The Daily Static
  The Daily Static
UF Archives
Register
UF Membership
Ad Free Site
Postcards
Community
Geekfinder
UFie Gear
Advertise on UF
Forum Rules
& FAQ

Username

Password


Create a New Account

  
 

Back to UserFriendly Strip Comments Index
Question of the Day! by kickstart2006-11-19 12:26:49
  Prolly the fact that... by breezeblock2003-07-11 01:21:08
    umm ... by graeme2003-07-11 01:32:43
      Interestingly enough... by Buffy_Fett2003-07-11 02:55:38
        Small question by catharsis2003-07-11 05:40:59
          Let me see if I can make an analogy by Buffy_Fett2003-07-11 07:36:51
            How can you be sure? by Control2003-07-11 07:44:43
              Why shouldn't I be sure? by Buffy_Fett2003-07-11 07:58:20
                Circular argumentation by Control2003-07-11 09:17:46
                  But they don't by Buffy_Fett2003-07-11 09:21:58
                    My response to that is to be found ... by Beorn2006-11-19 12:55:59
                      Different questions by Buffy_Fett2003-07-11 12:38:33
                        depends by mirage2003-07-11 13:08:52
                          Key phrase, as I see it by Buffy_Fett2003-07-11 13:20:00
                            Well, I know there is definitive proof. by Beorn2003-07-11 15:05:53
                              just for fun... by niwikki2003-07-11 16:41:16
                                Why am I even bothering to refute that nonsense? by Beorn 2003-07-11 19:47:58
That argument draws a totally absurd conclusion from a couple of misinterpreted facts taken out of their context. A perfect example of pseudoscience.

> matter cannot be created out of nothing

Almost true. Other forms of energy can be converted into matter, but if you change it to "energy cannot be created out of nothing", then it's close enough to be true for our purposes.

Who's claiming that the Earth was created out of nothing anyway? It's not me.

> the earth was actually formed by re-using old materials

True, but not if you think it means an old planet was picked apart and then put together to form the Earth. You can call the matter re-used if you like, because it's been part of stars.

After the big bang there was only hydrogen and helium in the universe, but the Earth is made of stone. To make stone out of hydrogen and helium atoms you have to fuse them into heavier atoms. That fusion happens in supernovas. The heavy elements were thrown out from the supernovas in gaseous state, and they remained gas and dust until they became part of a cloud that started to contract and formed our solar system

> and that would explain the age of geological evidence found.

The geological evidence is not based on the ages of atoms or subatomic particles, but on the ages of minerals that were formed within the Earth. I shouldn't need to point out that minerals that have been formed inside the Earth can't be older than the Earth.


Besides, I feel that there's a joke about "cannot matter" that's just begging to be made, but I won't do it.
[ Reply ]
                                so ... by graeme2003-07-11 22:12:23
                                No answer by mirage2003-07-11 23:19:25
                                Exactly (n/t) by graeme2003-07-11 23:49:15
                                However, by mirage2003-07-11 23:56:02

 

[Todays Cartoon Discussion] [News Index]

Come get yer ARS (Account Registration System) Source Code here!
All images, characters, content and text are copyrighted and trademarks of J.D. Frazer except where other ownership applies. Don't do bad things, we have lawyers.
UserFriendly.Org and its operators are not liable for comments or content posted by its visitors, and will cheerfully assist the lawful authorities in hunting down script-kiddies, spammers and other net scum. And if you're really bad, we'll call your mom. (We're not kidding, we've done it before.)