ThereIsBearCum wrote: elkanofan wrote:
Fabrestuta wrote:Oh really, there is also many many scientific papers that say the big bang didn't happen. I see you also ignored the part about energy meither being created nor destroyed, which begs to ask what happened before the big bang funny that. It just happens to be one of the main principals of physics. Google it if you do not know, quite a famous man.
I am NOT saying the big bang isn't true, I am saying you are blindly saying it is with absolutely NO evidence to back it up. Much of the science of the universe is educated guesses, but still guesses.
Not just that, i seen how SO much science follows such a hugely Marxist premise.
Look at the premise of evolution.
Look at the premise behind Marxism
the basically follow the same exact lines, not just that they both came about around the same time. Carl Marx believed strongly in Darwins theories also.
No soul or magical crap just men or humanoids fighting against themselves over history to live the 'best' life possible and the strongest groups or species win in the end and will rise to the top!
Again who where these people? Upper middle class who became rich, westerners, Europeans, did they take Africans and South America into account with their theories? Or was it purely based on European affairs, i mean explaining evolution and western science to a kid living on a rubbish heap with no parents in Kenya, not really helpful is it, they probably just kill themselves!
Fabrestuta wrote: elkanofan wrote:
ThereIsBearCum wrote:There are loads of peer reviewed scientific papers that disagree with you there. Gee, who am I going to believe? Briefly, the expansion of the universe is evidence that supports the big bang.
I don't know what happened before it, no one does. That doesn't make it untrue, we just haven't figured out its origins yet.
Have you ever seen air?
Its not about 'what' to believe all the time.
It's about being aware of hings which affect you. Just make sure you don't take anything spoon fed by the media as gospel without properly checking out the institutions which provide you with the information.
those peer reviewed scientific papers, that institution who funds it, what do they believe, what type of people are they?
What theories do they follow?
Thats a good point Elk. Not all scientific research is done on a purely neutral basis.These may be truly brilliant people but they are still that, people, and as such can have a predisposition for one idea or another.Perfect example. How can you have many absolutely brilliant minds have completely different ideas on whether global warming is man made/real/ or just a cycle of the Earth?
I guess keeping an open mind is only pertinent if it coincides with what you believe.
Well the factor there is money, maybe the scientists promoting global warming are set to make themselves a healthy profit from their findings which lead to products and rules put in place because of their research
Maybe the wealthy men who want to promote global warming because these people will make money from it? People need to question this.
The scientist behind Eugenics i think were clearly smart, dosen't make them any less racist. Just because your are perceived smart and have qualifications dosen't make you neutral or mean you cant make mistakes and be horribly misguided. like i say also for all the scientific evidence we see today and how 'advanced' society is we still have billions dying of hunger, we still have so much hit going on, are all the things put out there without question to help us.
I DON'T believe blindly that everything put up by our institutions are there just to help us.
money in this society is ALWAYS the most important factor!