O
o_mlly
Guest
Correction: Presumed factors. Just ask Isaac if you see him in the next life. All science is provisional. Do you deny that?
Transitional Fossils and the Theory of Evolution in relation to Genesis Accounts
- Status
F
Freddy
Guest
These are facts that we are discussing. If I measure the distance from my house to the Opera House I can use a number of different methods. And they will all fall aroumd a certain point. Some methods will be more accurate and some less so. But they will all fall around a mean. So if I say that it’s about 6kms then that is a fact. If you want to know it more accurately then I can give it to 2 decimal places if you like and give a margin of error. But it will still be around 6 kms.Freddy:
Correction: Presumed factors. Just ask Isaac if you see him in the next life. All science is provisional. Do you deny that?
Your view is that you refuse to accept any distance I give because all the methods use scientfic principles and hey, science is ‘provisional’. Wot a larf…
What I would do in that case is ask you how far you think it is to be so sure that my distance is so wrong. And the means by which you measured it. But we’re back to tumblin’ tumbleweed. But we could try again, I guess. Not in the hope that you’ll give an answer. I just want it shown that you refuse…
So how far are any given stars and how did you determine their distance?
O
o_mlly
Guest
This is your typical preface to strawmanning as a deflection.
What I refuse to accept and you continue to push is scientism.
The issue is and has been whether science is “certain” in its findings or provisional. The scientific method is inductive; the general cannot be inferred from the particular without the caveat of “as far as we know now”.
So spare me the primers on basic physics and address the issue. Does astronomy have no future as to making better observations or more cogent reasoning as to the distance of the stars from earth?
You might peruse this article before recommitting to the god of scientism:
Last edited:
R
rossum
Guest
So, you accept the existence of the Big Bang about 13.7 billion years ago, as given in that article you referenced.
The speed of light has been measured to be constant for at least 10 billion years. That allows over 3 billion years for the cooling that article talks about. More than enough time.
Thank you anyway for confirming that you accept a 13 billion year old universe, since you would obviously not post a reference that lied about its age.
S
stoplooklisten
Guest
Why does @rossum (and all of us) not have a moral obligation to seek out where we ultimately came from? Is it not right to seek out our Creator? Why is there existence rather than nothing? Have you proven that the ultimate source of your existence is not “God”? If it is “God”, shouldn’t you seek to know and thank that God?o_mlly:
Yes I do. We have fossils. You have nothing. Where is your observation of any deity poofing a new species into existence? You have no evidence, so all you can do is to try to disparage (unsuccessfully) the evidence for evolution.
It seems to me that the burden of proof lies on creatures that want to deny their Creator (and not as much on creatures who want to acknowledge their Creator)? You are an intelligence being. How could you come from a non-intelligent source? Or, are you willing to going affirm something like “cosmic consciousness” but not a God who asks you to maintain a clear conscience and repent? How can life come from non-life? Why do you deny the story of history as told in the Bible, often supported by papyrus and archaeological artifacts, and further affirmed by billions across millennia who have lived (and died) according to their faith?
Last edited:
F
Freddy
Guest
So…you’ve no idea how far the stars are…Freddy:
This is your typical preface to strawmanning as a deflection.
What I refuse to accept and you continue to push is scientism.
Do you have anything to offer at all? I mean anything?
What do you accept? All we get is you denying everything. What do you base the age of tbe planet on? How old is it? How long has man been here? Where do you get the information? Is there any chance at all of you offering anything?
PS: the theory that light was faster only would hold for the very early universe, before stars were formed. So their distances are as accurate as you’ll ever need.
PPS: At least you accept the big bang’s age. Maybe we could work from there. Could you at least confirm that?
Last edited:
S
stoplooklisten
Guest
Why could the speed of light not have been faster to include at least the time when the stars were made (on the 4th day of Creation per Genesis 1) and a little bit of time after that? In that way, their light could have been carried all the way to earth to be viewed by Adam and Even (on the 6th day of Creation per Genesis 1). After that, the speed of light could have been reduced to its current observed constant speed.
R
rossum
Guest
I know who created me. It was myself in my previous lifetimes; that is the way that karma works. Buddhism is not Christianity, so you should not expect a Buddhist to accept the Christian answer to that question.
O
o_mlly
Guest
As should all good scientists, I tentatively accept the estimates that the age of the universe at billions of years. If you are also a good scientist then your acceptance is also tentative.
As it relates to the OP’s question …
… the answer is: “No, it is not necessary”. Perhaps, you’ve read this before, “THE BIBLE IS NOT A SCIENCE BOOK”. The scientific findings on the age of the universe are tentative and may change but the truths in sacred scripture will not.
O
o_mlly
Guest
Fred, you’ve gone from strawman to theatrical mode. Spare us the drama and simply answer the question: Does astronomy have no future as to making better observations or more cogent reasoning as to the distance of the stars from earth?
F
Freddy
Guest
Sounds like a great idea!Freddy:
Why could the speed of light not have been faster to include at least the time when the stars were made (on the 4th day of Creation per Genesis 1) and a little bit of time after that? In that way, their light could have been carried all the way to earth to be viewed by Adam and Even (on the 6th day of Creation per Genesis 1). After that, the speed of light could have been reduced to its current observed constant speed.
S
stoplooklisten
Guest
What evidence do you have for previous lifetimes? I think there’s more evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.
O
o_mlly
Guest
This is exactly how one falls from science to pseudoscience.
Take an unproven theory and assumes it to be fact and build on that sand hill. Sound familiar? Yes, all evolution theory is based on pure speculation, not science.
My first post in this thread:
F
Freddy
Guest
Are you asking why we do thIs? That’s a strange question. But nothing from you on the big bang confirmation? You linked the page so…Freddy:
Fred, you’ve gone from strawman to theatrical mode. Spare us the drama and simply answer the question: Does astronomy have no future as to making better observations or more cogent reasoning as to the distance of the stars from earth?
Look, we know you’ve done a Buffalo and posted something that contradicts what you think. But you may as well bite the big bang bullet and we can take it from there.
O
o_mlly
Guest
S
stoplooklisten
Guest
It seems like this “thread community” seems to get more active on Friday and on the weekends.
Anyway, this weekend is the Catholic feast of Christ the King. It includes the last Sunday of the liturgical year. Next Sunday, it will be the first Sunday of Advent and the start of the liturgical year.
As we’ve considered the past and how the heavens and the earth and creatures may have come into being, let us also consider the future when we may all be made alive after death to live forever. Rather than changing political leadership, it will be unchanging and Jesus Christ will be King.
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
Image source: Google.com
Happy weekend to us all.
Anyway, this weekend is the Catholic feast of Christ the King. It includes the last Sunday of the liturgical year. Next Sunday, it will be the first Sunday of Advent and the start of the liturgical year.
As we’ve considered the past and how the heavens and the earth and creatures may have come into being, let us also consider the future when we may all be made alive after death to live forever. Rather than changing political leadership, it will be unchanging and Jesus Christ will be King.
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
Image source: Google.com
Happy weekend to us all.
R
rossum
Guest
Read chapter 13 of the Visuddhimagga. The instructions for remembering your previous lives are there. “If a monk wishes to remember in this way…”
S
stoplooklisten
Guest
Thanks for the information but this is a Catholic forum. No thank you, I don’t want to read that. I know I did ask the question.
F
Freddy
Guest
I don’t want to be rude, but that’s a clumsy sentence and difficult to parse.
Better observations? Well, our ability to garner ever more accurate information increases year by year. And the reason why we do it? Or are you asking if the ‘reasoning’ or how it’s calculated ‘has a future’? Are you asking if it will improve?
To cover both interpretations…we do it to gain knowledge. And yes, our abilities in this area will improve.
Now, how accurate do you think the age of the universe is in regard to the big bang (to which you linked earlier)? About right?
B
buffalo
Guest
Surely you must be aware of how fossils are formed and their rarity.
- Status