questionposter

Nope, we don't end up a totally different species because we didn't come from chimps, we came from something very very similar to us, like neandtherthals who had like 100 different ancestors the last of which being most similar to chimps. Your still not getting just how gradual evolution really is. We never came from anything drastically different that us, only very slightly, there's no possible way a chimp could give birth to a human. Yeah, bacteria gain resistance form other members who randomly had the mutation to survive and passed it on. Whether or not god wanted that to happen is something I can't answer.

It seems like your trying to bring classical physics into the world of quantum physics. You have to say what you mean more by things like "spinning" and "orbital force".

No I wouldn't want to do any of that because black holes are boring, you can't see anything, and even if you could see something like the 4th dimension, it would probably be pretty confusing to see a black hole, and there's no air in space, and we can already see supernovae with 3 dimensional telescopes. Most of the extra dimensions occupy very small regions folded up in particles and the fabric of space, so we probably wouldn't be able to see them unless we could somehow not have a physical body if that would even do anything, and shrink down to the size of a subatomic particle.

http://en.wikipedia....irtual_particle "Virtual particles exhibit some of the phenomena that real particles do, such as obedience to the conservation laws"

Wait, INFINITELY small? Matter and energy are quantized. Also, those particles are undetectable and even at that stage they are only semi-existent, we only see their indirect effects in very very specific experiments. They are like imaginary numbers.

Well, I guess a star responds to stimuli and it grows and changes, and it often reproduces or at least "produces" other stars after dying, so actually, maybe a star is some kind of living thing. I don't imagine it would be very smart as there is so much energy that it would be hard for information to organize and things like cells to form.

It won't work, because you still need to put that energy into making the plasma in the first place. So lets say you put x energy into making a plasma. Because of a bunch of small factors such as some light being radiated at un-usable wavelengths, you would only get less than x usable energy back no matter what, it's the conservation of matter and energy. If you could generate plasma from light from the Sun here on Earth, then that would be efficient, but it's pretty hard to do that.

Well w/e its still hotter in Kelvin.

Yeah, I see a lot of hypercritical-ism with religion, but its also pretty hard to do EVERYTHING according to an ancient religion. There's also lifestyles, so if people are use to a violent lifestyle, they are more desensitized to violence. This also happens with religion though too. People who are generally raised on very strict religios teachings will likely follow those teachings later in life.

Are you kidding? Have you ever seen ANY pictures from hubble? Have you even gone outside in the last 10 years? Well, I suppose if you live in some industrial area, that's understandable, but anywhere else, wtf?

So what if that's not what your bible meant? What does the science of evolution have to do with that? And you still don't get it, because we didn't come from a far different species, we only came from a slightly different species, who then came from a species slightly different to it, and that species came from a species slightly different to that, and etc. In fact, there's already ways in which different parts of the human race has evolved even within 6,000 years. Have you ever heard of the Black Plague? Well only the Europeans who happened to have mutations containing strong immune systems survived it, and they passed that on.

http://en.wikipedia....%93gluon_plasma Quark gluon plasmas were created at around 4 thousand billion degrees Celsius, which converted to kelvin (minus something like 273), it's still greater in kelvin. But, I have no idea how we could possibly know the temperature right after the big bang. 1 trillion equals 100 billion, so one thousand billion is one power greater than than trillion, and then times 4 and minus 273 and you have a temperature higher than a trillion which is the same as 100 billion.

Well that doesn't make sense, chimps are still pretty different from humans, the process of evolution is very very slow, and its because the way it happens is completely random mutations just happening to be successful. So lets say 999,999,999 times out of 1,000,000,000 a dinosaur is born with no feathers, but once in a while, that 1 time out of 1,000,000,000 a dinosaur happens to be mutated either from radiation or some chemical or etc, and that mutation allows the dinosaur to be more likely to survive cold weather, and its offspring will also have that same genetic trait, so its offspring will also be more likely to survive cold weather, and then another 1 time out of 1,000,000,000, a dinosaur grows more feathers than usual, which allows it to be more resistant to even colder weather. So now within the same species, there's dinosaurs with feathers and dinosaurs without, and a gigantic blizzard sweeps through. The dinosaurs without the feathers die, and the ones with feathers survive, and thus species is wholly changed. As you can see, a dinosaur never just gives birth to a bird.

Shouldn't the limit have something to do with a plasma? I mean, a plasma doesn't have chemical bonds, because chemical bonds can't survive that high of an energy, so doesn't the maximum energy a chemical can store or give off have to be exactly 1 energy level before a that chemical would become a plasma?

Well then your not an extremist are you?

Ok, well what about now? Is there a lot of eccentricity in Earth's orbit right now? Because the temperatures are predicted to go up in a similar fashion to those spikes in the past.

I don't get what the debate is. Couldn't god have just wanted evolution to happen? But unfortunately, what tends to happen is the extremists on both sides think they are better than the other side for their set of beliefs, which I find very ironic because evolution is neither a religion nor a mystical force that says you have to do anything, its just a process that happens to happen. With evolutionists, they tend to think they accept science and therefore they are mentally superior as a result of evolution as well as somehow regressing to some archaic state like they "accept" animalistic tendencies and think they have to act on them, and with religious extremists, they tend to think that because people of other religions are not protected by their divinity that the God(s) of the religious extremists consider the religious extremists more important and the lives of people of other faiths to be meaningless.

Evolution is just random mutations happening to be successful for a species to keep living. As far as I can tell, the "degrading as you age" genes were random, but it makes room for a species to continue to change and grow.

It sounds like your suggesting age=experience and knowledge, but I have found that not to be the case as many senior people I know are very prejudice about something, and if you just take the time to think about things when your younger, you can avoid a lot of trouble. When your 14, for some reason that's your peak physical capacities (like, if your ability to grow by working out, how vibrant you are, etc), and when your around 25-26, which is just before your brain starts to degrade, your brain capacity is at it's highest. Your probably more likely to learn more by keeping your imaginative, physical and thinking abilities throughout your life rather than just having them slowly but inevitably degrade. But, one thing I would be concerned about with the whole immortal thing is people becoming so arrogant they are just incapable of changing, or at least, if they were doing something for 1,000 years, it would take another 1,000 years to reverse it, like with racism.

But what else causes exponential spikes in global temperatures in the past (I can't find core sample stuff online, but I can cite a book published in 2009-10 if you really really don't think I'm telling the truth about the graphs)? Wouldn't CO2 trigger more water in the atmosphere, which would allow the atmoshpere to heat up to the point where the permafrost melts, which allows the atmosphere to hear up enough to nearly completely melt Antarctica, which without it to deflect light allows even more heating?

Why?

Wow, I know that many people including myself theorized that because the universe could be infinite that any physics we know of could be local, but for that to be so integrated with the rest of our perception and to actually be able to see that and for something so wierd to be taken seriously is pretty remarkable if that's the case. Although, that would have to mean there is some way to generalize all possible gravities and electro-magnetism force properties since all of those local areas come form the same universe, unless there were separate big bangs? It seems kind of weird though that we would be able to see different physics right in our own observable universe, I always thought it would have to be like two or three observable universes away in bubbles for physics to change, but I suppose it would explain a lot why there's all these weird cosmo properties. But, if it's the electro-magnetic force that's changed, how is it that we can see the same quantinization of light and observe it the same? Shouldn't we see weird elements and stuff on those galaxies? Or shouldn't we not even be able to see them at all since if the EM force is shifted, those electrons and protons would be at different distances from each other in an atom, so a photon from them would boost our electrons up to something like the 2.143 or 4.35246th energy level, which as quantum mechanics shows, can't happen, so we shouldn't be able to observe matter who's electro-magnetic physics is shifted? Isn't that why astronomers claim we can't see dark matter anyway?

Hmm. I don't think we can actually prove that a photon is "tugging" the fabric of space. As far as we know, photons actually distort the fabric of space even more so than matter, and I didn't even know your explanation existed.

Not only that, but if everything is so equally divided in half, why so much normal matter and less anti matter? Why so much dark matter and not normal matter?

I thought we agreed that humans, which you yourself stated, started the initial heating to cause a chain reaction of heating.