A Problem for the Creationists with a Limited Timetable: Supernova Starlight

  • Thread starter Thread starter BibleReader
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I am curious…could God make, say for example, the Grand Canyon so that when He makes it, it will appear many thousands of years old right away? Or must he make the land flat, let the dinos live long after He creates them, and wait for erosion etc to give us what we have today?
 
40.png
rossum:
In an ideal world, yes. However, the creationists are using their political clout to try and get creationism (i.e. ID) added to the science curriculum in schools. That means that scientists have to take notice of what the creationists are thinking and doing. If it affects the future of science then scientists have to take action.

rossum
Click to expand...
Hello rossum

We should not break up scientists monopoly on what people should be allowed to think and study? Is this your point? The human body developing over time without a Supreme Being Creator, now that is a fantasy long shot. Do you really think no one should be allowed to question this “scientific” belief?

Does not empty space, matter and energy and a universe with billions of years past and billions of years forward being molded into existance thousands of years ago by the Hand of our All Powerful Spiritual God, who exists outside of physical time, make more sence? Cannot evelution fit into this senario?

When does science place the initial start of empty space, matter and energy? Creation is talking about the time when empty space, matter and energy came into existance from nothing. How does science place this event in history?
 
rossum,

I do not see how teaching ID threatens evolution…is the search for the truth the foundation of science, and if yes, then shouldn’t science embrace all new forms of viewing our origins?
 
Let me preface this by saying that I’m an astronomer and believe in the evolution of the universe. I’m also a Catholic and believe that God created the universe. I see no conflict between the two.

Why? We’ve seen that God delegates authority; instead of saying, “hey, ya’ll are saved now”, he sends out people to preach his word, to heal, to be his representatives, etc… It is through our actions that salvation is spread to the world. Knowing this I have no problem believing that he delegated the motions of the heavenly bodies to Laws of Nature.

Now, Creationism is NOT a scientific theory. There is a variable that cannot be controlled or predicted (God). As such, it doesn’t belong in a science class. On the other hand, evolution does NOT disprove God. It is this “proof for Atheism” Creationists should be fighting to remove from the science classes. This is a position that far more scientists would agree on and support.

PS. I second stargazers identification of Andromedia.
 
buffalo said:
God and Matter: The Evolution of the Evolution Debate

Cardinal Archbishop of Vienna Christoph Schönborn has stepped into the confused controversies surrounding evolution, and added some much needed clarity.
Click to expand...

Indeed he has NOT added clarity. Christoph Schönborn is a scientific illiterate so his opinions on this subject matter not in the slightest. Whether neo-Darwinism is true or not is a scientific matter not a matter of faith. In my experience 99.9% of people who ostensibly oppose the Theory of Evolution or the Modern Synthesis do so from a position of abject ignorance. They almost all do not understand what the Theory claims. Schönborn is one such. Ultimately these matters will be judged on scientific not on religous grounds and Schönborn’s intervention will be seen as ill-advised and dragging the Church into disrepute.

Alec
evolutionpages.com
 
40.png
MrS:
that attitude will probably get you suspended…:tsktsk::whistle:
Click to expand...
Really? Why? I should be extremely surprised if that were the case. It is not an attitude but a considered opinion. Schönborn is wrong mainly because he doesn’t know what he’s talking about. A cardinal’s hat doesn’t make a scientist out of a philosopher. There are many in the Church who agree with me (especially those who actually know what they are talking about).

Alec
evolutionpages.com
 
Let me just say the Evolutionists do not always confine themselves to science either. I am a Amateur Astronomer myself. I have just bought a 10" new telescope from Orion about two months ago. I am strictly a Amateur who became involved in the hobby when I was 10 years old. Several years ago, I sat in Undergraduate Astronomy class I opted to take fulfill on of my two required science classes to get my Degree… I sat in a class where my Astronomy instructor presumed to say as part of her introductory lecture that “evolution proves that there is no God”.
 
40.png
philipmarus:
Let me just say the Evolutionists do not always confine themselves to science either. I am a Amateur Astronomer myself. I have just bought a 10" new telescope from Orion about two months ago. I am strictly a Amateur who became involved in the hobby when I was 10 years old. Several years ago, I sat in Undergraduate Astronomy class I opted to take fulfill on of my two required science classes to get my Degree… I sat in a class where my Astronomy instructor presumed to say as part of her introductory lecture that “evolution proves that there is no God”.
Click to expand...
Hello Philipmarus,

I agree with you that scientists want to muddle in on theology. They want to teach science in our class rooms but at the end kick in a “therefore there is no God” religious attitude.

I watched Stephen Hawkins Cosmos. It was beautiful. However, at the end he starts mocking the belief that God brought all that he has seen in the cosmos into existance thousands of years ago. Cannot a man as brilliant as Stephen Hawkins understand that our All Powerful God exists outside of the physical time and God has complete control and power over physical time.

Hawkins had no idea or proof as to when empty space came into existance. As for the creation of matter and energy, he admitted they existed before the big bang but had little more than speculation as to when God created them. What on earth would he be reffering to the big bang as creation if he knew that empty space, matter and energy existed far before, if not infinitely before, the big bang. All things, empty space, matter and energy were all brought into existance upon God’s creation of the universe.

God’s focus is on a love for God capable, free willed man. God does not have to sit around for billions of years for this to happen. God has full control over the infinite past and infinite future of what we see as time.

It only makes sence that our All Powerful, Omni-Present to the whole of physical time, God, molded both infinite past and infinite future matter, energy and empty space into existance from the focus point of love for God capable free willed Adam. The past of time, or the lack of it, must bend to the awesome Power of our Spiritual God’s Hand.
 
40.png
philipmarus:
Let me just say the Evolutionists do not always confine themselves to science either. I am a Amateur Astronomer myself. I have just bought a 10" new telescope from Orion about two months ago. I am strictly a Amateur who became involved in the hobby when I was 10 years old. Several years ago, I sat in Undergraduate Astronomy class I opted to take fulfill on of my two required science classes to get my Degree… I sat in a class where my Astronomy instructor presumed to say as part of her introductory lecture that “evolution proves that there is no God”.
Click to expand...
Let me say that your teacher was completely out of line and wrong. What was she discussing evolution for in an astronomy class anyway?

Peace

Tim
 
Steven Merten:
I watched Stephen Hawkins Cosmos. It was beautiful. However, at the end he starts mocking the belief that God brought all that he has seen in the cosmos into existance thousands of years ago. Cannot a man as brilliant as Stephen Hawkins understand that our All Powerful God exists outside of the physical time and God has complete control and power over physical time.

Hawkins had no idea or proof as to when empty space came into existance. As for the creation of matter and energy, he admitted they existed before the big bang but had little more than speculation as to when God created them. What on earth would he be reffering to the big bang as creation if he knew that empty space, matter and energy existed far before, if not infinitely before, the big bang. All things, empty space, matter and energy were all brought into existance upon God’s creation of the universe.
Click to expand...
Um, that would be Carl Sagan, not Steven Hawking.

Peace

Tim
 
HECD << Indeed he has NOT added clarity. Christoph Schönborn is a scientific illiterate so his opinions on this subject matter not in the slightest. >>

I believe this statement is correct. However, his comments do seem to matter to many Catholic creationists. But Fr. George Coyne, the Vatican observatory astronomer has corrected Schonborn.

God’s Chance Creation by Fr. George Coyne in the Tablet
BTW, to skip the free registration use www.BugMeNot.com

On science issues, I think we should listen to the Catholics who are at least somewhat trained in science. Another one is biologist Kenneth Miller of Brown Univ. Hear this recent MP3 available of him, plus see the Nightline program (QuickTime format) available here from 8/10/2005 that the “Intelligent Design” people are not happy about. 😃

And the 2004 International Theological Commission statement, my favorite paragraphs 62-70.

Phil P
 
40.png
Orogeny:
Let me say that your teacher was completely out of line and wrong. What was she discussing evolution for in an astronomy class anyway?

Peace

Tim
Click to expand...
I have not been on here in a few days. Yes, it was part a lecture in upper division Astronomy class I took at one of the “Big Three” Public Universities in my state. I took the class as I way fulfilling one of my General Education requirements. I’ve found quite a number of College professors that use their class time for which they are assured of a “captive audience” for Grandstanding their own views. I learned more “Anti-Catholicism” in one particular Graduate level seminar on Latin American Politics than one would imagine.
 
Add an intersting aspect to this debate…

I read toward the begin of this thread abotu how the speed of light may not have always been the same…

So, I would like to through this out…

I have a degree in physics, so, when I came across a publication a few years back about the speed of light and 7 day creationism, it caught my eye…

For starters, here is a rough definition of how space/time works.
The two are inseperable…, you change the properties of one,it changes the other… take a staep further. time and light exist “on top of” space. lets say you have a rubber sheet that you put grid lines on this sheet using a pin. When you streatch the rubber sheet, The lines go farther apart. When you streatch it, you then change the properties of time and light. let us say that no matter what it always takes one second to for light to travel from one line to the next. set that as a constant. as we steatch the rubber, the light must travel ‘faster’ to our perspective in order for it to ge tto the next line within a second, However, with repect to the intrensic spacing of the ruber, it remained the same speed. one line per second. The same is also true for time, mut far more complicated to explain…

In any case, now thats out of the way, I read a paper a while back by a jewish scientist (sorry cant remimber the paper) about how he ran a space time experiment on how ‘time’ would look if you include the expansion form a central point… I wont bore you wiht math, but the first day when included the universs expantion lasted about 8 billion years, day two was something like 3 billion years day three - 1 to 2 billion years… so on and so forht through the 6 days of creation… you know what number they added up to? about 14 billion years old. I think the last estimate I heard was the official age is like 13.75 B…

My friends, that is within 10% defiation… and that is normally accepted for science…

It is very possible that it took god only 7 - 24 earth hour days, however, time distorts as the unverse expanded casues the days to seem extremely long on this side of the ruber band…

Anyway, Sorry if it is a little confusing, jsut wanted to say that the universe can very well be 13.75 billion years old from OUR perspective, and only about 6000 years old from the perspective of the original state of the universe…

Have fun chewing on that one guys…

Cheers
Josh
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top