James Webb Telescope Announces Discovery Of 13.8 BILLION Year Old Massive Structure

🌌 James Webb Telescope Announces Discovery Of 13.8 BILLION Year Old Massive Structure 🪐✨
Welcome back to Info. Paper, your trusted source for the latest and most awe-inspiring discoveries from the cosmos! In today's groundbreaking episode, we delve into a monumental revelation: the James Webb Space Telescope has discovered a massive structure that dates back 13.8 billion years!
🔭 What You'll Discover:
James Webb Space Telescope: Learn about the incredible capabilities of this advanced telescope and its role in uncovering the mysteries of the universe.
The Discovery: Uncover the details of this ancient structure, its staggering age, and its significance in the history of the cosmos.
Implications: Understand how this discovery reshapes our understanding of the early universe and its formation.
Expert Analysis: Hear from leading astronomers and cosmologists as they discuss the potential impact of this finding on our knowledge of the universe’s origins.
🌠 Why This Matters:
The discovery of a 13.8 billion-year-old structure challenges our existing theories about the universe's formation and evolution. Join us as we explore this extraordinary find and its profound implications for cosmology and astrophysics.
🔔 Subscribe to Info. Paper: Stay informed with the latest updates in space exploration, groundbreaking scientific discoveries, and more. Hit the subscribe button and ring the bell for notifications on our latest videos!
👍 Like, Share, and Comment: What do you think about this ancient structure? How do you believe it will change our understanding of the universe? Share your thoughts and join the discussion!

[@manuelvazquez8758]

Are they sure it is point 8? Maybe point 4? How about total B.S.?

[@jonnyb6700]

.8

[@jimmyj5557]

How come the well estsblished channels don't make a big splash about this?

[@rerunblisters5088]

Because the Powers that be do not want public opinion to shift away from the theory of evolution, or whatever-else theory that's still being promoted due to the possibility people may discover that scientifically, God.has to exist.

[@xersocudiganulatac6262]

The Universe has no beginning and will never end.

[@rerunblisters5088]

The universe had a beginning, and it will never end. Do you know why?

[@Stevie-L-n8g]

Yeah, made by a jewish monotheistic God!!! Right!

[@jonnyb6700]

Roger Penrose talks about how the big bang was not the beginning.

[@xersocudiganulatac6262]

@@rerunblisters5088 How can we conclude that the Universe has a beginning when we have no evidence how sub-atomic particles comes to exist from nothing and how an atom multiply from nothing?

[@xersocudiganulatac6262]

@@jonnyb6700 Yes the big bang was not the beginning because the Universe has no beginning. IMO

[@donovanbryan5000]

Just so happens the oldest star in entire universe is 200 light years away how about the trillion other galaxies?

[@SalliouMoussaIbrahimMadi]

The universe is older than expected, only God knows his age

[@Tyrell_Corp2019]

Not even god knows. God is not a puppet master but the fabric of life we all feel. God is searching his meaning through the creation.

[@SalliouMoussaIbrahimMadi]

@@Tyrell_Corp2019 Which god? The God I'm talking about is the creator of the universe. Not these fake gods

[@rerunblisters5088]

If you don't yet know, carbon dating and all other methods for estimating the age of objects that predate historical records are incredibly biased and lack academic consensus. These numbers about the age of the universe, or dinosaurs for that matter, are pulled out of their asses.

[@Morassabe]

so molecular decay, observed for centuries, is wrong? You have proof of this? It sounds like you pulled that comment out of your ass. U-235 doesn't have a half life? Lead? Plutonium? Carbon? I'm no chemist, be the first to admit it, but, I do understand observational science. Are you saying that nearly 100% of science is wrong? That we base many different theories, as well as chemical compounds that we make, on false information? It would seem that if that were true, then we couldn't make those compounds, we couldn't produce fission reactions, let alone fusion. I really would like you to point me in the direction of your assertion please. Academic consensus never occurs, tho the percentage of folks that may differ from a generally accepted theory is quite low. I can point to the idea that the earth isn't warming, when observational science clearly shows us that it is. But, there will always be a naysayer, whom comes up with some idea that refutes the accepted science. That is the beauty of science, it doesn't accept anything as complete fact, but rather theory, backed up by study after study, but, the emphasis is always on proving or disproving a theory. That being said, you'll need to prove, or disprove your comment sir.

[@Graeme_Lastname]

Boy that voice synth needs to learn how to pronounce words correctly. Could say the same for half of YT.

[@Stevie-L-n8g]

Can this commentator NOT pronounce words and names properly? LIe-Bra for Libra, Methu-sala for Methusala(all one word)?

[@kingphilwill]

It's AI