Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
8 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 7/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   SIMPLE Astronomical Evidence Supports the Bible
doctrbill
Member (Idle past 2764 days)
Posts: 1174
From: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Joined: 01-08-2001


Message 151 of 197 (201622)
04-23-2005 11:00 PM
Reply to: Message 147 by ptolemy
04-23-2005 10:12 PM


Re: Teach us who God is
Average Venus Today
disappears behind sun 50 days
appears as morning and evening star 263 days
disappears at close approach - average 8 days ===> Total synodic 584 days
Cuneiform tablets show Venus over 21 year period
disappearance on far side of sun longer - 65 and 90 days
evening and morning appearances shorter 240 / 241 days
Disappearance at close approach 7 days ==> Total synodic cycle 584 days
Did it ever occur to you that the old astrologer didn't own a decent pair of sunglasses?
Try it yourself. Watch Venus until you think it has disappeared into the sun and then compare your results with those on the clay tablet. And then, check the official figures and see how far off you are.
You are such an extremist! On the one hand you need bare-eyeball, Bronze Age observations to support your 'theory' of astronomy; and on the other hand: you need an Earth Orbiting Telescope to support your view of the Bronze Age Bible. Great range. Too bad it is so far off target.
This suggests that the solar system was much smaller in historical times.
OR ... It shows that the ancients didn't have sunglasses, or telescopes, or accurate clocks, or automatic calculators, or Columbian coffee, or toilet paper ... (I digress).
db

Theology is the science of Dominion.
- - - My God is your god's Boss - - -

This message is a reply to:
 Message 147 by ptolemy, posted 04-23-2005 10:12 PM ptolemy has not replied

  
Eta_Carinae
Member (Idle past 4374 days)
Posts: 547
From: US
Joined: 11-15-2003


Message 152 of 197 (201628)
04-23-2005 11:14 PM
Reply to: Message 147 by ptolemy
04-23-2005 10:12 PM


Venusian orbit change?
I smell a Velikhovsky in the air.
On a serious note - there's a lot of crap flying in this thread. Would you inform us the mechanism for a proposed historical difference in the orbit of Venus?
Why do I even ask?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 147 by ptolemy, posted 04-23-2005 10:12 PM ptolemy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 154 by doctrbill, posted 04-23-2005 11:20 PM Eta_Carinae has not replied
 Message 158 by ptolemy, posted 04-24-2005 12:17 AM Eta_Carinae has replied

  
doctrbill
Member (Idle past 2764 days)
Posts: 1174
From: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Joined: 01-08-2001


Message 153 of 197 (201629)
04-23-2005 11:17 PM
Reply to: Message 150 by ptolemy
04-23-2005 10:47 PM


Invisible Proof
ptolemy writes:
Another invisible thing invented to protect our first principle!
You say "our" as if you own it too.
Correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't your 'first principle' require the existence of an invisible guy? And if that is not enough, this invisible guy has a son. And if that isn't enough there is also a 'Ghost.' Three invisible guys. And if that isn't enough there are millions, yeah billions of invisible angels and demons all of whom are required to support and protect your first principle. Invisible things invented to assert a 'theory' which cannot be proven.
Sound familiar?
db

This message is a reply to:
 Message 150 by ptolemy, posted 04-23-2005 10:47 PM ptolemy has not replied

  
doctrbill
Member (Idle past 2764 days)
Posts: 1174
From: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Joined: 01-08-2001


Message 154 of 197 (201630)
04-23-2005 11:20 PM
Reply to: Message 152 by Eta_Carinae
04-23-2005 11:14 PM


Re: Venusian orbit change?
I smell a Velikhovsky in the air.
It's been a long time since I read him, but I too was wondering whether Immauel had read that same cuneiform tablet.
db

This message is a reply to:
 Message 152 by Eta_Carinae, posted 04-23-2005 11:14 PM Eta_Carinae has not replied

  
ramoss
Member (Idle past 612 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 155 of 197 (201631)
04-23-2005 11:23 PM
Reply to: Message 147 by ptolemy
04-23-2005 10:12 PM


Re: Teach us who God is
I don't know what you think you have been reading, but from an astronomical point of view, it is 100% nonsense.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 147 by ptolemy, posted 04-23-2005 10:12 PM ptolemy has not replied

  
ptolemy
Inactive Member


Message 156 of 197 (201632)
04-23-2005 11:42 PM
Reply to: Message 145 by arachnophilia
04-23-2005 9:52 PM


A first principle is fundamental to our thinking
Arachnophilia writes:
that has nothing do with the question i asked. none of that. i'm asking a vague and rhetoric question?
how is everything changing together any different than everything staying the same?
i'm not gonna bother with your misrepresentations of the biblical perspective of the cosmos and the scientific until you tell me what the difference your describing actually is.
You are still not getting what I am saying - if everything is changing - it will be visibly evident everywhere in the universe. Nothing visible in the universe is staying the same.
The only thing that does not change in the whole universe is symbolic stuff based on the very first principle that Peter predicted. Only the invisible, mathematical, symbolic things are unchanging and we invented them with the very first principle Peter predicted.
Plato - who did not follow Aristotle’s first principle - proposed forms as his solution to the problem of change. To explain how people are prisoners of their language and way of thinking he told a story of a cave and its prisoners. Our habitual way of thinking about the physical world can hold us prisoner.
http://faculty.washington.edu/smcohen/320/cave.htm
This message has been edited by ptolemy, 04-23-2005 10:49 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 145 by arachnophilia, posted 04-23-2005 9:52 PM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 157 by arachnophilia, posted 04-23-2005 11:51 PM ptolemy has replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1343 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 157 of 197 (201633)
04-23-2005 11:51 PM
Reply to: Message 156 by ptolemy
04-23-2005 11:42 PM


Re: A first principle is fundamental to our thinking
You are still not getting what I am saying
no, actually, you're still not getting what i'm saying. i'm not talking about first principles. i'm not basing logic on it. quite the contrary, i'm going around it.
if everything is changing
-- "in relation to everything else," then how is this different than staying the same?
i'm not making any kind of statement. i'm asking a question. you have to explain this principle first -- YOUR first principle.
then, i will work on deciphering what you're talking about, including but not limited to the obvious facts that many philosophers objected to objective reality, and quantum reality and string theory is supposedly founded on this "first principle" yet totally ignores the idea that things stay the same (or even in the same universe).
This message has been edited by Arachnophilia, 04-23-2005 10:51 PM

אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 156 by ptolemy, posted 04-23-2005 11:42 PM ptolemy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 173 by ptolemy, posted 04-25-2005 2:16 PM arachnophilia has replied

  
ptolemy
Inactive Member


Message 158 of 197 (201635)
04-24-2005 12:17 AM
Reply to: Message 152 by Eta_Carinae
04-23-2005 11:14 PM


Re: Venusian orbit change?
Archnophilia writes:
On a serious note - there's a lot of crap flying in this thread. Would you inform us the mechanism for a proposed historical difference in the orbit of Venus?
If matter is a relationship - for which there is ample quantum evidence
If the relationship shifts - and all the light from primordial galaxies is shifted
Then matter could be a deteriorating - aging relationship. It would be like a shifting equilibrium.
Because we have invented laws and constants based on the assumption of changelessness - we cannot imagine that matter could decay. The Apostle Paul wrote that the whole creation phthora [degenerates - corrupts]
There is no way to propose a causal reason why the solar system would increase in size if atoms are not perpetual motion machines. The cause would be fundamental, and you can’t break it down into a higher level of specificity.
The Bible twice states that the earth also continually increases in size - for which there is simple evidence. Again there is no way to precisely define why - if the cause is fundamental. Why? Matter is fundamental to everything.
I am not a follower of Velikovsky. He did not question the first principle.
The ancients spoke of close encounters
The Bible seems to record one
The ancients mention a planet shattering
The Bible uses almost identical language and that God saved the world from chaos.
As hard as we try - we cannot imagine that matter can change - shift as a relationship. Yet the universe is full of evidence of such change. It is easier to invent a fictitious universe made of undetectable things than to question one’s first principle.
Can God really take the wise of the world with their own skills - their mathematical way of reasoning? He looks like He is on track to do so. Of course what I am saying is foolishness to those trained to only think with that little assumption. You are helping me prove that this really is our (the Western) first principle - our dogma about matter.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 152 by Eta_Carinae, posted 04-23-2005 11:14 PM Eta_Carinae has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 160 by Eta_Carinae, posted 04-24-2005 12:44 AM ptolemy has not replied
 Message 161 by arachnophilia, posted 04-24-2005 4:56 AM ptolemy has not replied
 Message 162 by Phat, posted 04-24-2005 5:06 AM ptolemy has not replied

  
Funkaloyd
Inactive Member


Message 159 of 197 (201636)
04-24-2005 12:35 AM
Reply to: Message 149 by tsig
04-23-2005 10:31 PM


Re: Interesting
I believe that it could be different, but I consider it extremely unlikely.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 149 by tsig, posted 04-23-2005 10:31 PM tsig has not replied

  
Eta_Carinae
Member (Idle past 4374 days)
Posts: 547
From: US
Joined: 11-15-2003


Message 160 of 197 (201637)
04-24-2005 12:44 AM
Reply to: Message 158 by ptolemy
04-24-2005 12:17 AM


Complete nonsense.
If matter is a relationship - for which there is ample quantum evidence
Makes no sense, just stringing words together.
If the relationship shifts - and all the light from primordial galaxies is shifted
Then matter could be a deteriorating - aging relationship. It would be like a shifting equilibrium.
Rubbish. Again you're just stringing words together but the statements have no meaning.
Because we have invented laws and constants based on the assumption of changelessness - we cannot imagine that matter could decay. The Apostle Paul wrote that the whole creation phthora [degenerates - corrupts]
The 'assumption' as you call it can be tested. Upper limits on the changes in fundamental constants can be measured. That's not assumption it's fact.
There is no way to propose a causal reason why the solar system would increase in size if atoms are not perpetual motion machines. The cause would be fundamental, and you can’t break it down into a higher level of specificity.
Codswallop! That's just cop out metaphysical claptrap.
The Bible twice states that the earth also continually increases in size - for which there is simple evidence. Again there is no way to precisely define why - if the cause is fundamental. Why? Matter is fundamental to everything.
WTF!!!! What 'simple evidence'???????
It seems to me you talk in riddles and nonsense so as to negate being pinned down on specifics.
The ancients spoke of close encounters
The Bible seems to record one
The ancients mention a planet shattering
The Bible uses almost identical language and that God saved the world from chaos.
You know this nonsense wouldn't occur if people didn't blindly follow the musings of Bronze Age goat herders in the Middle East.
As hard as we try - we cannot imagine that matter can change - shift as a relationship. Yet the universe is full of evidence of such change. It is easier to invent a fictitious universe made of undetectable things than to question one’s first principle.
Huh? This really makes no sense whatsoever. The changes I think you are meaning would be manifest. They'd be so obvious as to destroy physics as we know it. This isn't seen.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 158 by ptolemy, posted 04-24-2005 12:17 AM ptolemy has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 163 by arachnophilia, posted 04-24-2005 5:09 AM Eta_Carinae has not replied
 Message 164 by Phat, posted 04-24-2005 5:10 AM Eta_Carinae has not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1343 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 161 of 197 (201653)
04-24-2005 4:56 AM
Reply to: Message 158 by ptolemy
04-24-2005 12:17 AM


Re: Venusian orbit change?
Archnophilia writes:
hey, i didn't write that!
i'm waiting until we get the fundamental assumption of your argument under control, and then we'll address theological, philosophical, and astronomical concerns.

אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 158 by ptolemy, posted 04-24-2005 12:17 AM ptolemy has not replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 162 of 197 (201654)
04-24-2005 5:06 AM
Reply to: Message 158 by ptolemy
04-24-2005 12:17 AM


Re: Venusian orbit change?
Ptolemy writes:
Can God really take the wise of the world with their own skills - their mathematical way of reasoning? He looks like He is on track to do so. Of course what I am saying is foolishness to those trained to only think with that little assumption. You are helping me prove that this really is our (the Western) first principle - our dogma about matter.
This sounds like the advertisment to a sequel. Can Batman escape the evil Riddler? Can God really take the wise of the world? Take them where????

This message is a reply to:
 Message 158 by ptolemy, posted 04-24-2005 12:17 AM ptolemy has not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1343 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 163 of 197 (201655)
04-24-2005 5:09 AM
Reply to: Message 160 by Eta_Carinae
04-24-2005 12:44 AM


Re: Complete nonsense.
If matter is a relationship - for which there is ample quantum evidence
Makes no sense, just stringing words together.
unfortunately, quantum mechanics, in part, has ushered in a new era of existential bullshit, and philosophical mental masturbation. we call it "postmodernism."
this is not the first time i've heard this part of this argument, either. and scarily enough it does have some sense to it (when ptolemy's not trying to put it across anyhow).
matter is essentially the collected sum electron repulsions, and various smaller quantum effects. it's almost all empty space, really. but there's no greater philosophic truth to that. so what if matter is just a relationship of electrical impulses and stuff that isn't even there all the time? on any scale larger than the atom, it doesn't especially matter. matter is still perceptably solid, and physical constants still apply -- otherwise, we'd never have devised them in the firts place. quantum mechanics is just plain bad and inefficient at describing the actions of two car on a road, let alone plants in a solar system.
newtonian mechanics works perfectly well at that. whether or not everything really is in a constant state of flux, with quarks whizzing into and out existance, to the observer at our viewpoint, newtonian mechanics more than adequately functions to describe most of our universe. and where it does not, relativity works.
which is why i posed the question - if we can't tell it's changing, what does it matter?
added by edit:
You know this nonsense wouldn't occur if people didn't blindly follow the musings of Bronze Age goat herders in the Middle East.
or rather, iron age collections of tradition collected by priests in exiled judah. but close enough, usually.
This message has been edited by Arachnophilia, 04-24-2005 04:15 AM

אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 160 by Eta_Carinae, posted 04-24-2005 12:44 AM Eta_Carinae has not replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 164 of 197 (201656)
04-24-2005 5:10 AM
Reply to: Message 160 by Eta_Carinae
04-24-2005 12:44 AM


Re: Complete nonsense.
You know this nonsense wouldn't occur if people didn't blindly follow the musings of Bronze Age goat herders in the Middle East.
Once you guys can figure out how to keep the space shuttles from blowing up and we can justify the enormous expense of the space program to pay your inflated salaries, we may find better purpose in life than what our esteemed (and enlightened) goat herders have brought us.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 160 by Eta_Carinae, posted 04-24-2005 12:44 AM Eta_Carinae has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 165 by arachnophilia, posted 04-24-2005 5:15 AM Phat has replied
 Message 170 by contracycle, posted 04-25-2005 6:31 AM Phat has replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1343 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 165 of 197 (201657)
04-24-2005 5:15 AM
Reply to: Message 164 by Phat
04-24-2005 5:10 AM


Re: Complete nonsense.
Once you guys can figure out how to keep the space shuttles from blowing up
boo. poor taste.
This message has been edited by Arachnophilia, 04-24-2005 04:16 AM

אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 164 by Phat, posted 04-24-2005 5:10 AM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 166 by Phat, posted 04-24-2005 11:56 AM arachnophilia has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024