Expansion: Big Bang or Stretching? 11

Helium-2 Nebulas.  Clouds of glowing, blue gas, called helium-2
nebulas, have been set aglow by something hot enough to strip two
electrons from each helium atom. No known star—young or old—is hot
enough to do so (16), but compressed conditions before the heavens
were stretched out would do this.

Dark “Science.”  The big bang theory must invoke unscientific
concepts, such as “dark matter” and “dark energy,” to try to explainthe “stretched out heavens.” What is dark matter and dark energy? Even
believers in those ideas don’t know (17).

Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB). The CMB is often given as evidence
for the big bang theory. Actually, that radiation, when studied
closely, is a strong argument against the big bang and evidence for
the sudden creation of matter within an immense universe.

16.	“Hotter stars ‘are not predicted by normal stellar evolution, so
the presence of the He II nebulas is a bit of a mystery’ comments
Garnett ...”  Donald R. Garnett, as quoted by Ron Cowen, “Gorgeous
Gas,” Science News, Vol. 163, 24 May 2003, p. 328.

17.	“No one knows what dark matter is, but they know what it is not.
It’s not part of the ‘standard model’ of physics that weaves together
everything that is known about ordinary matter and its interactions.”
Jenny Hogan, “Welcome to the Dark Side,” Nature, Vol. 448, 19 July
2007, p. 241.

“We know little about that sea. The terms we use to describe its
components, ‘dark matter’ and ‘dark energy,’ serve mainly as
expressions of our ignorance.”  David B. Cline, “The Search for Dark
Matter,” Scientific American, Vol. 288, March 2003, p. 52.

Summary

With both the big bang and stretching explanations, it is difficult to
imagine time beginning, the sudden presence of matter and energy in a
small universe, a brief period when laws of physics did not operate,
and space expanding. The big bang theory says that space expanded for
a brief fraction of a second from a mathematical point—trillions of
billions of times faster than the speed of light today. The stretching
theory says that a much smaller universe than we have today was
rapidly stretched out, along with the matter and light in that space.
Although no scientific explanation can be given for either form of
expansion, we can see which explanation fits the observable evidence.
We also can appreciate why at least eleven Bible passages, involving
five different writers, mention the “stretched out heavens.” Another
verse, Psalm 19:1, takes on a new depth of meaning: “The heavens are
telling of the glory of God, and their expanse is declaring the work
of His hands.”

http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/FAQ19.html

The only time creation and science should EVER be used in the
same sentence is when the words "is not" has been inserted between
them

Pahu78@gmail.com wrote:

> Summary
> 
> With both the big bang and stretching explanations, it is difficult to
> imagine time beginning, the sudden presence of matter and energy in a
> small universe, a brief period when laws of physics did not operate,
> and space expanding.

But not as difficult to imagine as the spontaneous generation of a 
giant magic sky fairy - now that really would be weird!

regards
Ian

On May 13, 8:56 am, Ken  wrote:
> The only time creation and science should EVER be used in the
> same sentence is when the words "is not" has been inserted between
> them

One more religious wacko!!!!
Hewy

On May 13, 1:41 pm, Ian Smith 
wrote:
> Pah...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Summary
>
> > With both the big bang and stretching explanations, it is difficult to
> > imagine time beginning, the sudden presence of matter and energy in a
> > small universe, a brief period when laws of physics did not operate,
> > and space expanding.
>
> But not as difficult to imagine as the spontaneous generation of a
> giant magic sky fairy - now that really would be weird!
>
> regards
> Ian

Do you find it easier to believe in the spontaneous generation of the
universe from nothing, and the spontaneous generation of life from non-
living matter, with no intelligent cause? Do you know of any
scientific evidence for these events?

Pahu78@gmail.com wrote:
> On May 13, 1:41 pm, Ian Smith 
> wrote:
>> Pah...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> Summary
>>> With both the big bang and stretching explanations, it is difficult to
>>> imagine time beginning, the sudden presence of matter and energy in a
>>> small universe, a brief period when laws of physics did not operate,
>>> and space expanding.
>> But not as difficult to imagine as the spontaneous generation of a
>> giant magic sky fairy - now that really would be weird!
>>
>> regards
>> Ian
> 
> Do you find it easier to believe in the spontaneous generation of the
> universe from nothing, and the spontaneous generation of life from non-
> living matter, with no intelligent cause? Do you know of any
> scientific evidence for these events?

Not surprisingly, I find it easier to believe in whatever the 
evidence points to...

Evidence for a "big bang" event = increasing by the day
Evidence for a "god" = none whatsoever, absolutely nothing

If you want to propose a 'goddidit' explanation, then all you need 
to do is present the evidence for the existence of your god. I 
shan't lose any sleep waiting. No-one has managed to do it so far - 
the 'god' explanation stands only as a discredited hypothesis.

But don't let me stop you trying...

Go ahead, present the evidence.

regards, Ian

Pahu78@gmail.com wrote:
> On May 13, 1:41 pm, Ian Smith 
> wrote:
>> Pah...@gmail.com wrote:
>> > Summary
>>
>> > With both the big bang and stretching explanations, it is difficult to
>> > imagine time beginning, the sudden presence of matter and energy in a
>> > small universe, a brief period when laws of physics did not operate,
>> > and space expanding.
>>
>> But not as difficult to imagine as the spontaneous generation of a
>> giant magic sky fairy - now that really would be weird!
>>
>> regards
>> Ian
> 
> Do you find it easier to believe in the spontaneous generation of the
> universe from nothing, and the spontaneous generation of life from non-
> living matter, with no intelligent cause? Do you know of any
> scientific evidence for these events?

Yes. 200 years of physics has developed a series of explainations that both
overlap and accurately predict behaviour we can measure in nature.  Working
backwards these ideas suggest that this universe did indeed get created in
some form of quantum event 13.7 billion years ago.

Anybody is of course free to disagree and present their own mechanisms, but
as this is science, deus ex machina isn't a sufficient explaination as it
provides no predictive and testable _new_ ideas.

-- 
Two hands working can do more than a thousand clasped in prayer

On 13 May, 15:43, Pah...@gmail.com wrote:
> Expansion: Big Bang or Stretching? 11
>
> Helium-2 Nebulas.  Clouds of glowing, blue gas, called helium-2
> nebulas, have been set aglow by something hot enough to strip
> two electrons from each helium atom.

Helium-2 (two protons, no neutrons) is a radioisotope that decays
by proton emission into protium (hydrogen), with a half-life of
3x10-27 second.[45]

That's 0.000000000000000000000000003 seconds

[45] The Encyclopedia of the Chemical Elements, page 264