, including Earth, had coalesced from the protoplanetary disc.
And guess what? Gravity was responsible for the water that became part of the early Earth forming into oceans, etc.
Now, if you attended an actual school as a child, why were you never taught any of this? I was learning about physics, chemistry, biology, geology and astronomy in a rigorous manner at the age of 11. By the age of 16, I was learning how to solve some of the differential equations that describe the behaviour of celestial bodies. I still have the textbooks in my library. Why weren’t you doing the same?
They have Kool Aid fountains instead of drinking water in Religious schools…
4 Likes
Eyewitness testimony should always be suspect.
Consider the Satanic moral panic of the 80’s and 90’s. Therapists unintentionally “planted” false memories in children to support ridiculous claims of ritualistic Satanic abuse.
Peoples’ careers were ruined, and law enforcement resources were diverted away from real problems . . . like the cocaine epidemic.
1 Like
Let me rephrase the question to simplify it for you. The oceans and seas hold about 96.5 to 97 percent of all Earth’s water and cover about 71 percent of the Earth’s surface how did water get into Earth?
Holy moly, have you never heard of subduction and other general geological occurrences?
Subduction is where one layer of the earths crust is pushed under the surface of another piece of the earths crust dragging with it all manner of material from the surface and pulling it underground like a massive slow moving conveyor belt.
Also things like cavitation of rocks such as limestone that react with water and over time and are slowly eroded away to form cavities in the earths crust.
Look at a textbook and scientific data behind volcanoes, if something comes up out of the ground and is ejected onto the earths surface. Something must take the place of all of that displaced material, wonder what could potentially take its place?
These are just a few examples I could rattle off the top of my head. What about this all seems mysterious and needs an all powerful being?
I am surprised I am answering this again. Apparently my first response did not post.
LOL Fill up? Ha ha ha ha ha ha … (density = mass/volume), Therefore, the layering of Earth is a result of gravitational pull. The densest layer (inner core) is at the center and the least dense layer (crust) is the outermost layer. Can you guess where water falls in this mix? Why do you think valleys are full of air? Now, there is the real enigma! And, what do you imagine is gluing all this oxygen to the rocks? Wow! So many mysteries.
Water is composed of Hydrogen and Oxygen, it is an emergent property of the combination of 2 hydrogen molecules and one molecule of oxygen. All hydrogen atoms were created about 380,000 years after the big bang . Oxygen was created much later in the nuclear furnaces of stars, towards the end of their life cycles.
Earth’s oxygen supply originated with cyanobacteria, tiny water-dwelling organisms that survive by photosynthesis. In that process, the bacteria convert carbon dioxide and water into organic carbon and free oxygen.
Model gives clearer idea of how oxygen came to dominate Earth’s atmosphere | UW News.
Is this supposed to be some sort of apologetic theistic gotcha? Science has some very good models of how all the elements were created.
1 Like
Again, did you have a school to attend as a child?
What part of “water molecules are present in abundance right across the universe” did you fail to learn?
Those protoplanetary discs I mentioned earlier … included in the material would have been cometary ices. Cometary ices loaded with water, albeit extremely frozen water.
Which, wait for it, would have been integrated into the early Earth via the same process of gravitational attraction that integrated all the other materials into the early Earth.
Do you spend your entire life demanding this level of spoon feeding from everyone around you?
4 Likes
You obviously do not understand the meaning of the terms you are using. Agnostic literally means, “Without knowledge”, and that means “I don’t know.” Most atheists are in fact agnostic - atheists. These terms are not mutually exclusive. Atheist literally means “Without a theology” or “Without a belief in god.” The atheist holds no belief in god. Atheism says nothing at all about delving into the multiverse, spirituality, simulation theory, new age garbage, UFO beliefs, or any other whimsical imaginations that are unsupported with solid evidence. Atheists are people who do not believe in the existence of God or gods. (Full Stop) Whatever else they bring to their lives is a personal matter. Unless of course they hop onto a public forum and begin spouting past lives Buddhist nonsense or begin making claims of spirit existence. While these are perfectly acceptable positions or beliefs for atheists to hold, most atheists are also skeptics to some degree. When ideas do not pass the sniff test, they just don’t seem to go very far without being challenged by most atheists. (Just something I have observed.) You my friend, do not understand the terms you are using.
How seriously can one take any claim that can’t differentiate between near death, and being dead. 
Nope, just as before you took your sabbatical, what they are “reporting” are claims about dreams derived from brains starved of oxygen, but not dead of course.
Don’t just Google what you want to believe…
FYI,these “reports” are not demonstrating anything that happens when one is dead, but rather what the a very much alive brain experiences when scientific knowledge is keeping someone alive, after their heart has stopped beating.
Wow, “some say” that do they… 
Subjective
adjective
- based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions.
Here’s something from the late Christopher Hitchens that nails it for me.
“NDE’s are not accounts of what happen to you after you die, they are (anecdotal) accounts of what you may experience whilst alive, thanks to life saving scientific innovations.”
It wasn’t, before asking questions, try Googling the big bang theory, then Googling how solar systems and planets are formed. Those two events are separated by 9.3 billion years.
Sigh, the earth didn’t form itself, see above.
Gravity, or did you mean how was water introduced to the planet? In that case, gravity.
Onto, not into, and the problem is not simplicity, your questions are beyond facile, the problem is that they are a) asinine in the extreme to anyone who understands the most basic scientific facts that explain them, and b) even were they unanswerable mysteries they would not in any way remotely evidence any deity, you are clumsily trying to use a known common logical fallacy, called an argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacy. I have linked it for you. Note the emboldened part in this quote:
“Argument from ignorance (from Latin: argumentum ad ignorantiam), also known as appeal to ignorance (in which ignorance represents “a lack of contrary evidence”), is a fallacy in informal logic.”
It is not a choice between natural or scientific explanations, and an unevidenced deity using inexplicable magic. Nor is this the first time you have used this fallacy, and been told about it. Here for example:
Or here:
Again here:
Note, no god is in any “equation” until sufficient objective evidence can be demonstrated it exists, or is even possible. What you’re describing already exists, the odds against it happening therefore must be irrelevant no? Like winning the lottery is astronomically unlikely, yet people win lotteries against those odds every day all over the world, so it must be inexplicable magic at play, your rationale not mine, for clarity.
You try ti use the same fallacy here again:
and here…
SInce I am just using up bandwidth now, I shall just point out that you have used this same logical fallacy relentlessly from your first visit, and HERE is a link to your posts for anyone who cares to check.
I don’t need to really go any further. Honestly, doesn’t this say it all? There is nothing in any of this that is not reliant on self-reported consensus. We previously talked about ‘consensus.’
Am I bored with this yet?
1 Like
It’s called near death because the people are clinically dead for a while and then receive resuscitation.
I don’t think you understand what it means to take DMT. There’s no sleep involved and no oxygen deprivation.
Exactly, so anecdotes about their experiences do not indicate we can experience anything after our brains die.
I didn’t mention DMT, or sleep? I was responding to your claims about NDE, and quoted Wikipedia in response to your own quote, and they absolutely involve oxygen deprivation if the heart has stopped.
Wikipedia reports that the oxygen deprivation explanatory model is supported by the reports of fighter pilots who experience unconsciousness due to g-force acceleration. However Wikipedia also reports
Also, hypoxic hallucinations are characterized by “distress and agitation” and this is very different from near-death experiences which subjects report as being pleasant.[14]
Lack of oxygen = bad hallucinations
Being dead = good hallucinations
However, it does indicate that experiences continue after brain activity has ended. In fact, the whole thing is just the soul escaping the body before the brain starts to decay. That is the objective of the soul (if it is to go to heaven).
Much the way that a stroke occurs after there is a restriction of blood flow to a portion of the brain, the end result of cardiac arrest is akin to a global stroke: once the heart stops beating, oxygen is cut off from all the body’s organs, including the brain, and within seconds, respiration stops and brain activity comes to a halt.
You can’t defend against the claim that people experience things after the ending of brain activity because people’s hearts and brains have been reactivated after clinical death and the people are coming back with exceptional stories to tell.
I would love to see evidence for that. Demonstrate you have a soul ratty. Show me one legitimate study that concludes a soul is actually an existent construct.
3 Likes
Well, when a person goes into cardiac arrest and brain activity comes to a halt, people who are subsequently brought “back to life” recount extended experiences beyond the time of death. As such experiences include existing outside of the body in a weightless state; going to the gates of heaven through a portal of light; and meeting other souls in that very same heaven it seems to me that you are under the pressure to demonstrate that the soul does not exist. My case is quite open and shut.
I can explain all of this quickly and easily, with two simple ideas. Sleep paralysis and phantom limb syndrome.
It is a well-known fact that when some people lose limbs, their brains continue to feel the limb; and their bodies react as if they have the limb, long after the limb is gone. This is exactly what happens in NDE and in OBE. The body shuts down. The brain, absent input from the body’s senses, creates the ‘astral body’ or ‘religious hallucination.’ The absence of sensation from the body creates serious integrity problems for the brain. It compensates by creating its own sensations. This also occurs in extreme cases of sensory deprivation.
Sensory deprivation or perceptual isolation is the deliberate reduction or removal of stimuli from one or more of the senses. Simple devices such as hoods (HINT: Buddhist Mindfulness Meditation) headgear and earmuffs can cut off sight and hearing, while more complex devices can also cut off the sense of smell, touch, taste, thermoception, and the ability to know which way is down. When I practice OBE I use earplugs.
Sensory deprivation has been used in various alternative medicines and in psychological experiments with an isolation tank. I was introduced to it through my dream culture studies and Zen practice. When deprived of sensation, the brain attempts to restore sensation in the form of “YOU GUESSED IT,” hallucinations](Hallucination - Wikipedia).
(Sensory deprivation - Wikipedia)
I can still do the OBE thing today. I do not believe any of this, OBE, NDE, or the rest is distinct from sensory deprivation. As for the drug experiences, they have their different causes. Mushroom hallucinations are not quite the same as experiences with OBE, however, I have done both at the same time. I met a character called “The Laughing Man” who took me on a little journey once. As I said, it is all brain states. I believe that completely at this point in my life. (This was not always the case.) I was probably once as fucked up as ratty. LOL.
2 Likes