Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Essay - Dodging creationist dung

Expand Messages
  • Victor
    ... Victor: You are using the assumption that you deny exists in your arguments. How do you compare the length of a former year with a present one without
    Message 1 of 5 , Jun 1 10:54 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      > Victor,
      > First of all, I don't buy for a second any of your assertions
      > regarding assumptions in science. Looks like a lot of straw-manning
      > to me.
      > We know that the Earth orbits the Sun, not the other way around
      > (geocentrism is bogus), and this is what we teach our kids in
      > science class (at the appropriate time). They don't have to
      > understand calculus, or physics, or the details of the latest
      > hypotheses about quantum gravitation to know that the Earth orbits
      > the sun, and geocentrism is an incorrect idea about the natural of
      > orbital movement in the solar system.
      > In the same way, we know that the Universe and the Earth have been
      > in existence far, far longer than any 6,000 or 10,000 years (young
      > earth creationism is bogus), and we know that organisms were
      > not "poofed" into existence in six days several thousand years ago,
      > and so on. We don't have to be experts on the latest quantum
      > mechanics theories from physics about the structure of matter in
      > order to know these things, from other areas of science.
      > Science proceeds quite successfully as if the Bible never even
      > existed. The Bible is irrelevant to science.
      > In other words, your entire argument is a red herring.
      > - Todd Greene
      Victor: You are using the assumption that you deny exists in your
      arguments. How do you compare the length of a former year with a
      present one without using the assumption? How do you isolate "time"
      from the motions of matter or light as though it has a private
      existence? Solomon was the wisest man, in my opinion, because he knew
      that time is in our minds.

      In the Old Testament era, people thought that the first generations
      lived vast ages. The Bible, in both Greek and Hebrew, calls the early
      ages the great-time, the eons. Hesiod wrote that the early
      generations lived long and matured slowly. A child, he wrote, played
      at his mother's knee until he was 100 years old. He clearly believed
      that life and durations continuously deteriorate since he stated that
      future generation would be born with grey temples. You might say,
      Hesiod was a pagan. Old man Israel, in the Hebrew language, said
      essentially the same thing: that DAYS AND YEARS become shorter and
      worse for succeeding generations. We can see in the distance that all
      orbits spiral out. We can see with our eyes what the Bible states,
      that the whole creation is in bondage to corruption. We can see with
      our eyes that the properties of primordial matter were vastly
      different from local stuff. Do you believe the earth has a privileged
      position - that this did not happen in our neighborhood? You are
      apparently so indoctrinated to thinking with symbols that you reject
      the visible evidence that all matter everywhere continually changes.

      You seem to be trying to tie the Bible to geocentrism. When the Bible
      says the sun rose, it is a common expression still used by everyone

      Was the early solar system different? Have you ever examined the
      measurements and descriptions of the ancient astronomers? They
      described in graphical detail close encounters with planets. They
      even described a planet collision at close range which the Bible also
      remarks on several times. The ancient astronomers consistently
      measured a smaller solar system. The earliest astronomical records
      show the dates when Venus (then called Ninsianna) disappeared during
      the 21 year reign of king Ammizaduga of Babylon. For example, several
      tablets have been found that recorded the disappearances of Venus at
      inferior and superior conjunctions. Here is a quote: "In the ninth
      year of the king, on the 11th of Sivan Ninsianna disappeared in the
      west, remaining absent in the sky for nine months and 4 days, and on
      the 15th of Adar she was seen in the east." That is ~ 270 days which
      is unlike anything today. Today Venus' synodic cycle averages 263
      days for morning and evening phases, 50 days invisible on the other
      side of the sun and 8 days invisible at inferior conjunction for a
      total average of 584 days. About 2000 years later, the Mayans
      recorded the Venus synodic cycle that is still different from the
      modern cycle but has similarities to the Babylonian one.

      Angles are not dependent upon the assumption that matter is immutable
      like clocks. Ptolemy measured the diameter of the planets as larger
      than we do with angles. He even gives the construction details of the
      instrument he used. He measured the maximum elongation of Mercury and
      Venus and they are too large. In 1672, when Mars was at conjunction,
      the British astronomer royal Flamsteed and Cassini both measured the
      parallax to Mars. Parallax is a way of measuring distance with
      angles. Flamsteed used diurnal parallax measuring the angular change
      Mars made to close by bright stars using a micrometer eyepiece. The
      earth was passing Mars - so in reference to the background stars -
      Mars was stopped. Cassini sent Jean Richer to an island off French
      Guiana where they measured the simultaneous parallax as Mars passed in
      front of the bright star Psi Aquarii in the same season of the same
      year. They both arrived at a parallax within one second of each other.
      Their solar system was 7% smaller than ours. This experiment has been
      repeated at various intervals, and shows that the orbit of earth is
      continually spiraling out. Why don't we measure that with radar?
      Radar is dependent upon the first principle, but angles are not. If
      matter changes, as it visibly does, then our clocks and our radar
      would change WITH IT because those units rely on the first principle.

      Consider carefully your first principle, that matter does not change.
      The simplest evidence, in the distant heavens is confirmed by the
      measurements of the ancient astronomers. If the first principle is
      false, science will fail and the Word of God will triumph.
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.