Steve Campbell, Biblical Critic and author of Historical Accuracy

“Important fields of research, e.g., the treatment of the state in interstellar regions,
including the formation of stars, are still based on a neglect of Bennett’s discovery
more than half a century ago …
present-day students in astrophysics hear nothing about it.”

Hannes Alfven
Plasma Physicist, 1908-1995

Faith follows reason and reason follows information

There is no Genesis 1: 3 for me now.

And God said, “Let there be light.”

= = =

Stellar nurseries in the Snake Nebula – stars forming along a filament

Gravitational Theory does not predict this. [Einstein is not enough ! ! ! ]

“Newborn stars do not have enough dust to build planets” by Nola Taylor Redd

= = =

Steefen
So when you are teaching kids Genesis 1: 3,

Light is not just from a Sun/Star, it is from the electrified filament along which stars are formed.

See the video starting at 10:56.

Cosmic-scale electric filaments.

= = =

Although the scientific method is devoid of bias, humans are not.

= = =

The Big Bang is a theory because BICEP2 has not detected Einstein gravitational waves and has not affirmed either an inflationary epoch or a Big Bang creation event.

Without a creation of the universe event, there is no creator-god of the universe.

Psalm 8: 3-4

…3When I behold Your heavens, the work of Your fingers, the moon and the stars, which You have set in place— 4what is man that You are mindful of him, or the son of man that You care for him?

Steefen
The God of the Gaps is in the above verses.

There is no God who set billions of stars in place. Stars are created in a Z-pinch along a filament.

Is there really a God of Electricity creating stars in a Z-pinch?

I’m going to say a running river in nature, not affected by humanity, does not do so because a God-Person is the cause.

** you do not have permission to see this link **

Electric Universe Debunked? Let’s take a moment…

Stephen said
** you do not have permission to see this link **

 

** you do not have permission to see this link **

 

** you do not have permission to see this link **

  

Dochteur
To be honest, his summary of flat earth theory had very specific and valid points debunked, but my feeling of EU debunking video was that it was filled with only vague “it is established and verified beyond doubt, so this can’t be true” statement and nothing to really tackle any specific facet of the theory in greater detail.

Steefen
Your video did not so much debunk Electric Universe as much as you insulted it. Extending your insults into putting things in a class of bad names is not argumentation. As a whole, your video is not effective argumentation and it is not persuasive. Thumb down. Do Birkeland Currents exist? Do Z pinches exist?

Stephen said

Steefen said

Neil Creamer

I think that people like Professor Dave [who made a video disagreeing with the Electric Universe] would do well to study a little history of science and some philosophy to get an idea where and why ideas start. There has been a trend in academia towards specialiization and this has had the unfortunate effect of hardening dogmas and debilitating the investigator’s capacity to approach a problem in more than one way. It has also deprived educated people of an ability or willingness to see a bigger picture or entertain more than one big idea at a time.

  

Let me translate.

Scientific hypotheses have been proven wrong before so that means we must be right.

How dare those narrow minded scientists expect us to provide evidence for our hypotheses?   

So what if we can’t make any testable predictions?   It’s all so beautiful!

  

Poor translation.