In the begining God made Science
-
Selam Abdun Nur
Very interesting claims. I say claims at this point as I have not varified any of it yet as I have not research in this area, but very interesting. So the blackhole theory is a baseless theory according to your sources. The claim is that the gravity is so great that light could not even escape its surface, but I am not disputing with your theory as I have no knowledge on this matter. A question. You say they are teaching Einsteins theory in university. Where are they teaching the theory which aposes it?
On another point there was a claim at one point that someone was able to control cold fusion in a lab,it turned out to be false claims. However, if we consider the impact of such a discovery, the world will change over night. No more need for combustion based fuel. Lot of companies will go bust. I personally believe someone somewhere has managed to or very close to unlocking the secrets to producing fuel which is both clean as well as in abundance. However, I don't believe we will live to see it in our life time. Too much money to be made at present with oil, gas etc.. Who knows hey?
Peace
Hope
That is interesting as black holes have been detected and "seen". As for "cold fusion" it is, at present, thought to be impossible; but, of course, the impossible in science has a habit of becoming possible.
-
Salaam Rev John,
it is without doubt black holes are pure conjecture, they will infer existence through other effects, this is not seen, please sight a link to this information.
Rev John, you think energy can not be created nor destroyed, every atom in existence breaks this man made law, explain an earth magnet, is an easy example, it pours out energy endlessly, all dynamos utilise this endless field, of course I am talking to myself.
I have little interest in cold fusion, I would be more interested in a simple method of converting magnetic fields into electrical fields without movement, one way to do this is to pull part of the north face of the magnet into the south face, the fields are agitated in so pull the electrical field from the magnetic, this has been achieve , but not commercially developed.
Another method is magnetic gates, this has real possibilities in large volume electrical production, but one of the problems with extracting free energy from the fluidic manifold is people like Rev John, so invested in the lies of the establishment they can not see further than the end of their nose.
-
This is what you call evidence, the article states exactly at the end, this is not proof of anything, pure conjecture
"September 4, 2008?A supermassive black hole at the center of the Milky Way has wound up in the crosshairs of a virtual telescope spanning 2,800 miles (4,506 kilometers).
Ground-based radio telescopes in Hawaii, Arizona, and California aimed at Sagittarius A*?also called A-star?obtained the image (above, a previous picture of the black hole).
The star is believed to mark the position of a black hole four million times the sun's mass.
Though unproven, there is strong evidence for the existence of black holes. "
-
Salaam,
I noticed on my previous post I put 1036, the 36 should have been smaller, 10 to the 36, anyway, black holes, and dark matter are both inventions to explain the lies of the gravity based universe; there exists, they speculate, around 500,000,000,000 galaxies surrounding the Milky way, the conventional physicists tell us each has a black hole at its heart, yet they needed to produce an artists impression to post on the Hubble site, to show us how they should look, quiet amusing, what is truly funny is that people accept the tissue of lies without ever investigating anything, and what is truly annoying is they will both propagate and vigorously defend these lies, based solely on conjecture, they see expert opinion as infallible.
Black holes cannot be seen because of their strong gravity. Visible light cannot escape black holes because of it.
-
Salaam Munzir,
yes I know what they say about the lie of black holes, you state it as a fact, but it is without any doubt absolute rubbish, even the king of Einsteinian physics stephen hawkings has stated he no longer thinks blackholes exist, you should ponder this, do you seriously believe the most powerful and dominant force in the universe is gravity?
It is the weakest force known to man, as I told you if gravity is 1, magnetic-elecro fields are 10 to the 36, which do you think the more likely to dominate the universe?
Do not be fooled by the ignorance of Rev John, his first name should expose his level of thought, in a plasma based universe, everything works according to the existing observed natural order, you do not need to invent lies, like black holes and dark matter, have you noticed they must be invisible to exist, the emperors new suit.
-
One last point to consider, plasma, the fourth state of matter, makes up around 99.99% of the matter of the universe, you should investigate plasma to understand creation, not gravity.
Peace Abdun Nur
Can plasma which makes up 99.99% be the dark matter scientist have been going on about?
http//news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4679220.stm
However, it is considered the universe is made up of around 80-85% dark matter.
PeaceHope
-
Salaam Munzir,
yes I know what they say about the lie of black holes, you state it as a fact, but it is without any doubt absolute rubbish, even the king of Einsteinian physics stephen hawkings has stated he no longer thinks blackholes exist, you should ponder this, do you seriously believe the most powerful and dominant force in the universe is gravity?
What about antimatter. It has a lot of energy.
-
Salaam,
Anti-matter is again speculation, one derived from the Dirac sea, it has been verified experimentally that every known kind of particle has a corresponding antiparticle, and that a particle and its antiparticle have exactly the same mass and lifetime, and exactly opposite charge.
It is from this symmetry that the physicists speculate anti-matter must exist in equal quantities to matter within regions of the observable universe.
However the universe does not function on symmetry but A-symmetry, so it would mean through this A-symmetry system there is no need for an anti-matter balance.
Salaam Rev John,
Your ignorance is impressive, and with a phd, so you say, I?m impressed, the universe is manifest, there exists an underlying fluidic manifold, this is the reason energies move as waves, or the wake of waves, they are moving within the fluidic manifold, this means we exist within a constant energy exchange, this is the driving force of our reality.
-
Salaam,
as I have said dark matter is another lie, they cannot support the lie of a gravity based universe and a big bang foundation, without the contrived lies of invisible explanations, like black holes and dark matter.
Selam Abdun
I suppose they invented dark matter theory after their calculations did not fit the gravity theory maybe?
-
Salaam,
before posting your ignorance, please investigate the source of the idea and the reason for the requirement of dark matter, if you wish to believe the vision of the universe expressed by Rev John, please do not let me stand in your way, I have better things to do with my time than to answer nonsense.
-
I thought "In the begining God made Science" sounded more like an assertion of Logos theology. Since 'science' is from the Greek word for truth, God creating science in the beginning is like the pre-creation of the Word of God.
I do have a problem with the Genesis creation story - but it is not with the first six days. It is with the seventh day. It says God rested. I don't agree with that, it conflicts with the Quran. The Quran say God is not only the creator but the sustainer of the worlds. If God is resting it means he is not sustaining the universe - hence it cannot be true. God does not rest. It is only his creation that gets tired and needs to rest.
-
Selam Abdun Nur
Again you are on the deffensive. You seem to think that anyone posting anything in the forum seem to be against you? I was expressing a comment to back up your plasma theory, or trying to say that might be the missing link but you seem to have taken it the wrong way. Which is a shame. It puzzles me. I don't like your personal attacks and feel you are extemely patronizing.
Peace
Hope
-
Salaam Hope,
I tend to be defensive as I find most do not accept the evidence, but I am always willing to apologise, I am sincerely sorry if I have miss-understood your post, I thought you were being sarcastic, if you look at what you posted, you can see why I could have taken it the wrong way, this of course doesn't excuse my miss-understanding.
As I thought you were being sarcastic, I was a little condescending, again I am sorry if this was evidently not the case.
-
Salaam Hope,
I tend to be defensive as I find most do not accept the evidence, but I am always willing to apologise, I am sincerely sorry if I have miss-understood your post, I thought you were being sarcastic, if you look at what you posted, you can see why I could have taken it the wrong way, this of course doesn't excuse my miss-understanding.
As I thought you were being sarcastic, I was a little condescending, again I am sorry if this was evidently not the case.
Peace Abdur Nur
Sorry if my post came across that way. I am only here to seek knowledge. I do take in what people say on the forum but because of constrants in time I have not been able to look at most of what you are posting (sites) but slowly God willing I will, as I have a natural interest in science. You must understand that people need to catch up to you interms of what you have read. You must give us that chance to do this. Finally as a rule even if people do not accept your view then you have layed down your argument and it is up to them to research it. You have no responsibility to force your opinions or clear evidence on anyone. I am sorry again for not being clear and I am not trying to argue against any of your views but rather understand.
Peace
Hope
-
I thought "In the begining God made Science" sounded more like an assertion of Logos theology. Since 'science' is from the Greek word for truth, God creating science in the beginning is like the pre-creation of the Word of God.
I do have a problem with the Genesis creation story - but it is not with the first six days. It is with the seventh day. It says God rested. I don't agree with that, it conflicts with the Quran. The Quran say God is not only the creator but the sustainer of the worlds. If God is resting it means he is not sustaining the universe - hence it cannot be true. God does not rest. It is only his creation that gets tired and needs to rest.
You make a good point there.
-
Selam Abdun Nur
Again you are on the deffensive. You seem to think that anyone posting anything in the forum seem to be against you? I was expressing a comment to back up your plasma theory, or trying to say that might be the missing link but you seem to have taken it the wrong way. Which is a shame. It puzzles me. I don't like your personal attacks and feel you are extemely patronizing.
Peace
Hope
I am sick of his personal attacks, which is why I have him on ignore.
-
Salaam Hope,
I tend to be defensive as I find most do not accept the evidence, but I am always willing to apologise, I am sincerely sorry if I have miss-understood your post, I thought you were being sarcastic, if you look at what you posted, you can see why I could have taken it the wrong way, this of course doesn't excuse my miss-understanding.
As I thought you were being sarcastic, I was a little condescending, again I am sorry if this was evidently not the case.
Then why are you bulling us emotionally? remember that this is a public forum man.