FreeThinkingAtheist.com

1. In space, no one can hear you scream. Sound, a mechanical wave, cannot travel through a vacuum (nothingness). Without matter to vibrate through, there is only silence.

2. Black holes are not holes or voids of nothingness. They are the exact opposite of nothing. Being the densest concentration of mass known in the universe.

3. The concept of "zero" in the mathematical sense was developed in India in the fifth century.

4. Any number divided by zero is… nothing, not even zero. The equation is mathematically impossible.

5. Aristotle once wrote, "Nature abhors a vacuum", and so did he. His complete rejection of vacuums and voids and his subsequent influence on centuries of learning prevented the adoption of the concept of "zero" in the western world until the 13^th century.

6. Creatio ex nihilo: the belief that the world was created out of nothing, is one of the most common themes in ancient myths and religions.

7. Current theories suggest that the universe was created out of a state of vacuum energy… that is: nothing.

8. But to a physicst there is no such thing as nothing. Matter is made of particles, and empty space is simply anti-particles. These antiparticles quickly form and, in accordance to the law of conservation, annihilate each other in about 10 to the -25^th seconds back into nothingness

9. So Aristotle was right all along.

10. These virtual particles popping in and out of existence create energy. According to quantum Mechanics, the theoretical energy contained in the empty spaces of these words are more than the energy generated by all the power plans and nuclear weapons in the world.

In other words, nothing could be the key to the theory of everything.

Popularity: 42% [?]

    Funny how people can be such cynical conspiracy theorists about something as solid and known as how the Grand Canyon was formed, yet they choose to entirely overlook their religion and not question it at all. I mean really, think about it. If given two topics to choose from to doubt and question: The Grand Canyon's formation, or the Christian Bible, how can you possibly sit there and dispute something so solidly proven through science, like the Grand Canyon, but turn around and gladly trust something as questionable as the Bible? There's no sense in that!

     "Grand Canyon: A Different View," which contradicts science, says the Grand Canyon was formed by the great flood from the Bible story of Noah. Obviously Geology is a myth. You didn't know that? right..

    The book was written by a "born again" river guide who writes that his view of the canyon's being millions of years old changed after he "met the Lord. Now, I have 'a different view' of the Canyon, which, according to a biblical time scale, can't possibly be more than about a few thousand years old." You know, extreme cynics are one thing, but at least they actual doubt everything equally. Unlike the readers of this book, they at least don't contradict their cynical nature and turn around and believe in something full of holes and questionable motives, written entirely by man. 

     The reviews over at Amazon.com pretty much sum this book up, my favorite being:

I am a serious amateur geologist and a devout Christian. You've got to be kidding with this book. That it was forced to be put into the Grand Canyon book shops is absurd. What prompted me to write a review is that I heard that the park rangers at the Grand Canyon are no longer permitted to discuss the age of the Grand Canyon. This is evangelical socialist realism at its worst. It's time for me to put my pet dinosaur to bed.

Popularity: 100% [?]

I found this article that really puts the significance of our race into mind-boggling perspective. I cut parts out to shorten it up, original article/site can be found here.

——-

How old are you? You probably think you've been around a while, that your 20/30/40/50 years on this planet is quite a long time, that you've seen a lot of changes? On our time-scale, you're probably quite right. On the time-scale of this planet, in geological time, you might as well have never existed.

Mount Everest, the highest point on the planet, is composed of marine limestone. It used to be under the sea, but slowly, millimeter by millimeter, it has been pushed upwards (and continues to do so, as India collides with Asia). You might think a year is a long time, but can you even begin to comprehend the lifespan of Everest?

Our planet is one tiny insignificant rock orbiting one average, ordinary star in the outskirts of the Milky Way, itself just one ordinary galaxy among billions. When you look up into the night sky on a clear night, you can hardly see any stars at all. If you could see all of them, if our eyes were better and there was less dirt in the universe, the sky would be completely white. There would not be the smallest gap between the stars that you see

For every star that you can see, there are thousands of galaxies, each containing billions of stars. The Milky Way itself is an insignificant speck. Our solar system is an insignificant speck within that. This image was taken with the Hubble Space Telescope, and the area of sky that is represents is approximately 1/30th the apparent diameter of the full moon. As you can see for yourself, it is packed with galaxies. Galaxies, not stars:

People think that we are somehow blessed or special, so of course the "Creator Of The Universe" must have set aside this little corner of the universe just for us, right? Religion used to teach that the Earth was the centre of the universe, the single most important place that God created.

Now, we know better. If the Earth was destroyed tomorrow, the universe would neither miss us nor mourn our passing. Would you notice one grain of sand missing from the beach?

We think we are special, and that supremely powerful beings look after us. We are not special; we are simply the result of a (probably very common) chemical accident billions of years ago, in a place where the conditions are right for life to flourish.

The same thing probably happens all over the universe, and in many places there will be life. Some will be more advanced than us, others less advanced. In many places, the conditions will not be right for life. There are probably entire galaxies or clusters of galaxies where life will never arise, because the conditions there are too extreme. Galaxies with super massive black holes, areas of stellar genesis (such as the Orion Nebula), maybe regions close to quasars may never produce life due to intense radiation or gravitational disturbances.

We are certainly lucky, yes, but special? No.

Just to make you feel really insignificant =), this is a scale diagram of Earth, Jupiter (which is about ten times the diameter of Earth), and the Sun (about ten times the diameter of Jupiter). The tiny blue ball is where we are. This is where we fight our wars, worship our ten thousand different gods, kill each other over a few meters of territory, argue with our neighbors about exactly where the property line is, pollute our fine film of atmosphere (too small to show up on the picture), and live out our lives. The Earth is whizzing around the Sun at 67,000 miles per hour. By the time you've read this page we have traveled ten thousand miles together. Hope you enjoyed the trip!

Popularity: 100% [?]

    It seems to be that fossil dating is commonly misunderstood, despite the fact that science and evolution are actually taught in school (I cannot imagine what it would be like with Intelligent Design taught in school… like the Dark Ages I'd imagine). Maybe it's that creationists refuse to accept evolution, and refuse to learn about it. It seems that many of them read only about their side of the story (a.k.a. the Bible) but don't read about what's on the other side of the fence. They will ask things like "How do you know something is 1 million years old if you don't know anybody who is that old?"

    Carbon-14 dating is based on radioactive decay. The air, plants, and all livings animals (including humans) all have the same constant ratio of standard Carbon-12 to Carbon-14 at any given time, while they are alive. Since Carbon-14 is radioactive, over time it will decay into nothing. It's the ration between the constant Carbon-12, and the decaying Carbon-14, that we can tell its age from. Since the half-life of Carbon-14 is 5,700 years, there will only be half the amount of that particular sample in every 5,700-year cycle. The ratio of carbon-12 to carbon-14 at the moment of death is the same as every other living thing, but the carbon-14 decays and is not replaced. And when you look at the ratio of standard carbon-12 to carbon-14 in the sample, it is possible to determine the age (within 60,000 years) of anything that was once living. precisely. Because the half-life of carbon-14 is 5,700 years, 60,000 years IS about as accurate it can get. However, the principle of carbon-14 dating applies to other isotopes as well, that all have their own ranges, both short and long. 

    Potassium-40 is another radioactive element that is commonly found in living beings and has a half-life of 1.3 billion years. Other radioisotopes for radioactive dating are Uranium -235 (half-life = 704 million years), Uranium -238 (half-life = 4.5 billion years), Thorium-232 (half-life = 14 billion years) and Rubidium-87 (half-life = 49 billion years). So clearly, an age can be precisely determined for just about anything. This method cannot be used on fossils however, since they lack the radioactive isotopes used in the dating process. To determine a fossil's age, igneous layers (volcanic rock) beneath the fossil (predating the fossil) and above it (representing a time after the dinosaur's existence) are dated, resulting in a time-range for the dinosaur's life. Thus, dinosaurs are dated with respect to volcanic eruptions.

I find it strange when one argues relentlessly against dating methods, despite the mounting evidence, yet they can read "There was a great flood" out of the Bible, and immediately believe it, with no evidence what so ever.

Popularity: 14% [?]