But my question refers to eternal forms of energy before the existence of the universe. The circumstances of this universe is irrelevant.
There can be no "before" in any meaningful sense. "Before" this universe existed there was no time for anything to exist in.
That's how evolution works. It's why you are not an exact copy of your parents. - - - Updated - - - All energy is eternal. As is all matter. Neither can be created nor destroyed. They can only changes states. - - - Updated - - - Well, time/space was concentrated in to so small an area that our mathematical models cannot accurately describe it without generating gibberish answers.
Wind is caused by heating of the earth's surface causing air molecules to move creating wind. Please google something before you ask such a basic question.
No. That would be unscientific. However, the preponderance of evidence supports the Theory of Evolution and Evolution remains the best current means of describing the biological processes of Earth life.
Provide an example. You really can't get any more "might makes right" than "...because God said so". Well you linked me to a whole thread of people already destroying your argument, so I suggest you re-read it.
Then perhaps you can answer the following: If potential energy is eternal, how could kinetic energy possibly form?
I'm aware it can change forms, but you are arguing that all forms of energy always existed . Kinetic energy forms when potential energy ceases to be the state that an object is in. How then can kinetic energy always exist if potential energy always exists?
Does God create every snowflake? I think God created the laws of physics which dictate how crystals are formed.
While you can not see wind itself, you can see the effects of it, and the causes of it can be explained using science. The same it not true with god. The OP is a false comparison.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminiferous_aether The famous MichelsonMorley experiment compared the source light with itself after being sent in different directions, looking for changes in phase in a manner that could be measured with extremely high accuracy.[SUP][E 19][/SUP][SUP][E 20][/SUP]The publication of their result in 1887, the null result, was the first clear demonstration that something was seriously wrong with the aether concept of that time (after Michelson's first experiment in 1881 that wasn't fully conclusive). In this case the MM experiment yielded a shift of the fringing pattern of about 0.01 of a fringe, corresponding to a small velocity. However, it was incompatible with the expected aether wind effect due to the Earth's (seasonally varying) velocity which would have required a shift of 0.4 of a fringe, and the error was small enough that the value may have indeed been zero. Therefore, the null hypothesis, the hypothesis that there was no aether wind, could not be rejected. More modern experiments have since reduced the possible value to a number very close to zero, about 10[SUP]−17[/SUP]. It is obvious from what has gone before that it would be hopeless to attempt to solve the question of the motion of the solar system by observations of optical phenomena at the surface of the earth.[SUP][5][/SUP] A. Michelson and E. Morley. On the Relative Motion of the Earth and the Luminiferous Æther. // Phil. Mag. S. 5. Vol. 24. No. 151. Dec. 1887. A series of experiments using similar but increasingly sophisticated apparatuses all returned the null result as well. Conceptually different experiments that also attempted to detect the motion of the aether were the TroutonNoble experiment (1903),[SUP][E 21][/SUP] whose objective was to detect torsion effects caused by electrostatic fields, and the experiments of Rayleigh and Brace (1902, 1904),[SUP][E 22][/SUP][SUP][E 23][/SUP] to detect double refraction in various media. However, all of them obtained a null result, like MichelsonMorley (MM) previously did.
A girl walks by, and you start to undress her with your eyes. She is oblivious to your existence, and remains so to her grave, but your conscience tells you you're out of line. While I understand your desire to project your own stunted philosophy onto theists, His might is hardly a problem, seeing He is also the source of right. Now how about answering the question? No, I linked you to a thread wherein people offered nothing but nonsensical objections to my argument. You have someone else in mind? And you figure He can't have done both?
I didn't get most of that; but Tesla believed in aether, and that is good enough for me. He wanted to send wireless power through the aether, and predicted and described wireless communication. What is it that carries the wavelengths of wireless stuff? Aether or wind? I think Tesla knew that aether was atmosphere.
Wavelengths do not require air or wind. Light is a wavelength and moves through the vacume of space. Wavelength are non-physical energy and therefore are normally not effected by gravity, friction, and other forces.
What about solar wind? It 'carries' synchrotron radiation which is electromagnetism that is classified according to the size of its wavelength. Gamma rays have very short wavelengths etc. Electromagnetism can travel through wires or through the aether.
Wind exists because it is measurable, observable and because we know exactly what causes it and what it is made of. You might as well ask if oxygen exists. Someone said that because the universe exists therefore God exists or something like this...the presence of the universe does not demand a God to exist. In fact it may be the exact opposite. The universe exists, we exist therefore once we existed, God existed. Why? Because we made God. All of human history proves that we made up God. We have been doing it for as long as recorded history. God is nothing but a product of the mind of man, nothing else.
Duh because anyone can see going from dust or sludge to humans requires god magic. Saying it can be done without god magic is silly.