I found a video at YouTube that got my attention. I decided to write down the contents of the video.
“Nothing can only create NOTHING. Before the universe began, something must have always existed. Its energy. Energy is ETERNAL. The 1st law of thermodynamics confirms that. The law states: “energy cannot be created or destroyed”. No beginning or uncreated and no end. That’s the definition of “eternal”. You also can’t claim that this energy always existed IN the known universe because science has proven that the universe didn’t always exist. The universe and time didn’t always exist by Stephen Hawking
This energy that was present BEFORE the universe began had to have power beyond anything we can begin to imagine, considering it had to transfer its energy unto the TRILLIONS of stars and BILLIONS of galaxies. A separate eternal energy source that exists outside of the universe had to have supplied or transferred its energy to the universe (because we know the universe didn’t exist).
It is not unreasonable to assume this ANONYMOUS energy was the GOD. Listen, we reasonable have 2 options to determine what this powerful always existing energy. It could be a dumb, unconscious and vague energy source. (However, this seems extremely illogical considering that we can observe complexity, order, and design throughout the universe, solar system, galaxies, Human DNA, Chromosomes, Digestive system, neural system, the eye, the heart, liver, the brain…). The most logical answer would be that an intelligent mind constructed the universe, or a God. It’s as simple as that.
If you can’t agree with this logic then you’re stubborn, unreasonable, and don’t want to believe in the possible existence of a God.”
But, but…but how did God created the universe in absence of time? Or simply, what is time? Or was time part of the creations of the universe?
The year is 2113. Humanity has spent the last 100 years stockpiling nuclear warheads. And not just a few – 600 billion of the largest, biggest, deadliest warheads they can build. Sort of like the Russian Tsar Bomba (the biggest nuclear bomb ever detonated) but, well, times 600 billion.
Why? Because we’ve decided to blow up the Moon, and to do so would require the equivalent of 30 trillion megatons of TNT.
When we say blow up, we don’t just mean slightly-blow-up. See, if you don’t completely obliterate the Moon, the remaining fragments will likely coalesce back together into a Moon-sized object. Sure, it won’t look as pretty or as spherical as our modern Moon, but it will be pretty similar in its gravitational effect on Earth.
No, what we (or, more specifically, our future selves) want to do is completely get rid of the Moon. So, with their multiple rockets ready and waiting to attack the Moon from all sides, they launch them towards our natural satellite and blow it to smithereens. Scientists around the world eagerly prepare for one of the greatest (and most idiotic) experiments of all time.
With the fragments of the Moon too small to gravitationally bond together, they begin to spread out. First, a large number of them head towards Earth, raining molten Moon rock down on our planet. Cities are destroyed, countries are wiped off the map, and we begin to wonder if blowing up the Moon was such a brilliant idea.
The remaining Moon material enters orbit around the world, forming a ring around our planet. But, like Saturn’s ring, it doesn’t just stay there. Periodically, for the rest of Earth’s life, meteorites break from the ring and slam into the surface. We’re now under constant bombardment from an apparently vengeful Moon.
But the Moon isn’t quite done getting even yet. Have you ever noticed that the Moon is covered in craters? Well, that’s because it gets pounded by meteorites, protecting Earth from some of the rocks that head our way. With the Moon annihilated, we’re now also more vulnerable to space rocks.
Of course, one of the Moon’s most noticeable effects is (or was) the tides. With the Moon no longer there, the oceans of the world become much calmer. The Sun still has an effect on them (known as solar tides), so surfers wouldn’t be completely devoid of waves. But the oceans would largely become serene.
This has a dire effect on life on Earth. When life first formed on Earth in tidal pools, it was thanks to the gravitational pull of the Moon that primordial life was able to traverse between different pools and generally spread across the planet. While we’re already here now, life that is currently in the oceans is no longer able to move so easily. The churning of the oceans, and thus the circulation of nutrients, ceases. Water-based life struggles to survive and, eventually, thousands (and probably millions) of species go extinct.
The Moon isn’t done yet, though. You see, it also accounted for about one-eightieth of the Earth-Moon mass system. The loss of the Moon directly affects the Earth’s orbit, rotation and wobble. Without the Moon to act as a stabiliser, the Earth begins to wobble more and more, sending our seasons into turmoil and changing our orbit around the Sun from slightly elliptical to massively elliptical. We now swing around the Sun in a wild, unstable, fluctuating orbit.
As the world regrets their ill-advised decision to destroy the Moon, it’s already too late to do anything. If humanity survives the constant bombardment from the remains of the Moon and other space rocks, the eradication of most other species from the globe, and finally the potentially catastrophic seasonal changes then, well, maybe blowing up the Moon wasn’t such a bad idea.
Otherwise, we’d probably advise against it. Why don’t we get rid of the Sun instead?
The following is an actual question given on a University of Washington chemistry mid-term.
Question: Is Hell exothermic (gives off heat) or endothermic (absorbs heat)?
The answer by one student was so ‘profound’ that the professor shared it with colleagues, via the Internet, which is, of course, why we now have the pleasure of enjoying it as well
Most of the students wrote proofs of their beliefs using Boyle’s Law (gas cools when it expands and heats when it is compressed) or some variant. One student, however, wrote the following:
First, we need to know how the mass of Hell is changing in time. So we need to know the rate at which souls are moving into Hell and the rate at which they are leaving. I think that we can safely assume that once a soul gets to Hell, it will not leave. Therefore, no souls are leaving. As for how many souls are entering Hell, let’s look at the different religions that exist in the world today.
Most of these religions state that if you are not a member of their religion, you will go to Hell. Since there is more than one of these religions and since people do not belong to more than one religion, we can project that all souls go to Hell. With birth and death rates as they are, we can expect the number of souls in Hell to increase exponentially. Now, we look at the rate of change of the volume in Hell because Boyle’s Law states that in order for the temperature and pressure in Hell to stay the same, the volume of Hell has to expand proportionately as souls are added.
This gives two possibilities:
- If Hell is expanding at a slower rate than the rate at which souls enter Hell, then the temperature and pressure in Hell will increase until all Hell breaks loose.
- If Hell is expanding at a rate faster than the increase of souls in Hell, then the temperature and pressure will drop until Hell freezes over.
So which is it?
If we accept the postulate given to me by Teresa during my Freshman year that, ‘It will be a cold day in Hell before I sleep with you,’ and take into account the fact that I slept with her last night, then number two must be true, and thus I am sure that Hell is exothermic and has already frozen over. The corollary of this theory is that since Hell has frozen over, it follows that it is not accepting any more souls and is therefore, extinct……leaving only Heaven, thereby proving the existence of a divine being which explains why, last night, Teresa kept shouting ‘Oh my God.’