• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Creationists going after the "atomic model"...

the_ignored

Critical Thinker
T
Joined
Nov 26, 2002
Messages
254
Check out Adventure Safaris Books

Design Vs. Chaos, A New Model of the Atom Based on Classical Science and a Biblical World View, 2000. (Cost $20.00 includes quiz booklet and ideas for building models )

Benefits of a New Model of the Atom

1. The spinning-ring model has the potential to explain gravity based upon electrical forces.

2. The new model defines light as a wave and explains its movement in outer space. It rejects the duality principle that light is both a wave and a particle (a logical contradiction and an assumption inconsistent with God's nature and design).
Click to expand...
Their point #2 is shot down apparently by the photelectric effect, as someone else pointed out...so they reject a hypothosis that actually explains something, and replace it with another one that CAN'T explain the photoelectric effect, just because it goes against their religious beliefs, and those people say that they're advancing science?!


3. The new model puts physics back on a firm scientific (and biblical) basis instead of a philosophical basis.

4. The new model reduces the number of assumptions that must be made for nuclear modeling.

5. The chaos theories of the cosmos and nuclear energy are shown to be false. The spinning-ring model shows that God is a God of order, and the model is founded upon cause-and-effect classical science.

6. Five forces have been associated with theoretical physics for hundreds of years. These are electrical force, magnetic force, gravitational force, the weak nuclear force, and the strong nuclear force. This book will show that the theory of weak and strong nuclear forces is rejected by the spinning-ring model of the atom. The Common Sense Science team believes their model will also eventually explain gravitational force based on electromagnetism. This simplifies all forces in the universe to two: electrical and magnetic.
Click to expand...

Design v. Chaos Review

Energy. The Grant Unification Theory (GUT)

This new model has the potential for a Grant Unification Theory of the universe. The Common Sense Science team feels they will be able to understand what causes gravity based upon this model.

Two forms of energy:

1. Energy = waves (electromagnetic)

Gen. 1:3 "And God said, Let there be light: and there was light."

2. Energy with charge = matter [atoms] (electromagnetic waves with a charge of negative or positive to hold the atom together)

Gen. 1:4 "And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness."

The basis of all physical objects in the universe is electromagnetism (electricity and magnetism)

The Bohr Model of the Atom

The Bohr Model has 3 assumptions known to be wrong.

Relativity and Quantum Theory, based on the Bohr Model, cannot give a true picture of God's Creation.

Relativity and Quantum Theory, deny design and a creator God.

The New Model of the Atom (Lucas/Bergman)

The New Model (Lucas/Bergman) has a cause and effect basis.

It reduces all forces in the universe to two:

1. Electricity

2. Magnetism

Major discoveries that will help spread the Gospel can result from this new Model of the Atom
Click to expand...

Would it be over-reacting if I said that this stuff made me uneasy?
 
6. Five forces have been associated with theoretical physics for hundreds of years. These are electrical force, magnetic force, gravitational force, the weak nuclear force, and the strong nuclear force. This book will show that the theory of weak and strong nuclear forces is rejected by the spinning-ring model of the atom. The Common Sense Science team believes their model will also eventually explain gravitational force based on electromagnetism. This simplifies all forces in the universe to two: electrical and magnetic.
Click to expand...

Woo-◊◊◊◊◊◊◊-woo. Of course electricity and magnetism were found to be related effects of the same force long ago, so I guess he's got it down to one force!
 
Oh dear.

3. The new model puts physics back on a firm scientific (and biblical) basis instead of a philosophical basis.
Click to expand...

Ha ha!

Energy. The Grant Unification Theory (GUT)

This new model has the potential for a Grant Unification Theory of the universe. The Common Sense Science team feels they will be able to understand what causes gravity based upon this model.
Click to expand...

Difficult to know whether they're naming it after a dude called Grant, or they're just too clueless to know that it should be "Grand Unified Theory."

The Bohr Model of the Atom

The Bohr Model has 3 assumptions known to be wrong.
Click to expand...

Given that the Bohr model hasn't been used for 80 years, I don't see how this is relevant.

It reduces all forces in the universe to two:

1. Electricity

2. Magnetism
Click to expand...

Impressive, given that electricity and magnetism are the same force.
 
the_ignored said:
The Common Sense Science team
Click to expand...
OMG. Franko's back and he's put together a team of uninformed woo-woos. :eek:
3. The new model puts physics back on a firm scientific (and biblical) basis instead of a philosophical basis.
Click to expand...
WTF? Since when was a biblical (i.e. religious) basis not a philosophical basis?
4. The new model reduces the number of assumptions that must be made for nuclear modeling.
Click to expand...
I'd love to know what assumptions they are casually discarding and what their basis is for discarding them.
5. The chaos theories of the cosmos and nuclear energy are shown to be false. The spinning-ring model shows that God is a God of order, and the model is founded upon cause-and-effect classical science.
Click to expand...
:eek: again. Talk about rejecting facts to fit the theory. This is almost comical. Are you sure this isn't a parody?
6. {snip} The Common Sense Science team believes their model will also eventually explain gravitational force based on electromagnetism. This simplifies all forces in the universe to two: electrical and magnetic.
Click to expand...
This is so beyond stupidity it boggles the mind. Essentially, they are ignoring the existance of the entire field of quantum physics. But the kicker is, real physicists have been trying to find a unified theory of gravity and EM for about 50 years with the intention of addressing quantum later. The addition of quantum has not been a hinderance in the process at all. Gravity is actually the biggest hurdle in grand unified theory, not quantum forces. Stupidity on top of being uninformed.
The Bohr Model of the Atom

The Bohr Model has 3 assumptions known to be wrong.

Relativity and Quantum Theory, based on the Bohr Model, cannot give a true picture of God's Creation.

Relativity and Quantum Theory, deny design and a creator God.
Click to expand...
Wouldn't it have been lovely if they had mentioned which three assumptions are "known to be wrong"? And I would love to know how Relativity denies "design and a creator God". At this point, I think they're just making sh!t up.
Originally posted by the_ignored
Would it be over-reacting if I said that this stuff made me uneasy?
Click to expand...
Only if it is ever seriously considred, which I'm sure it is not.
 
This is somewhat reminiscent of the nazu phusics of the pre war germans, yeesh,
so what happened to the other two forces and gravity?

And god said , man am I laughing!
 
"The Bohr Model has 3 assumptions known to be wrong.", this is quite unlike the work from the Common Sense Science team which has only one thing wrong with it: Everything!
 
I'd love to go through a copy of the book, but I really don't want to support them by buying a copy.

Is there anyone who would actually defend this rationalizationist carp?
 
Do a search on Common Sense Science

Woohoo woo woo

From quantum science:

eight view of quantom science
_________________________
There is no deep reality.
Reality is created by observation.
Reality is an undivided wholeness.
Reality consists of a steadily increasing number of parallel universes.
The world obeys a non-human kind of reasoning.
The world is made of ordinary objects.
Consciousness creates reality.
The world is twofold, consisting of potentials and actualities
______________________________

Thier disagreement is based upon philosophy not science.


Peace
 
Upchurch said:
I'd love to go through a copy of the book, but I really don't want to support them by buying a copy.

Is there anyone who would actually defend this rationalizationist carp?
Click to expand...
See if you can find a used copy somewhere, that way none of your money goes directly to the authors.


I recently bought a used copy of 'psychic discoveries behind the iron curtain' or some such. Haven't read it yet, but it should be a hoot.
 
(From the page: )
The assumptions of the Judeo-Christian worldview are compatible and generally identical with the assumptions and methods of classical science. This permits one to integrate his religion and science and have a consistent approach to life.
Click to expand...
Does this sound familiar? Does this sound like the other side of the coin that a certain theiving coyote dog keeps yapping about? Isn't there somebody on these boards that keeps saying "the Enlightenment is over?"

:D

This is one thing me and these kooks agree on: you either go forward, or you go back. You can't stand still anymore.
 
There is the ' be run over' option as well, is there any credibility to the spining ring model? (sounds really whacked to me) They don't really explain like valent bonding or anything.
 
Couldn't have said it better myself, cats.

Common Sense Science will turn back on you eventually, because a lot of things that happen in nature don't really make much sense immediately. Nature has a way of throwing a curve ball that leaves us blinking in confusion for years and years.+
 
Upchurch said:
defend this rationalizationist carp?
Click to expand...

Hey, I think Koi are pretty. Oh, wait, you meant that dingleberry version of atomic physics.

Oh. Never mind.

They're rings. Ok, when the change size . . .

Yuh. Line splitting for why, now?
 
blackpriester said:


my guess: Lies or degree mills...
Click to expand...
Very possibly. I recognize many of the schools as being creditable, but I'm not sure how one would go about tracking down these guys' credentials. Will schools give information about alumni over the phone?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom