It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: edmc^2
To the contrary, there's no evidence of any non-conscious agency that's able to create any law. We have however laws being created by the conscious mind.
Case in point:
F = ma
If the law didn't already exist, will Sir Isaac Newton be able to formulate the equations that described to the laws of motion?
But let's supposed the law didn't exist - then where to begin?
How would you formulate something that doesn't exist?
Without consciousness, how would you even begin?
originally posted by: wmd_2008
I will repeat this
Why have none of the religious members replied to THIS POST
Your SILENCE speaks volumes
originally posted by: Barcs
Par for the course, I suppose. The religious folk that deny science never ever explain why it's wrong. They prefer to ignore any post that counters their claim or requires them to think critically. It's so much easier to just stick your head in the dirt and deny science. Basically they have no integrity.
originally posted by: mOjOm
originally posted by: edmc^2
To the contrary, there's no evidence of any non-conscious agency that's able to create any law. We have however laws being created by the conscious mind.
Case in point:
F = ma
If the law didn't already exist, will Sir Isaac Newton be able to formulate the equations that described to the laws of motion?
But let's supposed the law didn't exist - then where to begin?
How would you formulate something that doesn't exist?
Without consciousness, how would you even begin?
All that formula is doing is describing something. It's just language. Like saying S+M+I+L+E =
All you're doing is using language to describe something. Everything can be represented by some symbolic language. That's the whole purpose of language. To assign certain symbols in a specific order which describe real things or events.
But the actual things themselves just are what they are. They don't require a linguistic representation to exist. That's just how we communicate them.
Calculations Using Kepler's Third Law
A convenient unit of measurement for periods is in Earth years, and a convenient unit of measurement for distances is the average separation of the Earth from the Sun, which is termed an astronomical unit and is abbreviated as AU. If these units are used in Kepler's 3rd Law, the denominators in the preceding equation are numerically equal to unity and it may be written in the simple form
P(years)^2 = R (A.U.)^3
originally posted by: Joecanada11
a reply to: edmc^2
You started the thread with your "proof" from the bible. Maybe you should finish grade 9 before trying to explain science to us adults.
You started the thread with your "proof" from the bible. Maybe you should finish grade 9 before trying to explain science to us adults.
But you simply ignore those points and say but look the bible says "the earth hangs on nothing" how could they have known.
originally posted by: FairyThorne
There are so many creationism stories from various religions, all sounding extremely unusual, it's baffling to me how any one can claim a monopoly of truth with no evidence. I don't claim to know how everything came to me but I generally drift towards the arguments with quantifiable evidence.
When was it discovered that "nothing" physical or tangible was holding the earth? That it was literally floating in space?
Please provide information from 3,400 years ago showing that it was known that the Earth orbits the Sun.
So where did the writer of Job get the information from - c 3400 years ago?
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: edmc^2
When was it discovered that "nothing" physical or tangible was holding the earth? That it was literally floating in space?
The Earth is not floating in space. It is falling around the Sun.
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: edmc^2
No.
Is it something visible to the naked eye?
Please provide information from 3,400 years ago showing that it was known that the Earth orbits the Sun.
The Earth is constantly moving through space. Both around the Sun and around the galaxy. And, in fact, along with the galaxy. Its location is always changing. Did Job mention that? It's sort of a major bit of data.
The subject is not the orbit or the rotation of the earth or the sun but the location of the earth in space.
So where did the writer of Job get the information from - c 3400 years ago?
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: edmc^2
The Earth is constantly moving through space. Both around the Sun and around the galaxy. And, in fact, along with the galaxy. Its location is always changing
The subject is not the orbit or the rotation of the earth or the sun but the location of the earth in space.
Here is what you asked:
So where did the writer of Job get the information from - c 3400 years ago?
You