Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
Water Detection Around Star Supports Idea That Earth's Water Is Older Than Sun Watch (MSN. com)
I've been saying the Sun formed from a molecular cloud of Water-Ice, Methane-Ice, and Ammonia-ice ever since 2008. That's why the Bible states that the Water on the Earth existed before Visible LIght and before the Sun.
As I said in the comments on the Article, this proves Genesis 1;1-3 CORRECT and proves the Big Bang model, especially the Nucleosynthesis part, needs to be further revised. This means the first moment of Creation produces LARGE AMOUNTS of Carbon, Nitrogen, and Oxygen, contrary to the present version of the Big Bang Model, and means the Theory needs to be revised both logically and mathematically in light of this evidence.
Stars do not form from pure hydrogen and helium, and the bigger the Star, the HARDER it is to form from hydrogen and helium.
Stars form from water, ammonia, and methane ices.
I previously made that argument on Phys dot Org way back in 2008.
God is Good and God has proven himself time and again.
The Scientists findings literally confirm Genesis 1:1-3 almost word for word.
What Girls & Guys Said
Opinion
0Opinion
A few things need to be pointed out to you, because you seem to be a bit confused about a couple of things. First off, nucleosynthesis has absolutely nothing to do with the Big Bang (what a silly name) theory; the two are completely separate issues. Nucleosynthesis, discovered by Fred Hoyle for which he should have won a Nobel Prize but didn't, is the formation of the heavier elements (heavier than hydrogen and helium) within the stars and their subsequent distribution across space via supernovae. The "Big Bang" is the currently accepted version of how the whole of physical (but not spiritual) reality came to be. The elements and compounds (ex. water) you mention didn't exist during the earliest phases of creation, approx. 13.7 thousand million years ago.
You're just wrong, and I say this as someone who rejects the daft theory of Darwinian evolution, knows for a fact that our "reality" is just a ridiculous sideshow, a mirage, and is actually familiar with what the Bible really is (hint: it's not a science book).
Wrong and ridiculous.
There are at least two types of Nucleosynthesis that I know of that Fred hoyle proposed.
The first is Big Bang nucleosynthesis,
which he thought produced about 96% hydrogen, just under 4% helium and a trace of LIthium through Carbon.
i just read an article yesterday which pretty well proves Nitrogen through Oxygen 18 were also produced in large amounts an dcarbon was produced in larger amounts than Hoyle thought.
The second is Stellar Nucleosynthesis.
Which is obviously nuclear fusion inside stars producing "metals" especially in certain classes of supernovas... within certain mass ranges anyway.
Stars from 3M (newly discovered fact) to about 29M solar masses in particular contribute to "stellar nucleosynthesis". Crab Nebula Object is a past supernova in this range and Betelgeuse is a future one in this range... but the Crab is expanding above escape velocity of the galaxy, so it's ejecta will NEVER be captured again in this galaxy and not likely in any other either.
Below 3 masses and they cannot Supernova (except through mergers and other collisions events).
Above 30 masses but below 100 masses the core collapses directly to a black hole and most of the 'Metals" are trapped beneath the new event horizon. The remainign hydrogen and helium is blown into intergalactice space at nearly light speed.
Above 100 solar masses (very rare) the star contributes very little to nucleosynthesis, because most of the core mass gets annihilated by Photodisintegration and the hydrogen and helium in the star gets "wasted" and blown into intergalactic space at escape velocity literally arbitarily close to light speed..
continued below.
You are wrong. Scientists have found both water and alcohol orbiting Stars in galaxies at the very edge of the Observable Universe. They've found engtire SOLAR MASSES of clouds of water and alcohol and methan and ammonia orbiting galaxies at the very edge of the observable universe as close to the Big Bang as Hubble and James Webb are capable of seeing.
They just discovered SIX entire MATURE Galaxies that are so old and so well developed that They are considering a MAJOR REVISION to the Big Bng theory and the age of hte Universe to try to explain the new galaxy's existence. THESE GALAXIES ARE SO OLD THEY APPEAR TO BE OVER 13 BILLION YEARS OLD AS THEY WERE BEFORE THE LIGHT LEFT THOSE GALAXIES... IE 26 BILLION NOW... THIS I SA FACT I HAD ALREADY POINTED OUT FROM HUBBLE OBSERVATIONS IN THE PAST, WHEN HUBBLE SAW GALAXIES 11 BILLION LY AWAY AND THOSE APPEARED TO BE ALREADY 11 GA OLD 11 BILLION YEARS AGO... IE 22 BILLION NOW.
tHAT'S PART OF WHY i BELIEVE THE UNIVERSE IS ACTUALLY AROUND 96 BILLION YEARS OLD.
google "Big Bang Nucleosynthesis" girl. you obviously did not even try that to check whether I knew my stuff. I do nto lie and I do not claim knowledge I don't know that I know.
QUOTE
Nucleosynthesis first occurred within a few minutes of the Big Bang. At that time, a quark-gluon plasma, a soup of particles known as quarks and gluons, condensed into protons and neutrons. After the universe cooled slightly, the neutrons fused with protons to make nuclei of deuterium, an isotope of hydrogen.
For example there.
That is not an exaustive article.
Fred Hoyle's original paper had all hydrogen isotopes and all isotopes through Carbon 12 produced in the Big Bang.
He had all isotopes heavier than Carbon 12 produced in stars and supernovae and particle accelerators. He discover the Carbon 12 resonance to prove the Alpha Proces to produce Carbon 12 and Oxygen 16 and so forth in the cores of stars too.
Hoyle made a small mistake apparently, the real Big Bang produced more Carbon than he though, and produced Nitrogen and Oxygen...
This thread was started in response to the literal discovery by professional astronomers that the water on the Earth was "probably older than the Sun" based on studying a nearby star system, which also contained water "older than it's host star".
Next time, do not accuse someone else of not knowing their stuff until YOU search for whatever they are talking about.
I've been studying Astrophysics for 30 years and read all of Hawking and Asimov's books and countless other books. I read "Stars" when they thought that 90% of Stars were more mssive than the Sun, but now we know 90% of Stars are actually LESS massive than the Sun and 50% of Stars are actually LESS than 50% as massive as the Sun.
"First Generation Stars" cannot forme without molecular Ice, because they burn as the 4th power of mass, which blows away most of the nebula of hydrogen and helium too easily during early ignition. But if there is moleculare ice (water, methane, ammonia) that is denser and harder ot heat and accelreate, and so the cloud keeps collapsing longer.
Therefore the bigger the Star, the more likely it STARTED wth Carbon, Nitrogen, and Oxygen in its core... therefore "First Generation Stars" are only possible if the Big Bang mad ethose elements to begin with.
Okay, there's a lot to respond to here. Maybe not now because I'm tired, it's late, and I've been sitting here for long enough already. In any case, water didn't exist during the earliest stages of the existence of the universe, because oxygen didn't yet. Prior to the formation of the first stars there wasn't much of anything at all apart from the most basic of elements.
I'm now looking at your very last statement above, and it's just completely wrong. Stars begin by burning hydrogen and helium, not carbon, nitrogen and oxygen. I don't know where you're getting your "facts" from, but they're wrong.
no, you are wrong, period.
hydrogen and helium cannot collapse into a star spontaneously without water-ice methane-ice and ammonia-ice being present.
REAL ASTRONOMERS jsut proved the water on Earth and around other stars is older than the stars themselves.
that's what the Bible said all along.
you are therefore forced to admit that MOSES knew by divine intervention something scientific fact that nobody could have known through human reason.
Genesis 1 is now proven to be scientific fact.
Real Science is ALWAYS about proving a new model correct and proving an old model incorrect, or else proving the new model is not correct and sticking with the old modle until a better model is produced.
Real astronoers just PROVED the water in the solar system is older than the Sun, Moon and Stars and proved the water around at least some other stars is older than those host stars too.
either believe it or disbelieve it, but don't blame me.
Are you familliar with the Pillars of Creation Nebula? Where hundreds of new stars are forming?
guess what, they do nto form from hydrogen and helium. They form from MOLECULAR CLOUDS fo water-ice, methane-ice, and ammonia-ice as the "seeds" of the cores of the stars. Only once the molecular core reaches a critical mass can it trap hydrogen and helium.
The Bible says God created everything of OLD through wisdom and understanding (namely LOGIC).
Therefore the bible is a science book and anything which disagrees with God is a false science.
Moses somehw knew something that they just discovered with modern telescopes because the true God told him that. period.
Did you know helium and hydrogen spontaneously escape the Sun and all of the Planets, because the Solar Wind is more powerful than Gravity?
Imagine a Hypergiant star, allegedly a "First Generation Star" at allegedly 100 solar masses. It would burn 100 million times brighter than the Sun and thereby lose mass double exponentially faster than the Sun until it faces photodisintegration. Large stars lose a significant fraction of their mass in the form of the solar wind in their lifetime, some of them can lose several solar masses or more within a few years even... becuase hydrogen and helium get blown away by the solar wind.
Here's the thing, you are so used to the FALSE SCIENCES you have been taught your entire life that you have a hard time accepting the obvious truth.
NASA does not use the heliocentric model of the Universe. nasa uses the geocentric model because it still works better than any other model. I've seen their data on their computers and I am not lying to you.
The Bible says the Earth is the center of the Universe and the Sun orbits the Earth and Joshua literally commanded the Sun to stand still and it stopped orbiting the Earth for about 36 hours and then God made it resume orbiting the Earth and it STILL orbits the Earth.
Nearly Everything you think you know about "Science" is an outright lie... and it isn't your fault even... you've been lied to by 500 years worth of "enlightened" atheists.
The real science based on this new EVIDENCE presented by astrophysicists shows Water and Earth are older than the Sun Moon and Stars. Period. That means Iron and nickel and gold and uranium are older than the Sun moon and stars too.
Did you know astronomers do not know what the Crab Nebula Pulsar really is? They just discovered a few years ago it has soem exotic magnetic properties nobody knows how to quantify or describe, and it is destroying otherh stars 10 lightyears away from itself because of that.
further, i have a competing theory of how the supernova happened. I believe anti-matter anihilation is required to produce that much energy. i cannot claim to be absolutely certain, but i have checke dthe scientists work and don't believe electron capture works.
example of how the model they thought was absolutely infallible is now being debunked.
in recent years, they have discovered the Crab Nebula Pulsar is not exactly wht they thought it was. It has way, way more magnetism than they previously thought and other exotic properties, so much that ti is destroying nearby stars TEN lightyears away from itself... that was not predicted by any model and now they need a new model to explain this and we have no way to directly measure it to quantify and describe it yet.
Also, I cannot verify the Electron Capture theory of how the Crab Nebula Supernova formed...
Anti-matter is the least energetic substance I can concoct to explain and explosion that big, and i know a way that a core collapse of iron and hydrogen could produce about 1/6th antimatter as it's own mass fraction, so it's not out of the question.
Anyway, I don't think I'm being antagonistic.
I am trying to explain to unbelievers that God is not a fairy tale, no matter how much they like to believe God is a fairy tale.
Anyway, you cannot rule out God based on a man-made model, because the Model is never 100% true.
A model can only ever rule IN God. the "model" of the verses in Genesis agrees with what scientists just discovered in real universe. the old model does not agree. therefore Genesis rules IN God.
I already knew that, but you didn't.
You are hurting yourself if you treat science as the endeavor of trying to rule out God, because you will always be wrong.
I assume you failed basic history in school. 🤦♀️
I was always the person "Christians" in school asked to reconcile Science to God, because everyone knew I knew more about the Bible than any of them, and everyone knew I knew more about Science than anyone except Danny Thomasson the Senior Physics teacher.
Back then, I used to read two entire physics and math books from the School Library every day and so by the end of my Junior year I had read NEARLY every math and science book on the entire left section of the Library, and in my senior year I re-read most of the same books, since I had more formal education to better understand them all.
I found time to read the entire bible during that time severl times and sitll did "entertainment reading" and still did 15 hours per week in Karate class and still did 10 hours per week in other extra-curricular activiities and still did my chores at home and still graduated high school with Honors... and still corrected most of my teachers' mistakes, much less the lies of the wiccans and atheists.
The very first thing you are taught in Philosophy 101 at Louisiana State University is a Logical Proof that the Universe was Created by an Intelligent God.
The second thing they teach in Philosophy 101 is a logical proof that God is a Singular Being and not a Trinity.
Louisiana State University is considered a public university, but it is an "introduction to philosophy" so it is a fair argument that they ought to teach you what the Greek philosophers and other philosophers PROVED thousands of years ago.
"There is no knowledge or wisdom against the LORD."
By the way, YES I read that fast with nearly 100 percent comprehension and retention. I used to read even faster when I was a Senior in HIgh School I don't know I probably read 3 pages per minute comfortably with comprehension and could push myself to more than that if I wanted to, so I could read a 300 page novel or science book in one sitting comfortably, take a break to piss and eat dinner, and then read another 300 page novel or science or math book in another hour or two etc.
By the way, I don't know my real ELO rating in Chess, because I hardly ever get to play regularly and there are more important things to do.
However, I can prove the Ruy Lopez is NOT the best possible opening for white in Chess. the best possible opening I've ever found starts with kings Bishops Pawn and checkmates ANY computer AI in 3 captures without losing a piece or pawn.
I know Chess Titans on max difficulty plays above the 2000 level, and yet I can Checkmate it in 3 captures EVERY time without losing a piece. I capture 2 pawns and a bishop or two pawns and a knight and then checkmate with a knight-queen combo... the computer does not "learn' from its mistakes, so it is programmed to try to calculate a perfect game, but they don'tknow how to calculate a perfect game so the program isn't perfect. I do learn from my mistakes, so I can checkmate it in 3 captures without losing even one pawn.
I have not tested this opening against Winboard 3000, which plays above Gary Kasparovs ELO Rating, but the opening probably works about the same there, since there is literally almost no room for improvement. I can't imagine there's a way to Checkmate a 2000+ level AI without capturing anything whatsoever and also not losing anything whatsoever, the ai would need to screw up very, very badly for that ot happen..
The point is I am not a dunce, girl, nor am I a liar. When I tell you I tested with a 187 I. Q. in the year 2001 on the MENSA High I. Q. Society test, I am not lying to you.
That was a COMPOSITE I. Q.
If I took a pure Ravens Squares i. Q. test, I can score much, much higher than 187 on that, if they actually designed the test to score my maximum potential. I already know I can solve Ravens Squares problems at least 3 difficulty levels higher than the MENSA test even asks.
Not a dunce, not a liar, and I actually love real history and love real science and meteorology even more.
Speaking of history, we are repeating the crimes of the ancient pagans today through abortion.
While the pagans practiced human sacrifice of infants, our women today, both the Atheists and Christians alike, instead just murder the unborn baby and throw it in the trash.
Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat the same mistake.
abortion = human sacrifice
No. Since the moderator deleted my entire post, I'm going to say this again.
I got an A+ in every history course in school and tested out of all the history courses in college.
I got an A+ in almost everything in science in school and in math and tested out of the first 2 math courses and first 2 physics courses in college with a 100% on all of those placement tests.
I had also considered going into the Marine Corps and had taken the ASVAB test and scored the 99th percentile. I finished every question on the test, including the coding section, and only missed 3 questions on the entire test. I was told it was the highest known score at that time. I was later rejected by the Marine Corps due to a childhood illness I had to report honestly to the Medical Examiner.
I am a Code S Starcraft player.
When I play Axis and Allies my opponents forfeit after ONE TURN if they are smart. If they are dumb they forfeit within 3 turns.
Any other questions?
Germany and Japan have an unfair advantage in Axis and Allies, by the way, but I can win as the Allies too.
Germany and Japan have an opening my best friend and I discovered which pretty much requires your opponents to get PERFECT ROLLS, otherwise Germany and Japan are guaranteed to win.
I tried explaining this to a bunch of noobs who were in a 30-something turn game one time at a local game shop that they didn't know what they were doing, and they were all convinced i was the noob.
Russia CANNOT buy anything except infantry in Axis and Allies for the first several turns or they will automatically lose no matter what else happens.
if Japan gets "above average" rolls when they attack Pearl Harbor and attack Siberia, the U. S, and Russia may as well forfeit, especially since Germany's best opening with even "average rolls is guaranteed to conquer most of Europe.
We read and re-read and re-re-read the rules over and over to maek sure we were doing everythign right, andn when we found this opening we did it to our other two best friends, one of which had scored a 36 of the ACT and was a graduate from Texas A&M by then.
When we showed them the opening, they forfeited on turn 1 without even completing the entire round, because they saw that there was no possibility of a comeback.
When I play Age of Empires 3 in 1vs1 I am like that too. I play Dutch and rush when I hit Age 3 and harass my opponent to death so fast they have no idea what hit them. Very often the opponent forfeits and types "GG" without even killing one unit of mine.
Age of Empires teaches you real history as you play or sit in the lobby too. I learned a lot of real historical facts from the stuff that scrolls while you are waiting on the next game to load.
True fact I learned on the HIstory Channel, although it's been about 20 years ago, so I do not remember the commanding officer's name...
During World War 2, and Certain Allied CO stationed in Israel was preparing for a battle with the Germans. It suddenly occurred to him from God that he was in a very similar situation to Saul the Hebrew King in the Bible, so he opened his Bible to the story of Saul and read Sauls strategy against the Philistines. Then he adapted Saul's strategy against the Philistines to modern warfare and set up a defense which utterly destroyed the German army he was facing on the battlefield.
The United States and Western European military leaders study Joshua, David, and Saul in the Bible for military strategy and tactics, and so long as they stick to the plans it works.
When idiots such as Donald Trump and Joe Bidne make UNLAWFUL ttreaties with the Taliban, a known terrorist organization, things fall apart and we lose.
When we honor God and don't compromise and we learn from the Bible scholars, we kick the enemie's tales every time. It's only idiot politiicans who sell us out that causes us to be less successful in our military campaigns, but the military officers WIN EVERY BATTLE by using the Bible as the guide to military victories.
You may not believe this, but on the history Channel certain Jewish eye-witnesses reported seeing Angels fighting on Israel's side during the Six Days War.
you may not believe this, but the Weather Channel did a television special on Hurricane Dorian hitting the Bahamas, and in this case not one, but SEVERAL survivors who wen tthrough the 185mph eye-wall of the hurricane reported hearing he AUDIBLE voice of God speaking to them and telling them they were going to survive and would be "okay"... even though one of them had just lost his ARM from being struck by a piece of debris at 185mph sustained with about a 250mph gust... and he had simultaenously lost his mother, who was BLOWN AWAY by the wind and never found again. God did not save his mother, but God spoke to HIM and saved him and his wife and kids alive.
I'm warning you. you can MISS GOD by ONE INCH and go to hell forever.
I am not crazy when I tell you God is real and he talks to human beings who are willing to listen.
Did you know that NASA still uses the Ptolmaic "Geocentric" model of the universe when tracking Asteroids and Comets and planning space missions to the planets, even though you are taught that is wrong in school?
Why? Because it is way, way easier to program the Ptolmaic Geocentric model into a computer than it is to program the Heliocentric model of the Solar System from Copernicus much less Einstein's General Relativity.
Did you know neither NASA nor Russia knows the real Gravity equations?
They got to the Moon and Pluto by over-engineering the space craft AND making course corrections "on the fly".
If they knew the real gravity equation and real graviational constant, they could fly to pluto without making any course corrections, but because they do not know that yet, they need to over-engineer the spacecraft and make TWO course corrections to fly to Pluto.
I am not lying. I have seen some of the data from NASA's geocentric model of he Universe which they use for everything they do. They do not use the Heliocentric model of the solar system, and they usually do not use general Relativity for anything other than to calibrate the GPS network, which because General Relativity is not correct either, they end up needing to recalibrate the GPS network again and again several times per day.
In the REAL Relativity Theory as Einstein proposed, there is not supposed to be a "preferred reference frame" thus in Einstein's view, it is equally correct to say that a train station moves past the train as it is to say that the train moves past the station. Thus according to Einstein's view, you can't actually prove the difference between the Heliocentric model of the Solar System and the Geocentric model of the Universe.
However, Einstein is actually WRONG, as I've outlined elsewhere for several reasons, starting with the fact space-time is actually NOT a "continuum" but is Quantum, and so is Copernicus wrong too.
There IS a preferred reference frame in reality, because God ABSOLUTELY knows everything, and the Cosmic Microwave Background shows we (the Milky Way Galaxy) are relatively close to the center of the universe, but not directly in the center of the Universe. The CMB even tells us how fast we are moving ABSOLUTELY with respect to the point of origin of the Big Bang itself, and we are actually barely moving at all compared to MOST of the galaxies Hubble and James Webb can see. MOST (Nearly all) of the Galaxies in the Universe are moving directly away from US in every direction at 50% to 99% of the Speed of Light.
The Milky Way is moving with respect to the CMB at only a few hundred kilometers per second, which it's true that dwarfs solar system speeds, but that is NOTHING compared to 50% or 99% of the Speed of Light.
This means WE are very very close to the ABSOLUTE center of the Universe and the ABSOLUTE center of the Universe is probably somewhere inside the Local Group of Galaxies or so, but not much farther away than that.
The previous post is based on a combination of the Cosmic Red Shift and Proper Blue Shift of the CMB radiation as seen in WMAP and other observatories.
That is, the CMB in one direction appears "slightly red" and in the opposite direction appears "slightly blue". this means we are moving away from the 'red" side and moving toward the "blue' side... at only few hundred kilometers per second... even though again most of the galaxies in the Universe are moving away from us as fast as the laws of physics and logic will allow them to move.
I cannot prove this and don't know what to think about it, but my older brother, who is probably smarter than me and makes over 200k per year income, still swears up and down that the Sun orbits the Earth just as it appears to do in the sky.
Since NASA ( I happen to know this for a fact because I've seen it with my won eyes,) they definitely uses the Geocentric Model of the Universe for almost all of their calculations, it appears that the Sun does indeed orbit the Earth as does Mercury and Venus while they orbit the Sun orbiting the Earth..
So the joke's on all of us for believing the Heliocentric model of the Universe which was taught to us in public schools. NASA does not use the Heliocentric model. They use the Geocentric Model which is found in your King James Bible.
Since i know for a fact NASA uses the Geocentric model of the Universe, and I know for a fact General Relativity is too complicated to use anyway, that implies neither newton's Gravity nor Einstein's Relativity works correctly at all... if they did work, NASA would be using a heliocentric model or a "milky way centric" model or a 'local group centric" model or something else.
Since the Geocentric Model WORKS WELL ENOUGH TO FLY TO PLUTO and that's what NASA USES, then by Occam's Razor (the simplest explanation that works is usually correct,) that means the Earth really is the center of the Universe...
The simplest explanation that works in an electronic computer is the Geocentric model of the Universe, otherwise NASA would not be using it to track objects.
People forget the entire FRAMEWORK of "Modern Physics" is NOT the "Philosopher's Truth". It is a MODEL and a MODEL is always WRONG believe it or not.
however, that doesn't make it useless, necessarily.
"A model need not be the Philosopher's Truth, so long as it makes accurate predictions." - Rene DesCartes.
Example, Cartesian maps are always flawed, but sailors have been using them to navigate for centuries.
So while the Standard Model of Particle Physics may be very close to the Truth, it is not "absolutely true".
Anyway, I am not lying about that either. NASA literally uses the Geocentric model not the Heliocentric model.
Wether or not we are at the True "center of the Universe" is probably unprovable, but if you look in a telescope in every direction the Light Horizon in every direction is almost exactly the same distance in every direction, which is:
4164 Mega-Parsecs, give or take whatever the standard error is in the Hubble Constant.
if one side is off by a few parsecs compared to the other, no big deal.
It sure looks like the Universe is expanding in a spherical shell in every direction almost exactly equally AWAY from us and we are at almost literally the DEAD CENTER of the expanding spherical shell... therefore Copernicus might be wrong... maybe we DO occupy a Special Place in Reality...