“In the beginning, nearly 14 billion years ago, all the space and all the matter and all the energy of the known universe was contained in a volume less than one trillionth the size of the period that ends this sentence.”

— Neil deGrasse Tyson in Astrophysics for People in a Hurry, opening p‘graph

Unsure? Test Tyson’s tale.

Try crushing a rock in one hand until it’s smaller than it is.

It should be easy; 99.99% of the rock is empty of matter.

Why doesn’t it crush?

Views: 332

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

It made me realize that my brain is mostly empty space too.

Bertold, did you read my Discusion, "Dementia?" My brain seems to be my problem. 

Yes, I did, and your generosity of spirit in sharing your experience is a wonderful thing. Thank you.

Yeah, the atoms there are like atoms elsewhere; electricity keeps their parts from crashing into each other or from whizzing off in all directions.

Space probes return evidence of electricity in space, and Bangers say it doesn’t do anything there.

Ironic in a way - the virgin birth is questionable because there wasn't a big bang.

I like your way of thinking, Bertold!

Yeah, Bert, you do have a way of thinking: religion equals science.

Et tu, Joan?

Take religion, throw in science, add $5.65 and you can buy a latté.

My cosmology is based on 0 = 2.

Tom, knock it off. In my opinion, you provoke aggression. You can tell your belief, and you can disagree with my belief, and throw the sarcasm in the trash where it belongs. To insinuate that I believe "religion equals science" is nonsense and you know it. 

Let me be very clear, I do not believe your concept of the origin of the universe.

I leave open a door to at least listen to what you offer and agree or disagree with you. 

religion ≉ science

religion = religion

science = science

Neither one benefit from the interaction.

Joan, you didn’t know Bert and I have for months alternatedly communicated and ragged each other.

He posted the nonsense “the virgin birth is questionable because there wasn't a big bang” and you, empathy blinding you to where you were going, stepped into the muck.

I asked “Et tu, Joan” and you are upset.

If you will delete your “I like....” post and the one above, I will delete mine corresponding to them

OK, Bertold, I don't believe you when you say religion + science + $5.65 will buy you a latté. I am confused enough using my own brain and I want to know what you think, without the response to Tom. Of course, $5.65 will get you a latté.

Give me the answer that you think about how the universe was created so that I can understand you, even if I may disagree with you. We all know who has the best brains around here and it is not me. 

People who believe in the virgin birth, and in the miracles, and the resurrection, and salvation simply believe in myths, fables, and the stories told by the ancients who attempted to understand their world. 

I don't share those beliefs; I see too much misery caused by people who believe in supernatural events to explain life. Even this week, supposedly a week of celebrating a myth, a fable, an ancient story people kill each other and destroy lives because they disagree. 

If there were a god, he/she/it would be teaching communication skills, conflict resolution, problem-solving skills. I would not have had to get all my training if such a god existed. 

"People Who Believe the Virgin Birth" and who "Believe Tyson’s Tale" deal with "Non-overlapping magisteria (NOMA)," "the view advocated by Stephen Jay Gould." "Science and religion each represent different areas of inquiry, fact vs. values." "There is a difference between the 'nets'[1] over which they have "a legitimate magisterium, or domain of teaching authority," and the two domains do not overlap."

Gould, Stephen Jay (2002). Rocks of Ages: Science and Religion in the Fullness of Life. New York: Ballantine Books. ISBN 0-345-45040-X.


© 2019   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: The Nexus Group.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service