Welpi
|
  |
| Joined: 26 Nov 2015 |
| Total Posts: 12 |
|
| |
|
76km
|
  |
| Joined: 14 Aug 2015 |
| Total Posts: 5455 |
|
|
| 13 Jan 2016 05:59 AM |
your mother
and your father
and so on |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
redlego98
|
  |
| Joined: 11 Jul 2008 |
| Total Posts: 8870 |
|
|
| 13 Jan 2016 05:59 AM |
SCIENCE YEAH
A strange game. The only winning move is not to play. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Welpi
|
  |
| Joined: 26 Nov 2015 |
| Total Posts: 12 |
|
|
| 13 Jan 2016 05:59 AM |
"your mother
and your father
and so on" who created the first human
|
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
76km
|
  |
| Joined: 14 Aug 2015 |
| Total Posts: 5455 |
|
|
| 13 Jan 2016 06:01 AM |
Correction:
Who created the first PAIR of humans.
And they weren't that genetically different. So we should have nearly died out of a genetic disease. (Like the tasmania devils)
They are so genetically close they nearly died out. Which explains that there needs to be more than 2 humans. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 13 Jan 2016 06:05 AM |
We came from cells. Cells came from space. Space came from the big bang. The big bang came from two cosmic forces hitting each other. Cosmic forces came from gravity from other universes. Other universes came from endless waves. Endless waves came from string theory. String theory explains the smallest of or things (atoms and the strange world they live in, at the subatomic level), which atoms came from the theory of things being smaller than cells. Cells came from.. oh wait.
~MightyDantheman |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
76km
|
  |
| Joined: 14 Aug 2015 |
| Total Posts: 5455 |
|
|
| 13 Jan 2016 06:08 AM |
Big bang is quite a vague theory that only works with gasses, and cannot actually be physically achieved, as you need something at absolute zero, which you can't actuallyy achieve because you need something colder than its original counterpart to make it colder and colder.
It's a weird theory, based on the compression of gasses. It's true. It's quite vague if you go into it. AND only helium is known to be closest. so the fact that hydrogen works in this instance, would most likely be false. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
quamisido
|
  |
| Joined: 18 Apr 2014 |
| Total Posts: 8599 |
|
|
| 13 Jan 2016 06:09 AM |
"The Big Bang" I find it hard to beleive nothing created everything |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
76km
|
  |
| Joined: 14 Aug 2015 |
| Total Posts: 5455 |
|
|
| 13 Jan 2016 06:11 AM |
Its hard to believe, but the theory has a foolproof and logical foundation.
I can't post the off site graph to explain the theory properly. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
quamisido
|
  |
| Joined: 18 Apr 2014 |
| Total Posts: 8599 |
|
|
| 13 Jan 2016 06:14 AM |
| ^sorry, but there is nothing foolproof about a big explosion from nothing creating everything we know and love |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 13 Jan 2016 06:15 AM |
I'm getting popcorn.
Vote El Presidente, or else. http://www.roblox.com/WrongSkin-item?id=326604958 |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 13 Jan 2016 06:15 AM |
Actually, the Big Bang was simply a large super nova. How? The opposite of a black hole. Black holes have a huge problem of having an infinite variable known as mass. Is that mass was small enough, could it not travel to another universe, or different part of space? It's kind of like matter. For every thing, there is an equal opposite. A black hole simply gathered enough mass, to have it blast out in another spot. How does that work? Black holes, over time, "evaporate". They do so by collapsing in on its self, or by running out of mass. Where does it all go? Matter is only changed, never added or removed.
~MightyDantheman |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 13 Jan 2016 06:16 AM |
when the white stuff hits the tiny thing, it moves up and attaches to something then starts to grow and after 6 months.
then a human is created. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
76km
|
  |
| Joined: 14 Aug 2015 |
| Total Posts: 5455 |
|
|
| 13 Jan 2016 06:16 AM |
No it's the theory of absolute zero. And that its about how in "absolute zero" certain gasses can have no volume (be 0 dimensions) and still have its weight. (Mass)
It's quite logical, and they have gotten fractions (Like 1/5 of a degree(c) off getting there)
They're going to prove it. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
| |
|
bulding23
|
  |
| Joined: 24 Apr 2012 |
| Total Posts: 5437 |
|
| |
|
76km
|
  |
| Joined: 14 Aug 2015 |
| Total Posts: 5455 |
|
|
| 13 Jan 2016 06:18 AM |
Got it.
http://im-gur.com/hvG4AD9
remove the - |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Alphaerix
|
  |
| Joined: 26 Jul 2014 |
| Total Posts: 6002 |
|
| |
|
| |
|
Edginess
|
  |
| Joined: 30 Sep 2008 |
| Total Posts: 7883 |
|
|
| 13 Jan 2016 06:33 AM |
| the question is who created the universal dynamic of reproduction? who created the dynamic and will that constantly pushes a species to develop? |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 13 Jan 2016 06:34 AM |
| bait so obvious even debateyou couldn't fall for it |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 13 Jan 2016 06:44 AM |
@BillabobIgnus
Your completely correct. A 5 year old could've figured out that this was bait (okay, at least people around 10 and up). But this turned into a more serious topic about the big bang. Then someone decided to make another thread about the big bang saying that both religion and science is stupid. Good job. It makes me ask myself, why am I up at 4:44 am, wasting my life explaining this?
~MightyDantheman |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|