Would think it'd sound more like 'skwiro' in Clapham; though there is a high chance your friends in Clapham were Polish

I fully defend the i in i-um in aluminium though. You wouldn't call helium helum or uranium uranum.

I'm guessing it only got bent into 'aluminum' because it became a popular and cheap element to manufacture with, so it entered the pop lexicon of America and got softened up.

Throwing anything into the sun that isnt hydrogen or helium is a bad idea, it would reduce its lifespan, hastening its eventual morph into a red giant, and swallowing earth whole!!

Just FYI, each of the 10-20 thousand dots are lumps of mass, so massive in size that they each fuse millions of tons of hydrogen into helium every second, releasing, every second, each of the 10-20 thousand of them, more energy than has, or probably ever will be, used by every human being, combined. Thats MILLIONS of Hiroshima-sized nuclear bombs going off, every second, right in front of your eyes. In the foreground, Manmade objects are in constant freefall towards earth, missing only because they are brilliantly engineered and built to travel at extreme speeds. While all thats happening, a rock the size of an office building sails by. If it had hit us, it could easily have wiped out a medium sized country and collapsed the global economy. So yeah.. white dots.

First of all, I like your standpoint, nothing wrong with that. We simply don't know, maybe the big bang was an imploding black hole in another plane of existence, creating our own 4 dimensional reality. Maybe it was an omnipotent being looking like a giant spider with Panda bears instead of arms, maybe both.
Although Occam razor would suggest the first alternative (which on a grand scale sounds equally ridiculous to me), we still don't know.

And secondly ask yourself this (I don't mean you in special bobknight), "Is it even possible to consider biological evolution in isolation from everything else?". I don't think thats possible, first we need something like really huge stars to create heavy atoms (i mean everything with more protons than helium, that's not what a chemist would call heavy). We need smaller stars that don't burn up that fast and deliver energy, we need a planet in the right distance to this star. Ohh and the planet itself doesn't have the properties to sustain life from the beginning, earth also had to "evolve" to the kind of planet that was able to sustain life and therefore start the biological evolution. There are many more of these requirements and they also needed to "evolve" from this huge pile of energy called the big bang.

I don't really know with a 100% certainty that humans are 100% responsible for climate change but I do believe that we do create and are creating an impact. I don't know the science behind it but when I see that scientists tend to believe it is real and is happening I have to give that credibility because who would know better than they? What I think is even more important than climate change however is it's big brother sustainability. I bet the people in the audience would chant U.S.A. to that question as well. Mainly because people are afraid of the answer to that question and they would rather pretend it doesn't exist. I believe they think the present is more important than the future. But, when helium and tungsten prices start shooting through the roof and people are no longer able to afford to blow up a balloon for their kids birthday and light bulbs start steadily rising in costs these problems will no longer be avoidable. I think that is what scares me most about this video is we could be doing something about it now.>> ^bobknight33:

There is climate change then then there is Al Gore and the leftist man made climate change.

Man made climate change theory is pure BS. Only fools believe this.

I think her Victoria Jackson helium voice is prolonging this painful period. I don't think this would have gone on so long if she had a Venus Williams presence. I mean, she has a child and she's NOT SURE IF SHE FEELS SAFE? Come on lady, grow a pair! Oh, wait...

I sold giant helium penis and balls balloons one year at the FSF and the Pride Parade...Lived on Market at 6th-SOld out and made bank!

>> ^Fantomas:

Warner Bros. secretly promoting Atheism to children through cartoon!
More details tonight on FOX!


Of note, they changed the last few lines for public consumption:

Edited version:

Though we don't know how it got here
We're an important part here
It's a big universe and it's ours!

Original:

You might think that you're essential
Try inconsequential
It's a small world after all!

Stuff other than hydrogen and helium is only 2% of the universe, and yet, most of the interesting chemistry happens in that 2%, and biological systems are even more complex than just raw chemistry, so we are both trivially small percent, but a very complex and interesting percent!

Looks like @kceaton1's getting serious.

You may not speak out but i've decided to. If anyone is concerned about the seemingly unfair statements i make about shinyblurry then my comment section can show the proof. I have engaged him in discussion a number of times of science/theism, and the results are poor. He doesn't offer you the same respect he expects you to give him, i find him egotistical and obnoxious and completely uninterested in serious discussion. Read my discussions with him if you don't believe that - there's proof which is the test of any theory as we all know.

People like shinyblurry don't even realise that their zealotism drives people away from the religion.

Let me make a statement regarding the big bang theory. Firstly, all scientific theories are put in place to explain the facts. A theory takes everything we know, balls it up into a bunch of connections, and offers us a way of understanding that phenomenon. The big bang theory is not "complete", that is why it's still an active field of study. There are so many scientists right now trying to improve on theories that it's hard to even imagine.

You read a web page like that - almost entirely signed by scientists from the US and mostly "independent researchers"? And suddenly you think you know about the big bang. And in it one person suggests the idea that rigidly adhering to old forms is harmful to scientific advancement, but you take it to mean something else as far as i can tell - shame on you.

The big bang predicts the initial distribution of elements that we see reflected in the universe today - mostly hydrogen, a bit of helium and trace other elements. It actually predicts using only PROVEN SCIENTIFIC PRINCIPLES (that are testable to anyone on earth) what time and at what temperature different particles were able to form. From that, it predicts what chemical composition the universe has, and finds that it's in agreement. Do you even realise the significance of that? I don't think you do, your brain has been trained by religion to look for things like that and see only design. And that's also why you can't understand scientific theories. You really need to open your mind to how other people think, blurry, and i mean that with kindness.

Do you really think the big bang is so far away from the truth, in your ignorance? Have you looked at it in the kind of depth you need to to understand it? If not, i kindly ask that you stop spouting rubbish in the same way i don't go about trashing your unfounded, ungrounded theories every time you mention theism.

i didn't intend to speak out on @kceaton1's behalf, but i'm pretty sick of blurry canvassing for converts with misinformation myself. His links and statements provide nothing of substance to the argument. It doesn't matter what religion kceaton is, as a theist yourself i'm surprised you act cocky about another's choice of religion. Doesn't your religious claptrap say something like do unto other as you would have them do unto you? In my opinion under your own religion you will be going to hell for being so manipulative and insulting to others.

>> ^kceaton1:

>> ^shinyblurry:
That's quite a rant, Kceaton. Unfortunately, you cannot use the light travel time problem to falsify YEC. The SBB model also has a light travel time problem, specifically the horizon problem. Check out what some scientists published in New Scientist Magazine:
http://www.cosmologystatement.org/
I'm sorry you were indoctrinated into the Mormon church. My heart goes out to you, but you've thrown away the baby with the bathwater. It isn't too difficult to falsify the Mormon God, but neither does that make atheism the natural conclusion.
>> ^kceaton1

One:
I've known about this study since day one, does it surprise me, hahahahahaha. I think most people are morons. NO IT DOESN'T! I think we have one of the worst educations systems in the world, you may think your belief driven gospel knowledge may keep you safe, flying up there in the sky, BUT I'll take a damned engineer EVERYDAY over your damned God!
Two:
About my past. This is the THIRD time you've said this same thing. This is borderline abuse, FUCK YOU! Get off your high horse your are not an immortal moral high judge sent here to Earth to tell us what was a wrong or "sorrowful" mistake. I'm sorry, I'm being really damned aggressive right now, but I'm tired of your cockeyed charades and your imperative to make sure every Mormon that is or ever was KNOWS how "sorry" you are for them.
---
I'm tired of the targeted trolling!
That also means I will never qualify your "horizon" crap with a response, because it doesn't deserve one. I know this came off rude so sorry for that, on the other hand it was suppose too.

>> ^Fransky:

What's the deal with the girl and the silver bag around the 20:28 time?


Helium huffing.

Awesome, but only useful until we run out of our supply of helium, which I heard recently is dwindling very rapidly.

http://videosift.com/video/Liquid-Helium-And-Party-Balloons
>> ^brycewi19:

I've heard that helium is getting quite expensive. Something about supply being limited.
Wouldn't that have to factor in to the feasibility of this being financially practical?

>> ^zor:

>> ^sillma:
What a waste of perfectly good helium.

Right. Helium is not a good choice. Should have used hydrogen because it's renewable. They can use the energy to make more from water and if it explodes no harm no foul since there are no people on board.


But a 35 foot wide burning anything crashing to the earth has got to be bothersome.

I've heard that helium is getting quite expensive. Something about supply being limited.

Wouldn't that have to factor in to the feasibility of this being financially practical?

>> ^sillma:

What a waste of perfectly good helium.


Right. Helium is not a good choice. Should have used hydrogen because it's renewable. They can use the energy to make more from water and if it explodes no harm no foul since there are no people on board.