I have a masters degree in physics and taught 3rd year university astrophysics. I personally verified the Big Bang, and estimated the age of the universe to be 8 billion years from telescope data.

Our Sun Only Has 22 Orbits Left Before It Dies ☀️ Our Sun has only completed 20 laps around the Milky Way, leaving just 22 orbits before it dies. While we often view our Sun as a stationary anchor, it is actually a cosmic traveler hurtling through the Milky Way galaxy. Dragging Earth and the rest of the solar system along with it, the Sun orbits the galactic core from its home in the Orion Arm, roughly 27,000 light-years away. This massive galactic lap is an epic journey; each single orbit takes approximately 225 million years to complete. Having burned for 4.6 billion years, our star has finished only about 20 of these monumental orbits so far. Yet, astronomers warn that this cosmic journey has a definitive expiration date, estimating the Sun has just 22 orbits left before its fuel runs out. In about 5 billion years, the Sun will exhaust the hydrogen fuel in its core, triggering a dramatic transformation. It will swell into a massive red giant, likely engulfing Earth and the inner planets, before shedding its outer layers to leave behind a cool, dense core remnant known as a white dwarf. While this stellar death is billions of years away, the concept of a 'galactic countdown' offers a profound perspective on our place in the universe. It reminds us that even the most massive, life-giving celestial bodies operate on a finite clock, slowly marking their remaining laps around the galaxy. source: National Aeronautics and Space Administration. (n.d.). The Milky Way Galaxy. NASA Science.

I used my 17” telescope in dark Texas skies to capture this: A star much like ours as it dies. You can see the core of the star left behind in the center of the expanding shell. Any planets that were around this star have been destroyed.

Why does God test people’s faith instead of just giving them evidence? If truth matters, why hide it?

Is it Islamophobic to bring up the fact that 13 Islamic countries kill you by law if you leave Islam?

Just a little reminder 😉 -Atheism is NOT a religion. -It doesn’t take faith to be an atheist. -Atheists don’t believe nothing created everything. -Atheism doesn’t = nihilism or any other “ism”. -Atheism doesn’t dictate how I live or what I should value. -Atheists don’t hate God.

Even Arab leaders admit it. Everyone is sharing the Bill Clinton clip where he describes how Yasser Arafat rejected a generous peace offer at Camp David that would have given the Palestinians a state on 96 percent of the West Bank, land swaps, and a capital in East Jerusalem. Clinton says Arafat lied to him and that the Palestinian leadership never actually wanted a two-state solution. They wanted to destroy Israel. It’s a video often shared by people like @VividProwess, and it’s an important one for people to see. Of course, critics immediately dismiss it. They claim Clinton is biased or he’s pro-Israel. They’ll tell you that you cannot trust the American perspective. Ok, so let us set that aside. Now watch this. In this powerful interview, former Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, a major Arab leader who was directly involved in negotiations, says exactly the same thing from the Arab side. He talks about the Mena House Conference in Cairo as well as the Camp David negotiations of 1978. All failed because of the Palestinians repeatedly rejecting any offer. The Oslo accords were signed but because Hamas and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad were not involved, they derailed the accords and any chance for peace by initiating 4 years of terrorist suicide attacks in Israel. Then came the second Camp David negotiations in 2000 which Arafat agreed to, then rejected and instead initiated the Second Intifada. Mubarak explains how the Palestinians refused to even participate in the Mena House conference of 1977. He describes repeated opportunities they were given, including a detailed document that called for Israeli withdrawal from the Samaria, Judea and Gaza, security arrangements during a transitional period, and other major concessions. The Israelis were willing to negotiate on difficult issues like who would control security. The Palestinians, according to Mubarak, kept saying no and wasting chance after chance. He speaks with clear frustration about how for decades the Palestinian side has rejected peace initiatives and realistic compromises. The video further shows footage from the PLO representative in 1977, as well as old footage of Egyptian president Sadat who was involved in the Mena House and first Camp David negotiations of 1978. This perhaps is far more impactful than Clinton’s account because it is not a Western or Israeli voice. It is prominent Arab leaders who lived the negotiations, who represented the broader Arab world, and who had zero incentive to defend Israel. When leaders from both sides of the table describe the same pattern of Palestinian rejectionism and violence, it becomes much harder to dismiss as bias. The pattern is clear across decades and across different voices… generous offers, repeated refusals, and continued demands for everything while giving nothing in return. This is not ancient history. It is the core reason the conflict continues today. If you value the truth, please share.

Two astronauts are having breakfast on the space station when one turns to the other and says, “I can't find any milk for my coffee.” The second astronaut replies, “In space no one can. Here, use cream.”

"Science, by itself, cannot supply us with an ethic. It can show us how to achieve a given end, and it may show us that some ends cannot be achieved. But among ends that can be achieved our choice must be decided by other than purely scientific considerations. If a man were to say, “I hate the human race, and I think it would be a good thing if it were exterminated,” we could say, “Well, my dear sir, let us begin the process with you.” But this is hardly argument, and no amount of science could prove such a man mistaken." — Bertrand Russell, The Science to Save us from Science

Sam Harris has written the best thing you’ll read today. open.substack.com/pub/samhar…

The death of Henry Nowak should be the end of religious weapon exemptions everywhere. One rule of law for all. No exceptions.

Bro, let’s stop pretending. Muslims make up about 25% of the entire world’s population — over 2 billion people across 50 countries. Japanese people? About 1.4% of the world. One single country. Shinto exists only in Japan. So when people say “Japan should prioritize minorities and be more accommodating to Islam,” who exactly are we talking about? The global majority is coming to one of the world’s smallest ethnic and religious groups and demanding that Japan change its culture, food, and traditions for them. That’s not “protecting minorities.” That’s the majority trying to colonize a tiny minority. Japan has every right to protect its own people and culture first. If Muslims want to live under Islamic rules, they already have dozens of countries where they can do that. They don’t need to come to Japan and turn it into another one.

Don't condemn Muhammad and his companions for waging wars, raiding caravans, marrying children, owning slaves, degrading women, or engaging in brutal violence. Raiding rival tribes was standard. Child marriage was practiced. Slavery was the norm. Tribal codes, honor killings, conquest, this was the fabric of life in that time and place. The real problem isn’t what Muhammad did. The real problem is that what he did was declared sacred. His every action wasn’t just recorded, it was immortalized, canonized and sanctified. His tribal conduct wasn’t left in the 7th century, it was elevated as timeless law for the entire world. He didn’t just live in history, he froze history in place and called it religion. What should have been contextualized as ancient is now institutionalized as eternal. What should have been buried with time is now resurrected in legal codes, school curriculums, and acts of terror.

Sin el Islam... No habría controles en el aeropuerto. No habría zonas "musulmanas" en innumerables ciudades europeas y americanas. No habría atentados del 11-S. No habría atentados en el metro de Madrid ni en Londres. No habría Estado Islámico ni ISIS. No habría Al-Qaeda ni Bin Laden. No habría talibanes ni prohibición de educación femenina en Afganistán. No habría Hamás ni 7 de octubre. No habría Hezbolá ni guerra constante en el Líbano. Israel podría vivir en paz. No habría ataques con cuchillo por “alá akbar” en Europa. No habría violaciones masivas en Colonia ni en otras ciudades europeas por la misma causa. No habría burkas o burkinis en playas y colegios. No habría guetos de no integración en Francia, Bélgica, Suecia o Reino Unido. No habría gasto masivo en proteger sinagogas e iglesias. No habría leyes contra la blasfemia ni ejecuciones por dibujos de caricaturas. No habría migración masiva desde países de mayoría musulmana hacia Occidente. Sí, por todo esto y mucho más, me declaro un orgulloso "islamófobo".

I don’t believe good and evil exist 😂 I believe our perception of it does. Those are very different things. Like for instance we would agree that killing babies is an evil thing to do but you think it’s all good as long as god does it with a flood killing all babies of all living things. We have different perceptions on this. You think it’s totally cool for god to kill every first born child of the Egyptians simply to prove a point, many of which were new born babies. Again, I would perceive that as evil. So good and evil are based on human perception and are ideas we developed to try and keep our societies together. Rules are how any social creature coheres. The societies we live in dictate right and wrong, good and evil. One more example for you. I think it’s evil to kill a person simply because they work on a Saturday. Your god commands their execution in the Old Testament which to me is about as evil as it gets and modern society agrees. You would go to prison for life and in some states get the death penalty for doing such a thing. Doesn’t matter your book tells you to do it. Now Christians like to say that was the old covenant and Jesus changed this but again that would mean morality changed in the Bible meaning the Bible doesn’t teach objective morality. It’s subjective if the rules change or if it’s ok for god to do it but not you. That is the definition of subjective morality, it doesn’t stay consistent. For something to be objectively good or evil it would have to always be evil not matter what or always good no matter what.