Forums » Group W Forums » Topical Tropical Discussions

 


Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 9:11 pm
  

User avatar
Senior ArloNetizen

Joined: Mar 15, 2012
Posts: 408
The fundamentalist interpretation of Genesis 1 explains creation as happening in 6 Earth Days or less than .02 Solar Years or about 2% of one orbit around a star that hadn't been created yet.

Attachment:
hs-1992-29-c-web.jpg
hs-1992-29-c-web.jpg [ 9.77 KiB | Viewed 7652 times ]


This is a ProtoPlanetary Disk or proplyd. In this pic, however, we can see 2 additional stars peeping through the disk.

Attachment:
hs-1999-05-k-web.jpg
hs-1999-05-k-web.jpg [ 13.54 KiB | Viewed 7652 times ]


This is DG Tau B (Tau meaning "Taurus"). It is a plasma jet that issues from the poles of a forming star. Atheist scientists will swear there is an ignited star supposedly obscurred by the central region known as a "dust lane." I disagree with that. The geometry of the matter flowing into the star suggests otherwise. Considerations of singularities, as Hawking would describe them, would also suggest otherwise, but to get Stephen Hawking to admit to that would be tougher than getting him to stand up from his wheelchair.

These are some Hubble Space Telescope pics of star systems forming. Where arguments arise between between guys like me and the mainstream scientists is what these mean. These tell me that the star is not ignited prior to the formation of the planets and quite a few other observations tell me that the Bible, meaning Genesis, gives us an accurate version of how star systems, including ours, got here. It can get very complex, so it's best to discuss one aspect at a time.


Attachments:
hs-2008-39-b-web.jpg
hs-2008-39-b-web.jpg [ 22.58 KiB | Viewed 7652 times ]
          Top  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 9:25 pm
  

User avatar
Arlo Fanatic

Joined: Jul 06, 2008
Posts: 2531
Images: 2
Location: Crawfordville, Florida
Without taking a position either way (except that I "believe" in the scientific process, or paradigm as it relates to knowledge), I just have to say that, in my opinion, matters of faith cannot and should not be discussed in the context of empiricism. Such "arguments" are not only counter-productive to all parties, they are without meaning.


          Top  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 10:34 pm
  

User avatar
Senior ArloNetizen

Joined: Mar 15, 2012
Posts: 408
nortonkevin wrote:
Without taking a position either way (except that I "believe" in the scientific process, or paradigm as it relates to knowledge), I just have to say that, in my opinion, matters of faith cannot and should not be discussed in the context of empiricism. Such "arguments" are not only counter-productive to all parties, they are without meaning.


This was mostly as a response to a standpoint Dave made in the "Dillemna/Myth" thread. As for me, I simply believe that what is there often contains a lot more than meets the eye, whether written or photographic. We have the right to believe whatever we want, but whatever we believe can and will be used against us... somewhere.


          Top  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Mar 26, 2012 8:36 am
  

Arlo Fanatic

Joined: Jul 17, 2010
Posts: 1375
DrCharbonneau wrote:
nortonkevin wrote:
Without taking a position either way (except that I "believe" in the scientific process, or paradigm as it relates to knowledge), I just have to say that, in my opinion, matters of faith cannot and should not be discussed in the context of empiricism. Such "arguments" are not only counter-productive to all parties, they are without meaning.


This was mostly as a response to a standpoint Dave made in the "Dillemna/Myth" thread. As for me, I simply believe that what is there often contains a lot more than meets the eye, whether written or photographic. We have the right to believe whatever we want, but whatever we believe can and will be used against us... somewhere.


Wait, you are presenting a cosmic proof of Genesis?

Here is a cosmic proof!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XaLW7qBr ... re=related


          Top  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Mar 26, 2012 9:18 am
  

User avatar
Senior ArloNetizen

Joined: Mar 15, 2012
Posts: 408
heraclitis wrote:
DrCharbonneau wrote:
nortonkevin wrote:
Without taking a position either way (except that I "believe" in the scientific process, or paradigm as it relates to knowledge), I just have to say that, in my opinion, matters of faith cannot and should not be discussed in the context of empiricism. Such "arguments" are not only counter-productive to all parties, they are without meaning.


This was mostly as a response to a standpoint Dave made in the "Dillemna/Myth" thread. As for me, I simply believe that what is there often contains a lot more than meets the eye, whether written or photographic. We have the right to believe whatever we want, but whatever we believe can and will be used against us... somewhere.


Wait, you are presenting a cosmic proof of Genesis?

Here is a cosmic proof!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XaLW7qBr ... re=related


I can't "tube" on this machine. (It sinks every time :D )

I don't know if "proof" is a perfect descriptor, but evidence might suggest that a planet just might be teeming with life before the star ignites.


          Top  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Mar 26, 2012 12:07 pm
  

User avatar
Arlo Fanatic

Joined: Oct 12, 2005
Posts: 1770
Location: Axachusetts of New New England
However we got here, will not be fully known until we get there. But am very sure that this ''all creation is asking us to dance'' is how they above wish for all of us.

Asking Us To Dance
http://youtu.be/HrEpPaNyDx8


          Top  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Mar 26, 2012 5:58 pm
  

Arlo Fanatic

Joined: Jul 17, 2010
Posts: 1375
DrCharbonneau wrote:
I don't know if "proof" is a perfect descriptor, but evidence might suggest that a planet just might be teeming with life before the star ignites.


Evidence might suggest that Willie Nelson and Bill Maher do not smoke pot, I would not bet on it!!!!!


          Top  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Mar 26, 2012 8:56 pm
  

User avatar
Senior ArloNetizen

Joined: Mar 15, 2012
Posts: 408
heraclitis wrote:
DrCharbonneau wrote:
I don't know if "proof" is a perfect descriptor, but evidence might suggest that a planet just might be teeming with life before the star ignites.


Evidence might suggest that Willie Nelson and Bill Maher do not smoke pot, I would not bet on it!!!!!


And Newtonian Physics might evidence that a stainless steel bowl of Jello poured from a batch made in a same gage stainless steel 10 liter pot, both pot and bowl placed in the same fridge at the same time, will gel quicker. Would you bet on that?


          Top  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:02 pm
  

User avatar
Arlo Fanatic

Joined: Jan 09, 2003
Posts: 2489
Images: 5
Location: Rhododendron, Oregon United States
DrCharbonneau wrote:
heraclitis wrote:
DrCharbonneau wrote:
I don't know if "proof" is a perfect descriptor, but evidence might suggest that a planet just might be teeming with life before the star ignites.


Evidence might suggest that Willie Nelson and Bill Maher do not smoke pot, I would not bet on it!!!!!


And Newtonian Physics might evidence that a stainless steel bowl of Jello poured from a batch made in a same gage stainless steel 10 liter pot, both pot and bowl placed in the same fridge at the same time, will gel quicker. Would you bet on that?


You have to remember which time zone you're in here, Doc.


          Top  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 12:57 am
  

User avatar
Arlo Fanatic

Joined: Jul 06, 2008
Posts: 2531
Images: 2
Location: Crawfordville, Florida
Goofus wrote:
You have to remember which time zone you're in here, Doc.


Yes, absolutely. And that would be Celery Time :wink: 8)


          Top  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 2:59 am
  

User avatar
Arlo Fanatic

Joined: Oct 12, 2005
Posts: 1770
Location: Axachusetts of New New England
If there was a Father and a son, was there a Mother or any Daughters?


          Top  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 5:23 am
  

User avatar
Arlo Fanatic

Joined: Sep 13, 2000
Posts: 8523
Location: Pixley-- Actually An Hr South of Richmond, VA
Neat pics. Very interesting.


          Top  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 6:03 am
  

Arlo Fanatic

Joined: Jul 17, 2010
Posts: 1375
Hey, I like to play with silly string! It's cool!


          Top  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 7:53 am
  

Arlo Fanatic

Joined: Jul 17, 2010
Posts: 1375
DrCharbonneau wrote:
but evidence might suggest that a planet just might be teeming with life before the star ignites.


This is just silly unless you are suggesting life unlike what has been observed on the planet Earth?
(Sorry, there I go again questioning things I find questionable)


          Top  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 8:38 am
  

User avatar
Senior ArloNetizen

Joined: Mar 15, 2012
Posts: 408
heraclitis wrote:
DrCharbonneau wrote:
but evidence might suggest that a planet just might be teeming with life before the star ignites.


This is just silly unless you are suggesting life unlike what has been observed on the planet Earth?
(Sorry, there I go again questioning things I find questionable)


Questioning is normal. Constantly demeaning someone, explicitly or implicitly, suggests a power trip and, as I've mentioned, mental illness. It's okay. It's something that has to be worked around, I can see, if we want to share with you. You seem reasonably articulate, but it's hard to believe you are an expert in chemistry, politics and now astrophysics.

Those Hubble shots have a story behind each one. NASA and the Hubble Team are good, but not perfect. They are missing some implicite geometry in the shots, it seems, still we are at their mercy to tell us straight up data such as the angle of the shots, keeping in mind most of them are of the atheist religion.

How's about answering the question I posed to you about the simple physics of Jello? It has a bit to do with showing you how a chunk of ice, evolving dust, and accreting "earth" could bear life more advanced than your unimaginative assessment declares, even devoid of an ignited, brilliant star.


          Top  
Reply with quote  
 
Post new topic Reply to topic



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests


Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Jump to:  

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group