And the Sumerians worshipped the Sky God Anu as the father god and a large pantheon of others.
Anu was believed to be the supreme source of all authority, for the other gods and for all mortal rulers, and he is described in one text as the one “who contains the entire universe”.
This is the opposite of common physical reality. “Nothing”, howsoever you define it, is more than slightly difficult to study, so making pronouncements about it strains even absurdity. But what we do know is that “nothing” would have to be in uniform isotropic equilibrium, which is a pinnacle state. In other words, “nothing” would be inherently unstable: in its very condition of balance, it would have a natural tendency to move off its pinnacle state.
In other words, not only could “nothing” create the universe, it absolutely would. No creator is required for a thing (or no thing) to do what it must do.
All this assuming that there ever really was a universal creation. To assume that the universe is like unto everything in it, with a time-bound existence, is an unfounded assumption. It very well could have been here all along.
Having pat answers to these difficult questions serves no one. We can explore the weirdness of reality, as long as no one is barring our path. Churches, et al, have tried to tell us not to go there, because their book has all the answers. But what we have found in our ventures into the unknown has been far more interesting and beautiful than the ancient tales, and almost entirely unlike them.
Much less impressive when you realize that those are dog years. 
For dogs have surrounded me
– Psalm 22:16
Literally. When Stephen Hawking had an audience with the Pope (I think it was John Paul II, but am not positive) he was explicitly told not to inquire about the origin of the universe. Ironically, he was just then postulating his “imaginary time” hypothesis (the Hartle-Hawking state).
So 12 is Ned’s age, right?
And the Earth is made from half a million stones, Q.E.D.!
Genesis would have been written with a mind towards creating the things necessary for life in priority order. For a person with no understanding of the insulating effect of the atmosphere, water would seem to be more necessary for life than the Sun. Ergo, water comes in first.
Knock it off. This is not appropriate for this forum. I’d you feel you must, the Pit is right around the corner.
[/moderating]
How does one date the age of water? You can age the date of some stuff suspended in the water, but by definition a water molecule that formed a hundred million years ago is exactly the same as one formed yesterday.
I’m not sure you understand what a “fossil” is. They aren’t literally the bones of dinosaurs and whatnot. There are a couple of different processes, but basically a fossil is really minerals and rock that have filled in the space where the bones and other parts of the animal used to be.
You are correct that the tissues themselves do not last millions of years.
Welcome my brother, and as-salaam alaikum. God has opened your eyes to the truth of His wondrous creation. Here is a magnificent resource for revealing the truth of God’s power and majesty and how ancient texts have been proven true by modern science: The Qur'an and Science: Scientific Miracles in the Holy Book
Allahu akbar!
(Bolding mine)
Heretic! Don’t you know the bible is very explicit about the earth being less than 10,000 years old? More than 25,000 years… What kind of christian are you? Were you even awake during sunday school? I mean, clearly your science chops are better than mine, as I thought those big ol’ bones were the nephilim and dragons and leviathans described in the bible, but I think you need to work on your god-fearin’ chops! Because there’s no such thing as “25,000” years ago, and there never will be, what with the end time comin’ soon!
Water is water, except for when it is heavy water. Going from this summary: the scientists were trying to determine if the majority of the water on Earth was derived from pre-exsisting ices in the dust cloud that formed the solar system or if it was created by chemical processes during the formation of the solar system. They looked at the ratio of heavy water on Earth and did some computer modeling. The computer models suggest that the water needed to be old to have the observed amount of heavy water.
Except for when they do. (I picked that article because it was one of the most recent, there are many others.)
It must suck for ned12 when he has to take his disobedient children outside the city gates to be stoned to death. (Deut 21: 18-21)
I don’t get the impression ned12 is a literal adherent. Rather, if there was a real-life example of someone who had taken his child to a city gate and stoned him or her to death, ned12 would take that as evidence in support of the historical accuracy of the bible.
There wasn’t an Earth for the water to be on before the sun either.
So, to address this, claiming that the Bible was accurate because water is older than the formation of the Sun is really a stretch. It’s pretty clear that the narrative int he Bible had God creating the heaven and earth, along with the waters and then bringing the light (presumably turning on the sun). This isn’t what happened, however, and saying that water existed before the sun somehow proves this narrative is simply wrong. It’s definitely true that H2O existed before the Sun, but then so did the gas and dust that comprised both the Sun and the rest of the solar system, having come from previously exploding stars.
The Bible would only be getting 'more accurate all the time) if it’s narrative actually described what happened, not simply taking one factoid (water is older than the Sun) and using that to demonstrate what you are asserting. And it doesn’t. Here is the Bible’s narrative on this:
Except we know that the Sun is older than the Earth. The elements that comprise what would become the Earth, eventually, are older than the formation of the Sun, but then the elements that comprise the Sun are older than the formation of the Sun as well. The Sun, however, formed first, and the Earth formed later…actually quite a bit later, since the at least one theory holds that the Earth is a 2nd generation planet. Also, the early Earth didn’t have standing water…couldn’t have it in fact, since the planet was molten (nothing in the Bible about any of this). The current theory, as far as I know, has water being delivered to the Earth during the late heavy bombardment phase of the solar system. This would have been long after the first day and long after the planet formed (heck, if they are right about this being a second generation planet then the original super Earth that was in our approximate orbit got blown away by a massive collision, and even the Earth obtained it’s moon by having something the size of Mars glance off of us).
Sorry that you got all excited about the fact that water is older than the formation of the Sun, but it’s really not that much news here, nor does it prove the Bible happened or is getting ‘more accuarte all the time’.
Dammit, I think you guys scared him away. That was fun to read!
If you’re listing properties of this state, then are we really talking about nothing?
The creationists complain that we can’t use the laws of physics (quantum uncertainty) to talk about the origin of the universe, since if the laws of physics are in effect, it’s not really nothing. But that same point comes back to bite them.
If you’re still here, can you explain the relevance of this? I read the wiki article you cited, and I still have no clue why you reference it.
I blame iiandyiiii.
This is why we can never make new friends.