Rev. David Rives — Problems with the Big Bang

It’s been a while since we posted one of these. Google seems to have an admirer of the rev, because one of our posts about him from two months ago — Rev. David Rives — New Stars Are Never Seen — has never been indexed. Nevertheless, we couldn’t ignore this one.

Drool-o-tron™ alerted us to it with its sirens and flashing lights. The blinking letters of its wall display said WorldNetDaily (WND). The Drool-o-tron™ had once again found the latest video by the brilliant and articulate leader of David Rives Ministries.

Our computer was locked onto this headline at WND: Let’s talk about the Big Bang for a moment. We couldn’t resist that! The actual title of the rev’s video is “Big Bang Problems.”

The rev tells us that — gasp! — contrary to the bible, there’s a theory claiming that the universe started by accident 14 billion years ago. But how did stars form if everything was moving apart? Great question, huh? And where did the matter come from? Now there’s a new theory that magnetic fields around planets show they were formed only thousands of years ago — maybe on Day Four of Creation Week! There are big holes in the Big Bang theory!

The rev is once again wearing his new outfit — a blue bible-boy blazer and a bright red shirt! He’s the cutest rev you’ve ever seen! The video is surprisingly brief — less than a minute and a half long before the commercial at the end. Go ahead, click over to WND and watch it.

As we always do with the rev’s videos, we dedicate the comments section for your use as an Intellectual Free Fire Zone. You know the rules. Okay, the comments are open. Go for it!

Copyright © 2017. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

10 responses to “Rev. David Rives — Problems with the Big Bang

  1. For the IFFZ:

    The Twitterer-in-Chief tweeted that his current political imbroglio

    is the single greatest witch hunt of a politician in American history!

    The irrepressible pride of an incurable narcissist shines through yet again!

  2. Michael Fugate

    Or as expertly penned by Lalo Alcarez in today’ 18 May “La Cucaracha”
    http://www.gocomics.com/lacucaracha

  3. techreseller

    Poor rubes listening to this. Anyone who got a D or better in high school physics can see the holes in little cute David’s explanations.

  4. Michael Fugate

    I always wonder when sites like David Rives’ pull out “experts” to prove not only god but a very specific Christian one. He teams up with one F. J. “Rusty” Maisel who is given the title Dr., but if one goes to the good doctor’s website – it is listed as D.Ph. H.C. which is “honoris causa” or a degree with no requirements. By whom was this “degree” bestowed? And for what reason?

    I guess it is the authoritarian in them that makes this important.

  5. When this idiot has the knowledge of a cosmologist, say someone like Lawrence Krauss, he can make pronouncements on the big bang. Until then he is not in a position say anything.

  6. Ah, this is the Good Rev I’ve learned to love. Short, to the point and hence no burden on my extremely short attention span. And every sentence is a winner!*

    * Which means that everything can be rebutted by an averagely intelligent high school student who’s somewhat less lazy and dishonest as the Good Rev.

  7. I have long wondered why creationists don’t like the Big Bang. After all, it was introduced as an alternative to the eternity of the universe. The eternity of the universe was the opponent to standard creation by God as seen by the philosophers of Christianity, Judaism and Islam throughout the ages.

    It almost seems that the creationists don’t want any explanation.

  8. (Why do I enjoy playing Idiot’s Advocate so much?) The Reverend is quite right on one rather important detail. We do not have a good explanation of the fact that there was a preponderance of matter over anti-matter in the earliest state of our Universe. If there had not been, the Universe would consist of nothing but radiation.

    We attribute this to “symmetry breaking”. But that’s not an answer; it’s merely a relabelling of the question.

  9. Eric Lipps

    But at least scientists are trying to find an answer that makes sense, rather than witlessly quoting Genesis 1.

Make a comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s