FLRW

OMG, you look like Keanu Reeves, don't you?

I think maybe you should spend more time talking to Debby.

Yes, In the UK, about 25% of Jews do not believe in God or any higher power, while 56% of synagogue members do not believe in God.

I knew you were a genius.

I think this shows that God is a leap of faith.

A Catholic priest has died after a crucifix fell on him during a livestreamed Mass in Ecuador.

Father Patricio Alfredo Sanchez Molinari was delivering a sermon about the fragility of life at his church in the city of Guayaquil when the wall-mounted cross came loose and struck him.

Hmmmmm

 Over 3/4 of the world believe in a religion and God with or without proof.

Well, it's an established scientific fact, that penguins are more intelligent than humans .

Hmmm, In public Hitler embraced religion and religious rhetoric is through his speeches. The “German Christian” movement, an extremely nationalist and antisemitic Protestant group, was a very important part of his early support. There was even an occasion where a declaration had to be made that Hitler was not in fact the 2nd coming of Jesus, he was just a “really good Christian leader”. The very first treaty he signed was an agreement with the Catholic Church regulating the boundary between church and state, giving some political protection to the Catholic Churches, and creating obligations from Catholics to him as leader of the state. The church bells rang for his birthday every year, even as the Russians were nearing Berlin. There was also an effort by some Christian Nazis to rewrite the Bible free of “Jewish influence” and there was a popular theory that Jesus was Aryan, possibly even German - this was common in Europe at the time, for example you also saw some British leaders maintain Jesus was in actual fact Anglo-Saxon as bizarre as that claim might seem to us today.

Hitler was not a religious man. He was motivated by ideology. Religion was an important part of the Nazi movement from the beginning until the end. The antisemitism he espoused had been a common feature of German Christian movements for centuries, the holocaust being an industrialized and very large scale version of the programs that mar German history going back hundreds of years.

It's too bad we didn't have smartphones 2000 years ago. If we did, Atheism would have started ten.

It's too bad that they didn't have smartphones 2000 years ago.

Actually it's time for smart people to turn to Atheism. Well, unless you like 14 year old virgins.

It's time for Humans to question their existence. Born---Blip---Die!

A lot of religious people when they see the Melania pictures say "Jesus!"

See: https://atheists.org/classic-resources/did-jesus-exist/

Oh, I get it now, belief in God is a leap of faith.

"A believer in Lord Jesus Christ, Kermos"----LOL

A lot of people that voted for Trump wanted a foreign sex worker as First Lady.

Mod note: Image removed

Hmmmm, born -blip- die.

The following will refute Kermos's claims on the Big Bang Theory.

David Rowland is an independent writer and researcher who has self-published alternative claims arguing that the Big Bang theory is false and logically impossible.

David Rowland's Claims

1. No Singularity or Beginning: Rowland argues that an infinite universe without a beginning or end is the only logical reality, and that a singularity or creation event violates basic logic.
2. Redefined Redshift: He claims that galactic redshift is not a Doppler-effect velocity indicator showing expansion, but rather a form of light attenuation over distance.

Rejection of Expansion and Dark Matter: He asserts that Hubble's calculations were flawed, galaxies are not receding, and concepts like dark matter are non-existent mathematical fictions.

Scientific Consensus

1. Not Peer-Reviewed Mainstream Science: Rowland’s writings appear in alternative or vanity-style online journals rather than peer-reviewed major astrophysics institutions.
2. Overwhelming Empirical Evidence: The mainstream scientific community views the Big Bang theory as overwhelmingly supported by multiple independent lines of physical evidence, including:
3. The Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) radiation.
4. The observed expansion of the universe via galaxy redshifts.
5. The abundance of light elements (such as hydrogen, helium, and lithium) predicted by primordial nucleosynthesis.

Standing in Cosmology: Alternative static-universe or non-expansion models like those promoted by Rowland lack predictive power and fail to account for the physical data verified by modern space telescopes and observatories.

We need to replace the president and Congress with AI.

Red-shift does not disrupt Einstein’s E=mc²; rather, it is a direct consequence of the energy-frequency relationship defined by the equation.

Gravitational and cosmological redshift occur when photons lose energy as they travel out of a gravitational well or through expanding space. Since a photon's energy is proportional to its frequency (E=hf), a loss of energy results in a decrease in frequency and a corresponding increase in wavelength.

1. Energy Conservation: In general relativity, energy conservation is maintained through the curvature of spacetime; the photon's energy shift reflects the change in gravitational potential or the expansion of space, not a violation of mass-energy equivalence.
2. Frequency Shift: The observed redshift is simply the photon adapting to the new reference frame or potential, with its lower energy manifesting as a longer wavelength (redder light).
3. Theoretical Consistency: Einstein predicted this effect in 1907, and it has been experimentally verified (e.g., by Pound and Rebka), confirming that light behaves consistently with relativistic physics.

Redshift is a verification of General Relativity and the Einstein equivalence principle, not a disruption of E=mc². 

When I was 18, I would have taken the $1 million.

OMG, you think all women should move to Slovenia, don't you?

Remember that Trump is H L Mencken's 1920 prediction come true.

Red-shift does not disrupt Einstein’s E=mc²; rather, it is a direct consequence of the energy-frequency relationship defined by the equation.

Gravitational and cosmological redshift occur when photons lose energy as they travel out of a gravitational well or through expanding space. Since a photon's energy is proportional to its frequency (E=hf), a loss of energy results in a decrease in frequency and a corresponding increase in wavelength.

1. Energy Conservation: In general relativity, energy conservation is maintained through the curvature of spacetime; the photon's energy shift reflects the change in gravitational potential or the expansion of space, not a violation of mass-energy equivalence.
2. Frequency Shift: The observed redshift is simply the photon adapting to the new reference frame or potential, with its lower energy manifesting as a longer wavelength (redder light).
3. Theoretical Consistency: Einstein predicted this effect in 1907, and it has been experimentally verified (e.g., by Pound and Rebka), confirming that light behaves consistently with relativistic physics.

Redshift is a verification of General Relativity and the Einstein equivalence principle, not a disruption of E=mc². 

Hmmm, who is more stupid, Rev. Jim Bakker or Stephen Hawking?

Kermos, why do you like Chinese scientist?

The validity of Eda Gjergo’s concept that early massive galaxy formation significantly contaminates or even constitutes the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) is currently not accepted by the mainstream cosmological community and is considered a controversial hypothesis rather than established fact.

Gjergo and co-author Pavel Kroupa published a paper in Nuclear Physics B (2025) arguing that radiation from the formation of massive early-type galaxies (ETGs) could account for at least 1.4% and potentially 100% of the observed CMB energy density, thereby challenging the standard Big Bang model. Their calculations suggest that these galaxies were up to 10,000 times brighter during formation than they are today, and their redshifted infrared emissions could mimic the CMB spectrum.

However, prominent physicists and reviewers have raised significant criticisms:

1. Mechanism Issues: Critics note that for galaxy emission to mimic the CMB, there must be a mechanism to distribute cosmic dust uniformly and thermalize it to the exact temperature of the CMB, which is physically unlikely given that dust is generated by specific galaxies, not uniformly distributed.
2. Observational Evidence: Standard cosmology maintains that the CMB originates from recombination (380,000 years after the Big Bang), while the galaxies in question formed much later (~200 million years). The spectral shape and anisotropies of the CMB are robustly explained by the Big Bang model and are not fully accounted for by galaxy formation models.
3. Methodological Concerns: Some reviews point out circularity and a lack of sensitivity analysis in the authors' claims, noting that the 1.4% figure is a conservative lower bound that the authors themselves admit could scale up to 100% with "small tweaks" to assumptions, which undermines predictive rigor.

In summary, while Gjergo and Kroupa’s work highlights a potential foreground contamination that warrants further study, the consensus view remains that the CMB is a relic of the Big Bang, and the claim that it arises primarily from early galaxy formation is regarded as unsalvageable nonsense or a provocative but unproven hypothesis by many in the astrophysics community.

Well stated!

I'm guessing that Debby is the most attractive women on this site. And guess who is the most attractive male?

Wink,wink.

No, I will not watch it. What would Jesus do?

Kermos, you know that I look like Robert Oppenheimer, don't you?