Challenging the Myths of Astronomy

originally posted by: FearYourMind
a reply to: flyingfish

You didn't even watch the lecture. That's like demanding your professor to give you the answers without listening to the class lecture. You haven't specified anything that Missler lectured on to question me about. Get back to me when you've finished listening.

That's not how it works.
Your the one making specific claims, and I have questioned you, you need to validate your claims or tell me what's in the video that you think validates your claims..

a reply to: flyingfish

I never "claimed" anything. You obviously didn't bother reading any of my thread. Here, I'll re-post it for you. Hopefully it won't be too much for you to read.

I stated: "Who or what created the universe. Many people look to science for an explanation, but those who believe in creationism seem to lack or turn a blind eye to science and simply have faith. This is a compelling lecture by Dr. Chuck Missler who combines the two (science & religion) to explain the creationism theory. Chuck is a very intelligent man who has translated the Bible from Hebrew to Greek and has embarked on many touchy topics regarding Christianity & Science."

originally posted by: FearYourMind

You didn't even watch the lecture. That's like demanding your professor to give you the answers without listening to the class lecture. You haven't specified anything that Missler lectured on to question me about. Get back to me when you've finished listening.

I have one point about the video. He says gravity is irrelevant and so another force (God?) is what holds everything together. Well since the 1940s we learned that most of the mass of the universe is made up of matter we can not see but we can measure, so there is a lot going on there than just empty space.

As example: The black hole in the center of a galaxy is pretty much irrelevant to keeping the whole galaxy bound together. To take the Milky Way as an example, the black hole is about 4 million solar masses whereas the whole galaxy is hundreds of billions of solar masses. It's not because the galaxy's radius is too big (by the way the radius is more like 50,000 ly), but because the black hole's mass is insignificant compared to the galaxy.

Dark matter is responsible for most of the gravitational binding energy of the galaxy, with a bit of assistance from stars. In the central few kilo-parsecs of a galaxy, the mass is strongly dominated by stars and gas, but once you get farther away dark matter becomes more and more dominant.

In the end he does address what we already know because it doesn't fit his point very well and muddies it up quite a bit.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
If the notion of God is included, it is not science. Not at all. "God" gives you a wild card to explain what is unexplainable (either through human ignorance, or human laziness).

That isn't to say that ancient writings don't potentially show deeper understanding than is typically considered. This is the nature of ancient religions. There are/were no "Gods" insomuch as there was divine information. Or, rather, information not obvious to the average person (the profane).

But the notion of God us as unscientific as you can get. You could just substitute the word "magic" and have the exact same result (once you get past any related cognitive dissonance)

And you can call the Universe a "consciousness." According to much new thinking along that line, we can maybe have a new and better understanding of the old term of "God." A term that had to be applied to the unknown (that today is better understood to some degree) and really is outside the cloak of religion but rests in science.

a reply to: flyingfish

Don't kill the messenger. This is a discussion, but you'll need to know the topics by listening to the lecture. Don't bother if you refuse to hear Dr. Chuck Missler's lecture.

originally posted by: Aliensun

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

And you can call the Universe a "consciousness." According to much new thinking along that line, we can maybe have a new and better understanding of the old term of "God." A term that had to be applied to the unknown (that today is better understood to some degree) and really is outside the cloak of religion but rests in science.

That's very plausible. I believe we'll prove the existence of what we only know as the "spiritual realm" as we learn more about different dimensions and the universe. The universe is a lot stranger than most of us think.

a reply to: Xtrozero

Valid points there. You definitely know more about it than I do. Impressive retort to say the least.

originally posted by: FearYourMind
a reply to: flyingfish

Don't kill the messenger. This is a discussion, but you'll need to know the topics by listening to the lecture. Don't bother if you refuse to hear Dr. Chuck Missler's lecture.

The messenger is already a dead horse!



Chuck Missler and Koinonia House Ministries are christian apologetics and it's writings are pure propoganda.

Missler has many, many wild theories and claims he has concocted and have been panned by the vast majority of the scientific community. Even the Institute for Creation Research (ICR) has long ago rejected his hypothesis as ridiculous.

All he's doing in this video is giving the gullible an impression that his long rejected theory is valid and will soon be proven true by creation scientists. Outright deception to sell apologetic tapes, videos, DVD's and instructional materials for sale at the high prices from $15 to over $100 each.

These clowns also started Koinonia Institute, which claims to offer both undergraduate and graduate correspondence course credit in christian studies for degrees up to and including Ph.D. This is the same type of "college" that Kent Hovind supposedly received his Ph.D.

a reply to: FearYourMind

If you remove the evolutionary framework, get rid of the millions of years, and then take the Bible seriously, you will find an explanation that fits the facts and makes perfect sense

"If you remove all the stuff that actually has objective evidence supporting it, and then take a book that has no evidence to support its narrative, you will find an explanation that fits that facts and makes perfect sense."

Seriously? You probably should have kept this in the RF&T forum instead of the O&C forum. We like supposition 'round these parts, but only if it's backed by some kind of evidence.

The reason for the comments of others, the ones that you choose to see as ridicule, is that Missler's "work" has been posted many times here in O&C. And it's been shown to either be bad science (see the peanut butter example above) or non-scientific due to a complete inability to be tested and evaluated in any meaningful way (see Missler's claims of "if time dilation, then...") every time it's presented as "evidence". This is where the search feature comes in handy.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
If the notion of God is included, it is not science. Not at all. "God" gives you a wild card to explain what is unexplainable (either through human ignorance, or human laziness).

That isn't to say that ancient writings don't potentially show deeper understanding than is typically considered. This is the nature of ancient religions. There are/were no "Gods" insomuch as there was divine information. Or, rather, information not obvious to the average person (the profane).

But the notion of God us as unscientific as you can get. You could just substitute the word "magic" and have the exact same result (once you get past any related cognitive dissonance)

Well said. Very well said.

originally posted by: FearYourMind
a reply to: DJW001

Maybe "definitely" wasn't a good word, but they have pretty much settled in to the idea that aliens exist.

Father Jose Funes, director of the Vatican Observatory in Rome
states:

We are not alone, says Vatican: Pope's chief astronomer says alien life exists.
Vatican chief astronomer says there may be intelligent life on other planets
Discovery of new Earth-like planet Kepler-452b has strengthened this belief
He said 'vast majority of stars' could have planets that may support life
However Father Jose Funes said Jesus was a 'unique event' in history

Source

The Vatican Observatory people co-organize/co-sponsor a conference on how to detect extraterrestrial life. It is a topic they are very much interested in as all of astronomy is:





I do not know why this is suprising to anyone as the Vatican has had an observatory since the 1800s.

From NASA's Astrobiology page:
Search for Life Beyond the Solar System Conference

Search for Life Beyond the Solar System Conference
Presenter: Daniel Apai, University of Arizona
When: March 16, 2014 6PM PDT

Motivated by the rapidly increasing number of known Earth-sized planets, the increasing range of extreme conditions in which life on Earth can persist, and the progress toward a technology that will ultimately enable the search for life on exoplanets, the Vatican Observatory and the Steward Observatory announce a major conference entitled The Search for Life Beyond the Solar System: Exoplanets, Biosignatures & Instruments.

The goal of the conference is to bring together the interdisciplinary community required to address this multi-faceted challenge: experts on exoplanet observations, early and extreme life on Earth, atmospheric biosignatures, and planet-finding telescopes.

The sessions of the five-day meeting will include invited review and contributed talks, followed by extended discussions.

There will be posters, but no parallel sessions. We will limit the number of attendees to 250 to allow interactions between the participants. The conference will include a banquet (Wednesday evening) and an afternoon break (Tuesday) and two evening slots for collaborative team meetings. The Friday morning session will include a coordinated discussion that will provide input for a conference summary.

You can find video of all of the talks at the link above.

originally posted by: flyingfish

originally posted by: FearYourMind
a reply to: flyingfish

Don't kill the messenger. This is a discussion, but you'll need to know the topics by listening to the lecture. Don't bother if you refuse to hear Dr. Chuck Missler's lecture.

The messenger is already a dead horse!

Chuck Missler and Koinonia House Ministries are christian apologetics and it's writings are pure propoganda.

Missler has many, many wild theories and claims he has concocted and have been panned by the vast majority of the scientific community. Even the Institute for Creation Research (ICR) has long ago rejected his hypothesis as ridiculous.

All he's doing in this video is giving the gullible an impression that his long rejected theory is valid and will soon be proven true by creation scientists. Outright deception to sell apologetic tapes, videos, DVD's and instructional materials for sale at the high prices from $15 to over $100 each.

These clowns also started Koinonia Institute, which claims to offer both undergraduate and graduate correspondence course credit in christian studies for degrees up to and including Ph.D. This is the same type of "college" that Kent Hovind supposedly received his Ph.D.

These people should probably be charged with perpetuating fraud.

originally posted by: FearYourMind
a reply to: flyingfish

Don't kill the messenger. This is a discussion, but you'll need to know the topics by listening to the lecture. Don't bother if you refuse to hear Dr. Chuck Missler's lecture.

I'm afraid in this instance, the messenger intellectually killed himself.

I'm pretty sure we don't understand the Bible.

What is Jesus and God and the spirit and the body is all speculative in my opinion and that the esoteric lessons we lost in the Bible when the people who truly understood the rituals and context and everything were killed. Then the Catholic Church jumped in and took over everything until Martin Luther.

We have no idea.

So exactly what are the so called "Myths of Astronomy" that this thread is about? Anyone know, as the OP apparently does not!

a reply to: FearYourMind

Google any man of faith and you'll see negative propaganda.

Really?

ATTENTION PLEASE!

The topic is not each other or calling people or groups of people names just because you don't agree with them.

Return to the topic or Posting Bans may follow.

Do not reply to this post.

Blaine91555
Moderator

originally posted by: FearYourMind
a reply to: Thecakeisalie
. So, the King James version of the Bible is inaccurate. None of the dates are accurate in the King James Version.

There are no dates in the KJV.

Any date attributed to the scriptures is someone's added interpretation from blending historical, archaeological, and scriptural sources.