http://somethingfornothing.org.uk Something For Nothing Thu, 17 Feb 2011 18:44:13 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4 http://somethingfornothing.org.uk/the-origin-of-the-universe/observing-the-origins-of-the-universe-progress-in-cosmology/#comment-215 Bernd1964 Thu, 17 Feb 2011 18:44:13 +0000 http://somethingfornothing.org.uk/the-origin-of-the-universe/observing-the-origins-of-the-universe-progress-in-cosmology/#comment-215 A higher resolution would have been nice for this video. A higher resolution would have been nice for this video.

]]> http://somethingfornothing.org.uk/the-origin-of-the-universe/observing-the-origins-of-the-universe-progress-in-cosmology/#comment-214 balance1200 Thu, 17 Feb 2011 18:23:40 +0000 http://somethingfornothing.org.uk/the-origin-of-the-universe/observing-the-origins-of-the-universe-progress-in-cosmology/#comment-214 newton didnt discover gravity ? then who did? I never new that Newton didnt discover gravity newton didnt discover gravity ? then who did? I never new that Newton didnt discover gravity

]]> http://somethingfornothing.org.uk/the-origin-of-the-universe/observing-the-origins-of-the-universe-progress-in-cosmology/#comment-213 D33veeoss Thu, 17 Feb 2011 17:59:35 +0000 http://somethingfornothing.org.uk/the-origin-of-the-universe/observing-the-origins-of-the-universe-progress-in-cosmology/#comment-213 I think it's sad that you have to go through a man's self-admitted half-done theories, quasi-prove them true or false, and then prance around as though you've proven a man, who admitted nothing that you "disproved" as fact, but only as interesting and relevant, that would likely be the truth, a part of the truth, or a catalyst to the truth; wrong. The pompous disposition is especially annoying. At which part in this lecture did the professor unleash his own brilliance? I think it’s sad that you have to go through a man’s self-admitted half-done theories, quasi-prove them true or false, and then prance around as though you’ve proven a man, who admitted nothing that you “disproved” as fact, but only as interesting and relevant, that would likely be the truth, a part of the truth, or a catalyst to the truth; wrong. The pompous disposition is especially annoying. At which part in this lecture did the professor unleash his own brilliance?

]]> http://somethingfornothing.org.uk/the-origin-of-the-universe/observing-the-origins-of-the-universe-progress-in-cosmology/#comment-212 ThermalHD Thu, 17 Feb 2011 17:12:42 +0000 http://somethingfornothing.org.uk/the-origin-of-the-universe/observing-the-origins-of-the-universe-progress-in-cosmology/#comment-212 @balance1200 Abu Ja'far Muhammad ibn Mūsā ibn Shākir first came up with the idea of what we now call gravity. @balance1200 Abu Ja’far Muhammad ibn Mūsā ibn Shākir first came up with the idea of what we now call gravity.

]]> http://somethingfornothing.org.uk/the-origin-of-the-universe/the-origin-of-the-universe-and-the-arrow-of-time-sean-carroll-part-14/#comment-211 rhomeaforever Thu, 17 Feb 2011 09:40:28 +0000 http://somethingfornothing.org.uk/the-origin-of-the-universe/the-origin-of-the-universe-and-the-arrow-of-time-sean-carroll-part-14/#comment-211 thanks for the upload! thanks for the upload!

]]> http://somethingfornothing.org.uk/the-origin-of-the-universe/the-origin-of-the-universe-and-the-arrow-of-time-sean-carroll-part-14/#comment-210 marcarmstrong88 Thu, 17 Feb 2011 09:28:19 +0000 http://somethingfornothing.org.uk/the-origin-of-the-universe/the-origin-of-the-universe-and-the-arrow-of-time-sean-carroll-part-14/#comment-210 yea thank you. i had seen this on ted but its nice to have it here , for the easier way of link it to ppl :) yea thank you. i had seen this on ted but its nice to have it here , for the easier way of link it to ppl

]]> http://somethingfornothing.org.uk/the-origin-of-the-universe/prof-stephen-hawking-the-origin-of-the-universe/#comment-200 theaccousticaddict Wed, 16 Feb 2011 06:11:09 +0000 http://somethingfornothing.org.uk/the-origin-of-the-universe/prof-stephen-hawking-the-origin-of-the-universe/#comment-200 It cant be a theory or a fact, its either up or down, black or white, A or B, it cant be A and B at the same time. Observations? what observations? Evolutionists cook up stories in their minds and feed them to you and you call that observations?. for now, its fact? well, that's your opinion dude. Evolution was and is still nothing more than a common assumption thought up by a common naturalist about 150 years ago, and its pathetic that you guys capitalise on this poor man's presumptions. It cant be a theory or a fact, its either up or down, black or white, A or B, it cant be A and B at the same time. Observations? what observations? Evolutionists cook up stories in their minds and feed them to you and you call that observations?. for now, its fact? well, that’s your opinion dude. Evolution was and is still nothing more than a common assumption thought up by a common naturalist about 150 years ago, and its pathetic that you guys capitalise on this poor man’s presumptions.

]]> http://somethingfornothing.org.uk/the-origin-of-the-universe/prof-stephen-hawking-the-origin-of-the-universe/#comment-199 garyzenuf Wed, 16 Feb 2011 05:35:21 +0000 http://somethingfornothing.org.uk/the-origin-of-the-universe/prof-stephen-hawking-the-origin-of-the-universe/#comment-199 @theaccousticaddict .....done.....bye. @theaccousticaddict …..done…..bye.

]]> http://somethingfornothing.org.uk/the-origin-of-the-universe/prof-stephen-hawking-the-origin-of-the-universe/#comment-198 Toudiyama Wed, 16 Feb 2011 04:52:16 +0000 http://somethingfornothing.org.uk/the-origin-of-the-universe/prof-stephen-hawking-the-origin-of-the-universe/#comment-198 @theaccousticaddict your last sentence is nonsense zygote-->embryo-->foetus is an example of a singlecelled organism evolving into an organism with flesh and bones not that is matters because the TOE explains that evolution works on populations not on individual organism @theaccousticaddict your last sentence is nonsense zygote–>embryo–>foetus is an example of a singlecelled organism evolving into an organism with flesh and bones
not that is matters because the TOE explains that evolution works on populations not on individual organism

]]> http://somethingfornothing.org.uk/the-origin-of-the-universe/prof-stephen-hawking-the-origin-of-the-universe/#comment-197 theaccousticaddict Wed, 16 Feb 2011 04:26:23 +0000 http://somethingfornothing.org.uk/the-origin-of-the-universe/prof-stephen-hawking-the-origin-of-the-universe/#comment-197 @Toudiyama "...foetus is an example of a single celled organism evolving into an organism with flesh and bones". listen, i think you are confusing natural growth and development with your lame theory. A child is conceived by male and female with FLESH, BLOOD AND BONES!! God created living things to reproduce after their own kind. With evolution, the skin "magically" evolves, its stupid what people are ready to believe just cos they dont wanna believe in God. @Toudiyama “…foetus is an example of a single celled organism evolving into an organism with flesh and bones”. listen, i think you are confusing natural growth and development with your lame theory. A child is conceived by male and female with FLESH, BLOOD AND BONES!! God created living things to reproduce after their own kind. With evolution, the skin “magically” evolves, its stupid what people are ready to believe just cos they dont wanna believe in God.

]]>