Age of solar system on the premises of the Bible

a reply to: Seede

FFS - it does not matter if you call :

1000 000 000

" one thousand million "

" one billion "

or even

" gertrude "

it is still the same value

and its ratio to an other number is identical no matter what you call it

There was no difference between a British Billion and an American Billion in 1601, the primary reason being that whilst the continent existed, the nation didn't.

There is no friction in a vacuum, friction is the result of two particles or bodies of particles moving against each other, for example, a car on a road. Space is a vacuum, a vacuum has nothing in it, so nothing to cause friction. However, there is gravity, and gravity can act over massive distances moving objects a tiny amount over protracted time periods.

People are so incredibly ignorant to have blind faith in the bible because it gives different versions of the same event. It is the most ignorant thing in the world, and a rat must have more intelligence than these human beings, because they just stubbornly refuse to acknowledge the fact that there are separate versions of what took place for the same event. They refuse to even acknowledge that they are choosing what to believe because the gospels do not agree with each other. They think that they are showing love to God by believing in human beings, whether or not the human beings lied to them. They will be put to shame, because it turns out that the humans did lie to them, and they could not be trusted. Just because of blind faith, the people being lied to refuse to acknowledge facts.

That does not make sense! It is just the meaning of ignorance. I do not understand how a human being can be so ignorant to refuse to acknowledge facts due to having so called faith!

Then the Hebrews come out and tell them, "No, do not believe in those people because they are lying to you!" And the Christians just completely ignore them! They rather believe in the Greeks and Romans over the very people that the religion started from! How does religion make people so blind, I cannot figure out.

a reply to: bobsa

There is no friction in a vacuum, friction is the result of two particles or bodies of particles moving against each other, for example, a car on a road. Space is a vacuum, a vacuum has nothing in it, so nothing to cause friction. However, there is gravity, and gravity can act over massive distances moving objects a tiny amount over protracted time periods.

I believe what you mean is there is no friction in a complete vacuum. Space nor Interstellar space is not a complete vacuum and about 80% of the universe is dark matter of which you nor anyone knows what it is. No one has demonstrated a complete vacuum with zero friction to my knowledge and if it could be demonstrated as perpetual motion it would always remain a theory till the end of this universe. Then if the universe came to an end, perpetual motion would not be perpetual. What you are taught is considered facts while it is not facts at all. It is theory at its best and shall remain so.

Even the international space station has to reboost its orbit every once in a while to offset the effect of friction or drag.
This earth at one time [biblical belief] was a closed environment but even being a closed environment was subject to differing universal laws of physics. Those laws may have been different in the closed environment of this earth in comparison to today's open environment of this earth. At the same time, even in the closed environment, the laws of the closed environment were vastly different than the laws in the outside environment.

This leads me to believe that the laws of today were not the laws of 4.5 billion years ago. How can I say this? By the science of evolution. If the same laws were effectual 4.5 billion years ago as they are today then we should have the same evolutionary factors today as in 4.5 billion years ago. Do we have those same laws today? If you say yes then demonstrate it to me as that is the insistence of science today. Science claims that true science can prove mathematically as well as demonstrate yet prior to 1900 this same science corrected their math from 100,000 years to 4.5 billion years. Very embarrassing to say the least.

I also have repeatedly said that Kepler was neither British or American being that he was a German. Americans were recognized as being Americans in 1585 and has nothing to do with this conversation as being a nation. America became colonized in 1607. I said nothing contrary to those facts. What I did say was that Kepler did not use British or American math in 1601.

a reply to: AlienVessel

People are so incredibly ignorant to have blind faith in the bible because it gives different versions of the same event. It is the most ignorant thing in the world, and a rat must have more intelligence than these human beings, because they just stubbornly refuse to acknowledge the fact that there are separate versions of what took place for the same event. They refuse to even acknowledge that they are choosing what to believe because the gospels do not agree with each other. They think that they are showing love to God by believing in human beings, whether or not the human beings lied to them. They will be put to shame, because it turns out that the humans did lie to them, and they could not be trusted. Just because of blind faith, the people being lied to refuse to acknowledge facts.

Then you saying that you can translate Aramaic, Biblical Hebrew, and Coined Greek from 6,000 Greek MSS and the Masoretic Hebrew MSS. along with the DSS. From your above post that is exactly what you would have to be qualified to do in order to make those statements true. That leaves me in doubt that you are qualified in any of the fields of theology. I believe you are angry and bitter and certainly do not realize what you have posted. Is the Christian book the only book that you hate or are the other religious books correct in your opinion?

I believe what you mean is there is no friction in a complete vacuum. Space nor Interstellar space is not a complete vacuum and about 80% of the universe is dark matter of which you nor anyone knows what it is.

Space is as close to a complete vacuum as you can get, there is no such thing as a complete vacuum as particles can pop in and out at any time, however, the tiny amount of particles and vast spacing between them in space renders and interaction between them and other materials as frictionless.

No one has demonstrated a complete vacuum with zero friction to my knowledge and if it could be demonstrated as perpetual motion it would always remain a theory till the end of this universe. Then if the universe came to an end, perpetual motion would not be perpetual. What you are taught is considered facts while it is not facts at all. It is theory at its best and shall remain so.

I'm not sure if you proofread stuff before posting, but this doesn't even make sense, I assume what your saying is that if space really was a vacuum, then, newtons first law applying the body would remain in motion as no external force (friction) was being applied, but, the end of the world would stop it so is therefore dissproved? The end of the world would be an external force, as would a planet, asteroid and gravity. also perpetual motion is a completely different concept.

Even the international space station has to reboost its orbit every once in a while to offset the effect of friction or drag.

The ISS sits in the Thermosphere, not space. It is therefore subject to the atmospheric particulates in the thermosphere and also the effect of the gravity of the earth.

This leads me to believe that the laws of today were not the laws of 4.5 billion years ago. How can I say this? By the science of evolution. If the same laws were effectual 4.5 billion years ago as they are today then we should have the same evolutionary factors today as in 4.5 billion years ago.

Evolution is affected by the laws of nature and is environmental. The laws of physics can affect the laws of nature, which in turn could affect evolution, but this is not a two-way process and is not an absolute.

I also have repeatedly said that Kepler was neither British or American being that he was a German. Americans were recognized as being Americans in 1585 and has nothing to do with this conversation as being a nation. America became colonized in 1607. I said nothing contrary to those facts. What I did say was that Kepler did not use British or American math in 1601

You really need to understand the difference between numbers, formulas and laws. Kepler's laws use formulae to describe planetary motion, numbers are then plugged in to describe each instance of effect individually. Kepler's law is a law because it is proven, the law and its associated formulae have correctly predicted every planetary movement asked of it, irrespective of millions, billions, gazillions, sheckles or goats.

I really think you should also consider Occam's razor:
Occam's razor (or Ockham's razor) is a principle from philosophy. Suppose there exist two explanations for an occurrence. In this case the simpler one is usually better. Another way of saying it is that the more assumptions you have to make, the more unlikely an explanation is. Occam's razor applies especially in the philosophy of science, but also more generally.

You are making so many assumptions, you are tying yourself in knots, this should tell you that something is wrong.

a reply to: bobsa

Space is as close to a complete vacuum as you can get, there is no such thing as a complete vacuum as particles can pop in and out at any time, however, the tiny amount of particles and vast spacing between them in space renders and interaction between them and other materials as frictionless.

Exactly, as I had said in that there is no such thing as a complete vacuum but what you have said in that there is no friction is totally false. You are confusing friction with drag. Two objects of space can collide and yes it will involve friction and can cause great damage to the objects that collide. A heavenly body that is in motion in space will lose motion in varying degrees due to drag. Drag is caused primarily by gases, particles and dark matter of which we know very little. There is no such thing as constant motion forever that we are aware of. That would be perpetual motion and it simply does not exist to our knowledge. All creation does decay in various ways. You just have not been around long enough to see this on a grand scale.

a reply to: Seede

A heavenly body that is in motion in space will lose motion in varying degrees due to drag. Drag is caused primarily by gases, particles and dark matter of which we know very little

Drag is a force that acts in the opposite direction to motion, in a fluid, a vacuum is not a fluid and therefore bodies moving through space do not experience drag.

you keep talking about dark matter and how this affects friction, but you also mention that nothing is known about it. can I suggest that both can't be true, either we know what dark matter is and its effect on the coefficient of friction or we don't.

Scientists are very aware of how much friction there is in space, it's used to calculate the fuel needed for long missions like voyager.

a reply to: bobsa

Drag is a force that acts in the opposite direction to motion, in a fluid, a vacuum is not a fluid and therefore bodies moving through space do not experience drag. you keep talking about dark matter and how this affects friction, but you also mention that nothing is known about it. can I suggest that both can't be true, either we know what dark matter is and its effect on the coefficient of friction or we don't.

Regardless of your definition, bodies moving in space certainly do experience drag. I did not say we know nothing of dark matter. What I said was that - "Drag is caused primarily by gases, particles and dark matter of which we know very little."
Now In addition to that statement it also is the result of gravity and perhaps even additional factors that we know nothing about.

Dark matter is about 80% of the volume of our estimated universe. Naturally we do not know if this figure is true but it is a guess that is accepted as fact. You should be concerned with dark matter as it is well over the containment of our universe. You can't have your cake and eat it too. The very same science that dictates the academia today will also teach that this earth had a 7 hour day 42 billion years ago compared to the present 24 hour day of today. Now regardless of how you spin this, this earth rotated faster 42 billion years ago than it does today.

If this decay continues we can realize [guess] as much as 82 or more hours in a day in another 42 billion years. The rotation of this earth [according to your science] is rotating slower from its creation. Biblically speaking, that is exactly what the Christian bible teaches along with the teaching that before this entire universe winds down this world will wobble and be removed out of its present place. That could mean that the sun's relation with the earth will indeed change and cause great destruction to all life on this earth. No proof, just theology.

This teaches that in the scientific world the scientists can change their science and call it correction while a religion can change their religion and they call it being wrong. Simply a matter of brain washing at its best.

a reply to: Seede

"Drag is caused primarily by gases, particles and dark matter of which we know very little."

simply not a true statement, we don't even know if dark matter exists, it neatly describes something that is missing from the current theories, however, science allows for these theories to change when a better theory comes along, this is the basis of science. also not knowing the exact makeup of something does not preclude you from knowing how that "something" interacts with its environment or bodies within it.

Dark matter is about 80% of the volume of our estimated universe. Naturally, we do not know if this figure is true but it is a guess that is accepted as fact.

No, it's not accepted as fact, its accepted as a scientific theory, dark matter is entirely hypothetical, unproven and subject to change or deletion depending on a better theory or evidence coming forward.

If this decay continues we can realize [guess] as much as 82 or more hours in a day in another 42 billion years. The rotation of this earth [according to your science] is rotating slower from its creation. Biblically speaking, that is exactly what the Christian bible teaches along with the teaching that before this entire universe winds down this world will wobble and be removed out of its present place. That could mean that the sun's relation with the earth will indeed change and cause great destruction to all life on this earth. No proof, just theology

You don't have to guess, you can work it out based on current deceleration, precession, gravity etc etc.

It's not my science, it's science, period.

The suns relationship with the earth changes all the time, and will continue to do so, not theology, science.

This teaches that in the scientific world the scientists can change their science and call it correction while a religion can change their religion and they call it being wrong. Simply a matter of brain washing at its best.

this is the crux of the debate, science is ever changing, as it should, this change takes into account EVIDENCE, both observed, calculated and theorised. We should never change this as it underpins human advancement.

Religion, on the other hand, should essentially never change, as there is NO EVIDENCE, to back up any of the assertions made. The Bible, is not evidence of anything, it is a book written by man, with the books chosen by a politically motivated council in Nicaea. You talk about brainwashing, and yet here you are desperately trying to change evidence-based scientific observation, theory and fact to fit your understanding of some writings with no evidence to back up their veracity. Who do you think is brainwashed?

a reply to: bobsa

Religion, on the other hand, should essentially never change, as there is NO EVIDENCE, to back up any of the assertions made. The Bible, is not evidence of anything, it is a book written by man, with the books chosen by a politically motivated council in Nicaea. You talk about brainwashing, and yet here you are desperately trying to change evidence-based scientific observation, theory and fact to fit your understanding of some writings with no evidence to back up their veracity. Who do you think is brainwashed?

There are tons of literary and archeological evidence to support the Nazarene faith. You seem not to know the difference between evidence and proof. There are three groups of evidence along with some proof in a few bibles. Literary, Archeological and Spiritual and regardless of the spin you place upon Christianity the evidence is overwhelming in support of this faith. The Nazarene faith has not changed at all since the death of its founder although there are some offshoots of the Roman faith that have and do change. I say this to not excuse corrupt literature but only to show that there is true literature also just as there is true science and false science.

Science books are also written by men and women yet you parrot their evidence with great faith and then condemn religious books that meet the same criteria as science. All have been written by people.

You say that - "You talk about brainwashing, and yet here you are desperately trying to change evidence-based scientific observation, theory and fact to fit your understanding of some writings with no evidence to back up their veracity. Who do you think is brainwashed?"

I am not desperate to change anything. This entire subject originated with a debate as to whether there is friction or drag in space. So far you have contradicted yourself many times over by your very own science written by people. One question alone will prove my point. Your science says that this earth is over 4.5 billion years old and that 4.5 billion years ago the day of this earth was but 7 hours. Here is my question. Can you demonstrate the earth is 4.5 billion years old and did the earth slow its rotation from its conception?

I challenge you to demonstrate your observation that this world is 4.5 billion years old. I challenge you to prove and demonstrate this world had a 7 hour day at any time. You pick your own demise because it is not there and you know it. I challenge you to prove and demonstrate that the universe is expanding at any rate. Go ahead and pick your number. Give me your math and demonstrate what your man made science book tells you. You call looking out the window and seeing the moon is scientific observation. The Babylonian star gazers could do the same. You open a science book and you have the faith that these people that wrote that book are correct. Why? Because you want to believe it. Not that you even understand how they formulate their ideas but simply because it is accepted evidence which will change again one day. My proof? Read Kepler of 1619 on Celestial Mechanics [that is if you have the knowledge to understand] -- Then read Newton of 1687 and as you can see that your science has changed in just 87 years and one era.

Then do your own google on the age of this earth and note how many times the science books have changed from 6,000 years to 50,000 years, to 100,000 years, to 4.5 billion years and a dozen or more changes between all of them.

But you call that correction do you not? You can't even acknowledge the fact that some science is true and some is false and they are both put in your books and taught in universities as fact. Who put your science in your books? People put your science in your books just as people put religion in their books. So what are you driving at? Are you saying that man cannot write religion and have evidence?

One example out of many is that for centuries the critics have spouted the very thing that you spout. Their platform was - Prove to us that Pontius Pilate ever existed. No Roman literature could be shown that he did exist yet biblical literature was loaded with evidence that Pilate did exist. This went on for centuries till one day in 1961 at the Archeological site of
Caesarea Maritima, the Pilate Stone was discovered which proved [by archeology] that Pilate did exist as the prefect of the Roman province of Judaea from AD 26–36. So when you make a statement that the Christian bible is not evidence of anything then you truly show your ignorance.

Getting back to friction and drag.
Quote
Raj Shukla, I am an engineer. That pretty much sums it all.
Answered Nov 15, 2015
Asteroids don't catch fire in outer space unless and until they're hit by another asteroid. When two asteroids collide they release enormous amount of heat and energy and catch fire because of the oxygen present in the asteroid itself.
Unquote

What is the direct cause of the oxygen to be released or to ignite?

a reply to: Seede

I have already agreed, many times, that science changes, that is the point of science!! I also have said, albeit in a roundabout way that parts of science don't agree, again that's the point of scientific debate!

The bible does not supply evidence or proof of anything, it is a text, by your own admission science did, however, prove that Pontious Pilate did exist. Also if the Bible is evidence, why is there so much contradiction? if it was evidence or proof then there would be no contradiction, at all.

I believe in science, I also believe in God. Too me they are not mutually exclusive, HOWEVER, I do not believe in religion. Religion is man-made, it is man's "interpretation" of stories written, many, many years after Christ. Also, as I have said before, the bible is a collection of books decided upon at a hugely political council of Nicaea.

We will never agree, Science is two things to me:

1. Evidence that the universe is so complex and beautiful that it being a "random chance" event is inconceivable (to me), there is, somewhere, a guiding hand.
2. The vehicle that will eventually prove the existence of this guiding hand at the start of the existence of the universe.

a reply to: bobsa

Science is the proof that makes genesis chapter 1 make sense.

No one on ATS will ever understand that. On ATS you only have teenagers who dont know crap about the science they preach.

a reply to: spy66

I think an open mind is the key to everything in life, science and God are not mutually exclusive. What does annoy me though is this idea that people can read the Bible, "have a vision" or an interpretation epiphany and that somehow this new "information" is from God and if science has any evidence to the contrary then bd science because words.

originally posted by: bobsa
a reply to: spy66

I think an open mind is the key to everything in life, science and God are not mutually exclusive. What does annoy me though is this idea that people can read the Bible, "have a vision" or an interpretation epiphany and that somehow this new "information" is from God and if science has any evidence to the contrary then bd science because words.

Moste people who are christians have their knowledge from their own preachers....They are instructed how to read scripture.

This does not open theior mind one bit. The same goes for the once who thinks science is the answers..... These to are practically instructed in what they are to think.......

How do you get opened minded people from that?

a reply to: spy66

you don't, the best anyone can hope for is tolerance for opposite and disparate positions.

First of all, this the world / universe is a created one (and I believe it is) then no doubt it was created for a purpose, and it serves that purpose. And for sake of argument let's assume it is created, then IMO, it is clear that the creator wishes to remain at least mostly hidden. I take the Bible to say that the Truth of God has died from this world. Given that, the age of the earth or universe in completely irrelevant. God and the Truth are pretty much hidden here, and faith is the only way. Material proof certainly is not the way to God if He wishes to hide himself.

a reply to: bobsa

Text The bible does not supply evidence or proof of anything, it is a text, by your own admission science did, however, prove that Pontious Pilate did exist. Also if the Bible is evidence, why is there so much contradiction? if it was evidence or proof then there would be no contradiction, at all.

The NT alone does provide literary proof of the man called Jesus. There is much evidence from many outside sources that confirm the man called Jesus.

The confusion comes from the evidence provided in the 6,000 Greek MSS that comprise the NT. Out of those 6,000 MSS there are basically two groups of manuscripts. The majority of those manuscripts do agree with each other but in many cases they do not read word for word. In other words the message is the same but the literature may vary word for word. This majority of well over 80 to 90 percent that agree with each other are the MSS that translators of the Geneva and KJV will use in their work. The other MSS that do not agree with their work will be shelved [not destroyed] for reference only. These MSS that are in the majority text will be named Textus Receptus or simply majority. To be fair I must also say that there are many more MSS today then when the 1611 KJV was translated but these new MSS that we have today have not changed the message of the KJV MSS.

The same applies to the Masoretic MSS compared to the Dead Sea MSS.

Now if translations stopped right there you would have a uniform book for the majority of people but it did not stop there. Different religious denominations have their own varying doctrines and sought evidence to bolster their faith. It still happens today. They then gather the corrupt MSS that were shelved and will use excerpts of these corrupt texts to change the majority texts translations to suit their doctrines.

This is not the only reason that some modern bibles are written. There is the hidden agenda of copy right that make new bibles very profitable.

You also have religious offshoots of all sorts of denominations who will simply ignore whatever they wish to ignore. Some will actually forbid their followers to read or study certain letters of the the majority texts. Some will even take certain books and certain chapters and certain verses from a bible to bolster their own faith.

When you look into all of this corruptness one can then become jaded and most will not even believe or in most cases know the truth. Most will turn away and die in disbelief. I am more fortunate in that I have no religion to begin with and can examine what interests me without obligation to any sort of congregation or superior mindset. I do accept the Christ Jesus as the only begotten of The Most High EL but am very critical of doctrines except those of which are taught through His Apostles. Wishing you the best.

originally posted by: AlienVessel
How does religion make people so blind, I cannot figure out.

Perhaps these videos may give you some clues:

Psychology: The Art of selling nonsense/contradictions part 1
Pillars of culture - Sir Isaac Newton
The Pagan Religious Roots of Evolutionary Philosophies Part 1
Song 75 Our Reasons for Joy vocals

a reply to: whereislogic

Perhaps these videos may give you some clues:

Thanking you whereislogic for the videos. I seldom watch videos but do scan them to note their content. Your video on Newton not only grabbed my attention but I thought was beautifully demonstrated. I have a deep love for minds such as Newton and at ever chance I try to learn something of his brilliant mind. His intellect is so superior to almost all of us that it angers me that I cannot understand much of his work. Thanks again for that video.