11745RE: [CreationTalk] RE: Celestial Mechanics
- Feb 18, 2014
> I do not claim expertise in biblical Hebrew or celestial
However your interpretation of biblical Hebrew is at odds with every English Translation of the Bible (including the King James) and every other interpretation of biblical Hebrew for the past 2000 years. So either you are wrong or every other Hebrew scholar including Jews is wrong. So your Changing Earth Creationist idea assumes your interpretation of biblical Hebrew is correct and no body else for last 2000 years or so has gotten it right. You may not claim expertise in biblical Hebrew but you do assume you have expertise in biblical Hebrew beyond that of any one else that has live for the last 2000 years. Despite this fact you have never provided any thing but you say so that your interpretation of biblical Hebrew has any validity.
> I do claim that visible creation (cosmic history as in
>happened) confirms the grammatical Hebrew textcolor=navy>
>and casts doubt on the traditional, Latin-imitatingcolor=navy>
>translations found in modern bibles.style='color:navy'>
First of all what you call the grammatical Hebrew text is just interpretation of biblical Hebrew text and NOTHING more. Second what call “visible creation” has no existence in reality. There are no images showing what you claim it is a figment of you imagination and inability to understand digital images and not thing more.
> The ancient and modern astronomy methods, are not
>compatible. Early astronomers did not make calendars
>to measure time. They tuned their lives to the varying
>cycles of nature.
The falsehood of this claim is easily demonstrated by the fact that ancient civilizations had astronomy based calendars even the Sumerians such a calendar. Even ready the account if the Flood in Genesis 7-8 shows that Noah not only had a calendar but used it to keep track of time during the Flood.
> They saw never ending changes in the very places we claim clock-like orbits.
PROVE IT. Give just one reference to support this claim. Frankly I don’t think you can. You make these claims as though they a proven fact, but you never ever give any supporting evidence.
> They also looked with longing on the days of the early patriarchs who lived for geological ages.
900 years is hardly geological ages, even Sumerian and Egyptian account only give to 10,000 of year, still not geological ages. By way the term “geological ages” is an invention of Old Earth scoffers.
> Job listed geological phenomena (such as the dried Mediterranean ) during the few days of his life back in the dinosaur era.
No he does not. NOPLACE does Job say any thing about a dried Mediterranean . Also so your reference to the dinosaur era shows you are accepting the uniformitarian claims of Evolutionists.
> He mentioned how their faces changed (doubled) before
>they died. If we lived long enough to observe gradualcolor=navy>
>geological events changing the Earth, we would growcolor=navy>
>Neanderthal skulls from vast age. style='color:navy'>
This actually disproves your claim getting a Neanderthal skull from skull only requires living 400-500 years not geological ages.
>The Bible also mentions the shattering of a planet (called rahab)
>four times, twice in Job, which are similar to the ancient accounts
>of a crushed planet god.style='color:navy'>
Please provide some evidence any evidence that rahab was a planet. I suspect that all you doing is looking for things that you can interpret to fit your Changing Earth Creationist idea. Actually Psalm 87:4 shows that rahab was nation not a planet.
Psalm 87:4 (KJB) I will make mention of Rahab and Babylon to
them that know me: behold Philistia, and Tyre , with Ethiopia ;
this man was born there.
NOTE that Rahab is found being referenced with a bunch of Nations not planets
> Ancient astronomical accounts and scientific claims
>are often incompatible because each is based oncolor=navy>
>contradictory assumptions and define evidencecolor=navy>
>differently. Scientists assume that matter is notcolor=navy>
>changing, which allows them to focus on empiricismcolor=navy>
>and mathematical symbols as evidence. The earliestcolor=navy>
>astronomers used visible evidence. Records ofcolor=navy>
>ancient eclipses almost never fit modern ephemerides,color=navy>
>which has been known since the seventeenth century.color=navy>
>Scientists just assume our computerized methods arecolor=navy>
>correct and adjust the ancient date, location orcolor=navy>
>observation to fit our calculations. The earliestcolor=navy>
>astronomical records, the Venus Tablets, list the lunarcolor=navy>
>dates (over 21 years) for Venus’ appearances andcolor=navy>
>disappearances. Its disappearance on the far side ofcolor=navy>
>the Sun were long by weeks and its appearances ascolor=navy>
>morning an evening star were each too short (by halfcolor=navy>
>of the extra weeks of disappearance). The shortcolor=navy>
>morning and evening phases and the double longcolor=navy>
>disappearances on the other side of the Sun suggestcolor=navy>
>that the solar system was smaller 3,500 yearscolor=navy>
Please provide a reference to this preferably one with actual figures rather than vague descriptions.
> Radar reflections show that Venus has a rotational resonance with Earth at conjunction, as though we once tidally affected each other.
Actually this resonance claim has been shown to be wrong. Even if it were true God could have created it that way.
> The Bible mentions close passages (e.g. Joshua 10:13 &
>Judges 5:20-21) like the accounts of the early Greeks and color=navy>
Joshua 10:13 (KJB) And the sun stood still, and the moon
stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon
their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jasher?
So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted
not to go down about a whole day.
No close passage mentioned here God did performed a miracle to stop the Earth rotation but there is no reference to your alleged passage mentioned.
Judges 5:20-21 (KJB)
20 They fought from heaven; the stars in their courses
fought against Sisera.
21 The river of Kishon swept them away, that ancient
river, the river Kishon. O my soul, thou hast trodden
No close passage mentioned here either. Verse 20 sounds like a meteor shower.
> Some early galaxies (in distant clusters) have emerging
>clumps packed densely with stars, like equally spacedcolor=navy>
>beads on a necklace. At many ranges we observe howcolor=navy>
>trillions of stars streams accelerate out, spiral out, ascolor=navy>
>billions of galaxies grew from unformed matter in thecolor=navy>
>core of each galaxy - often growing into huge, dusty,color=navy>
>local, growth spirals.style='color:navy'>
NO such thing is observed. In fact stars in spiral galaxies actually orbit actually orbit in the direction opposite the spiral arms not with them as you claim so this is totally bogus.
> Nowhere in the vast universe do we see any evidence
>for atomic perpetual motion which is the basis forcolor=navy>
>modern empirical physics.style='color:navy'>
This shows you know nothing about modern atomic theory, Atoms do not represent perpetual motion and no one but you claim they do.
> Nowhere do we see any evidence for accretion of stars
This we can agree on because accretion of stars is an evolutionary idea.
> Instead, we see jets emerging and forming dusty nebulae
>and long strings of stars by ejections, style='color:navy'>
Give a reference for this.
>Someone might insist, we measure linear clocks, and we use
>the laws of physics to land spacecraft on Mars so ourcolor=navy>
>clock-based laws must be correct. Sending a spacecraftcolor=navy>
>to Mars involves periodic course and speed adjustments,color=navy>
>fine tuning it up to the last day to adjust the path to homecolor=navy>
>in on the visible surface features. Despite this fine tuning,
>we always land long, as though our estimate of Mars’color=navy>
>position is slightly off.style='color:navy'>
Please give a reference for your claim that Mars spacecraft always land long. Even if true it would have nothing to do with Mars’ position but a result of the fact that you want to land a space craft as slowly as possible meaning that any effort to slow it down more than cause it to land long.
> If all clocks are accelerating, this could explain the Flyby
>and Pioneer Anomalies. In the Pioneer Anomaly, NASAcolor=navy>
>used local atomic clocks to send radio signals that werecolor=navy>
>transponded back to Earth by four spin stabilized spacecraft.
>The carrier modulated a signal that when returned servedcolor=navy>
>to mark twice the range. NASA also used the returnedcolor=navy>
>frequencies to calculate Doppler range rate. The Dopplercolor=navy>
>calculations kept slowing anomalously with distancecolor=navy>.
WRONG a speeding up of atomic clocks would produce a redshift, the Flyby and Pioneer Anomalies are both blue shifts, making them the opposite of what your model predicts.
> What could cause orbits to not quite close, but to gradually
>open out. Jacob understood that the days and years of thecolor=navy>
>son are shorter and worse than those of the fathers (Genesis 47:9).
Genesis 47:9 (KJB) And Jacob said unto Pharaoh, The
days of the years of my pilgrimage are an hundred and
thirty years: few and evil have the days of the years of
my life been, and have not attained unto the days of the
years of the life of my fathers in the days of their pilgrimage.
This verse says noting of the kind. Jacob is talking about the length of his life not how long days and years were, this is even shown by the context.
> Neither Newton nor Einstein predicted tangential forces.
>Yet gravity aberration must produce tangential forces. Atcolor=navy>
>present, since gravity propagates at light speed, the Sun’s
>gravitational effects are offset by 20" towards the Earth’s
>bow. This steadily accelerates Earth’s orbit outward and
> concurrently speeds up our spin rate (relative to the formerstyle='color:navy'>
> positions and rates - not clocks). Since gravity aberration is
> greater for more distant planets, all large objects in the solar
> system (and planets around nearby stars) end up in
> logarithmically spaced orbits, as we observe.
WRONG, gravity does not propagate at the speed of light, changes in gravity propagate at the speed of light, gravity it self does not propagate, it is a curvature of space and NOT propagating from a body like light, so there is NO gravity aberration.
Even if there were a gravity aberration its affect on the Earth’s rotation would be orders of magnitude lower than the Earth’s obit sp they would not remain in sync. Even worst as the Earth object spiraled out ward gravity would slows it down so years would be getting longer not shorter. Once again reality is opposite what you claim.
> The visible history of how clocks keep accelerating along with
>the outward accelerating orbits (a violation of all moderncolor=navy>
>gravity theories) suggests that gravity is what emerges fromcolor=navy>
>matter as it changes relationally.style='color:navy'> As matter changes relationally
>, its volume increases, its inertial properties change along with
> the speed of its light clocks, as we observe in billions of growing
Except that you so called visible history des not exist. Noting you claim is observed any place in the unversed and in many cased reality is the opposite of what you claim.
> The sun is changing from red to blue as its matter changes relationally.
>3000 years ago the Egyptians painted a red sun and Homer claimed
>the sky was bronze, as it would have been if matter is continually
Please provide a reference to your claims about the Egyptians and Homer. Even if true it seeing the sun redder and the sky bronzen could result from dust in the air. We see this effect on Mars. On Earth the Flood would have left a lot of dust in the atmosphere and you this would be consistent with a young Earth as well.
Victor the simple fact is that because you NEVER give any reference all we have is you say so, on every thing you claim. You also obscure well known phenomenon by using unusual terms fit you ideas. To make matters worst when it is possible to check your claims they always prove to be bogus, and several cases reality is the opposite what you claim.
------ Charles Creager Jr.
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>