Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 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: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Creation
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


(1)
Message 541 of 1482 (828246)
02-14-2018 11:33 PM
Reply to: Message 535 by ringo
02-13-2018 10:47 AM


Re: Why NOT A Literal Bible?
Hi ringo,
ringo writes:
You claimed that the Big Bang was proven false. Message 522
Questions do no prove it false.
If you are going to quote me get the quote right.
Message 522
ICANT writes:
Which one of the nine problems that proves the BBT is false would satisfy you that the BBT is false?
If inflation does not exist those nine problems do not match what is observed.
You can find an open letter to the Scientific community at the web site below.
An Open Letter to the Scientific Community | Plasma-Universe.com
There were 31 scientists that signed the above letter. After it was reproduced at cosmologystatement.org, another 200 scientist and engineers signed the letter as well as 250 independent researchers.
You can find the original document at: cosmologystatement.org
They point out that if inflation, dark matter and dark energy which has never been observed, does not exist, there would be a fatal contradiction between the observations made by astronomers and the predictions of the BBT.
They state: "the big bang theory can't survive without these fudge factors."
Now if you have any evidence for the existence of inflation, dark matter, and dark energy please share it.
Just because they are required for the BB to be a theory does not make any one of them exist.
God Bless,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 535 by ringo, posted 02-13-2018 10:47 AM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 542 by NoNukes, posted 02-15-2018 1:25 AM ICANT has not replied
 Message 546 by ringo, posted 02-15-2018 11:44 AM ICANT has replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 543 of 1482 (828249)
02-15-2018 2:19 AM
Reply to: Message 537 by ringo
02-13-2018 10:59 AM


Bible
Hi ringo,
ringo writes:
No. It only means that the universe was once smaller than it is now. A series of contractions and expansions would produce the same observations.
That would mean the universe was infinite, eternal, if that took place. But is ruled out because it would have already run out of energy without an endless supply of energy.
ringo writes:
But it doesn't agree. The Bible doesn't mention expansion at all.
quote:
Job 9:8 Which alone spreadeth out the heavens, and treadeth upon the waves of the sea.
Isaiah 40:22 It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:
Isaiah 44:24 Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself;
I hear a lot of chatter about stretching and fabric when the universe is being talked about.
Stretching out the heavens would look a lot more like the pictures of the proposed universe, than what would be produced by a scaler field (which has never been seen but happened once to produce the universe) would.
If the universe started as a hot, dense, ball of energy and the space between each of the quarks and leptons began to expand that would produce a universe that would be a sphere. But if the space between all quarks and leptons expanded exponentially there would have never been any two able to combine and produce anything. Much less there would be no chance of a collision of galaxies as they would not exist.
God Bless,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 537 by ringo, posted 02-13-2018 10:59 AM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 545 by NoNukes, posted 02-15-2018 9:04 AM ICANT has replied
 Message 547 by ringo, posted 02-15-2018 11:52 AM ICANT has replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


(1)
Message 544 of 1482 (828251)
02-15-2018 2:56 AM
Reply to: Message 539 by Astrophile
02-14-2018 7:13 PM


Re: Why NOT A Literal Bible?
Hi Astrophile and welcome,
Astrophile writes:
First, even if the universe had a beginning, that doesn't necessarily mean that God created it. It could have come from nothing, as Lawrence Krauss says, or it may have come from something in an earlier universe.
I don't know if you can understand what non-existence is. But if you can you know that non-existence can not produce existence.
If you think so give me your explanation of what would make it possible.
Now if the universe came from a big bounce (big crunch of a universe beginning to expand into a new universe). That would make it eternal in existence.
Tell me what would be the mechanism that would cause the crunch to compress all that is in the old universe into the small little pea sized universe. Then what would be the mechanism that would cause it to begin to expand.
After a few eons there would be no energy left without an external eternal power source.
Astrophile writes:
I hope that this attempt at an answer helps you to understand that your question, as you phrased it, over-simplifies a very complex matter, and that there is no simple answer to it.
It has a simple answer.
Either it had a beginning to exist.
OR
It has existed infinitely in the past.
I can find no other possible solution.
Of the two solutions you proposed one is not possible, the other is a infinite universe.
Care to try again?
God Bless,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 539 by Astrophile, posted 02-14-2018 7:13 PM Astrophile has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 553 by caffeine, posted 02-15-2018 2:57 PM ICANT has replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 554 of 1482 (828316)
02-15-2018 7:22 PM
Reply to: Message 547 by ringo
02-15-2018 11:52 AM


Re: Bible
Hi ringo,
ringo writes:
Here you have the earth spreading. Science does not claim that the earth is expanding.
Are you sure the earth did not expand from a small nucleus to what it is today.
According to science the Milky Way is not expanding. Although it had to at one time.
God Bless,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 547 by ringo, posted 02-15-2018 11:52 AM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 560 by ringo, posted 02-16-2018 10:43 AM ICANT has replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 555 of 1482 (828318)
02-15-2018 7:26 PM
Reply to: Message 546 by ringo
02-15-2018 11:44 AM


Re: Why NOT A Literal Bible?
Hi ringo,
ringo writes:
A shortage of evidence is not "proof" that the Big Bang is false.
A lack of those three things means the BB did not take place as has been presented here.
Why do you think cavediver made the statement that a new theory was needed.
God Bless,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 546 by ringo, posted 02-15-2018 11:44 AM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 561 by ringo, posted 02-16-2018 10:45 AM ICANT has seen this message but not replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 556 of 1482 (828323)
02-15-2018 8:36 PM
Reply to: Message 545 by NoNukes
02-15-2018 9:04 AM


Re: Bible
Hi NoNukes,
NoNukes writes:
No. It only means that the universe was once smaller than it is now. A series of contractions and expansions would produce the same observations.
That would mean the universe was infinite, eternal, if that took place. But is ruled out because it would have already run out of energy without an endless supply of energy.
This exchange shows exactly why you should stick to being wrong about how to diagram a sentence, and why you should leave science to the serious scientists and to the amateurs who at least make try to read up on the matter.
Let me try this and you tell me where I am wrong.
1. There is x amount of energy in the universe.
2. To do work energy is transferred from concentrated, to less concentrated, which means there is less energy to do work.
3. That means the amount of usable energy becomes less every time the energy is used.
4. When energy reaches total equilibrium there is no more usable energy to do work.
5. Therefore the universe would begin to get colder and lifeless. It is already 3 degrees K (-454 degrees), in some places.
6. That would mean the universe could not have existed infinitely in the past as it would have run out of energy and reached total equilibrium a long time ago.
Example:
The earth is not a perpetual motion machine. It requires energy from an outside source in order to stay alive. Each day concentrated energy is transferred to the Earth from the Sun. This energy keeps the Earth running and sustaining life on planet Earth. The solar energy cause our rain to fall, the wind to blow, snow to melt, and plant life to grow. Much of the energy consumed doing this work becomes less concentrated and radiates back out into the cold vastness of space.
If the sun did not replenish the solar energy daily required to recharge the Earth it would quickly become lifeless and frozen.
God Bless,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 545 by NoNukes, posted 02-15-2018 9:04 AM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 563 by NoNukes, posted 02-17-2018 1:01 AM ICANT has replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 557 of 1482 (828338)
02-16-2018 4:20 AM
Reply to: Message 540 by Astrophile
02-14-2018 7:46 PM


Creation
Hi Astrophile,
Astro writes:
There appear to be only two possibilities: that the age of the universe is infinite, i.e. that the universe is eternal; or that the age of the universe is finite. The fact that the Bible picked the correct one doesn't prove that it was inspired by a god, any more than predicting that a die will give a number between 1 and 3 and then getting the number 2 proves that one is supernaturally inspired.
Also, the second possibility doesn't necessarily mean that the universe had a beginning as we understand the world, any more than the fact that the Earth's surface area is finite means that one can fall over the edge.
The Bible had recorded in it 2200 years that the heavens had a beginning to exist before Astronomer Edwin Hubble's discovered the universe was expanding.
So you want to tell me that Moses who first wrote about the heavens having a beginning to exist 3800 years before Hubble's discovery, had more education and knowledge than anyone until Hubble, came along, is that right? Where did he get that knowledge there were no books on the subject to read?
How do you propose that the universe began to exist?
Astro writes:
How long ago do you think that the beginning of the universe was? And if the universe didn't begin with the Big Bang, how do you think it began?
Glad you asked.
I really don't know when the universe began to exist. I really don't think 15 billion years as Stephen Hawking's says or other's have said 20 billion years, is enough time as we know it for everything necessary to complete the job is enough.
So I believe the universe had a beginning to exist in the beginning which was somewhere in past duration.
I believe God spoke and the universe began to exist in the first light period that when coupled to the first period of darkness declared them to be Day One in Genesis 1:5.
So you ask me how long was that light period? I don't know. But I would tend to believe it was infinite in past duration, and did not cease until God created darkness which is found in Genesis 1:2.
That light period would account for the cmbr just as easily as the BB.
Astro writes:
As I said, there are only two possibilities, an eternal universe or a universe with some sort of beginning, so the author of the first chapter of Genesis had a 50% chance of being right. However, the first chapter of Genesis also says that the Earth existed before the Sun and the stars, and that plants existed before the Sun, so I don't think that Genesis (or God's Word, if you prefer it) has a particularly good record of scientific accuracy.
Well the only way the infinite one would work would be to have an external power source.
The one beginning to exist needs a mechanism to produce that existence.
I would say the chances of Moses knowing the heavens had a beginning to exist without someone telling him would 1 in a trillion trillion.
Your theology is a little off course.
Trees existed a long time before Genesis 1:11.
The sun, moon, and stars are a part of the heavens (universe) and were created in Genesis 1:1.
Remember that light period that I said closed with the period of darkness that lasted for an unknown duration? The history of that light period is found beginning with Genesis 2:4.
Bible writes:
2:4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,
That verse says the history of the day (God declared a period of light and a period of darkness day one. Genesis 1:5) God created the heavens and the earth is found in the following verses.
Scientist believe in evolution so they believe a little different than I do.
Before any plants of any kind. Genesis 2:5,
A mist water the ground. Genesis 2:6
God formed man from the dust of the ground. Genesis 2:7
After which God planted a garden. Genesis 2::8
Out of the ground God caused fruit, and nut trees to grow.
Genesis 2:9
God gave the man a job. Genesis 2:15
God forbid the man from eating the fruit from one specific tree Genesis 2:17
God formed animals and fowl out of the ground.
God made a woman from the rib of the man Genesis 2:22
That was the order in which God made man, animals, and fowl.
The order you find in Genesis 1:6 - 2:3 is the re-modeling of the heavens and earth. Seems the old earth had become covered with water, and was engulfed in darkness.
God Bless.

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 540 by Astrophile, posted 02-14-2018 7:46 PM Astrophile has not replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 558 of 1482 (828340)
02-16-2018 5:48 AM
Reply to: Message 553 by caffeine
02-15-2018 2:57 PM


Re: Why NOT A Literal Bible?
Hi caffeine,
caffeine writes:
Both those explanations are prima facie absurd. The universe is everything - there can not be anything before it or outside it that caused it to exist. Equally, it couldn't have come to exist from nothing; since nothing could have caused it to begin.
How do you know the universe is everything?
There is no scientific data past the singularity.
So you don't know what exists prior to singularity or how the universe began to exist.
God Bless,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 553 by caffeine, posted 02-15-2018 2:57 PM caffeine has not replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 562 of 1482 (828379)
02-16-2018 6:31 PM
Reply to: Message 560 by ringo
02-16-2018 10:43 AM


Re: Bible
Hi ringo,
ringo writes:
That was accretion, not expansion.
Whatever you call the process it got bigger. Every time in the past that I mentioned accretion everybody clamed up.
God Bless.

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 560 by ringo, posted 02-16-2018 10:43 AM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 564 by ringo, posted 02-17-2018 10:50 AM ICANT has replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 565 of 1482 (828419)
02-17-2018 2:18 PM
Reply to: Message 564 by ringo
02-17-2018 10:50 AM


Re: Bible
Hi ringo,
ringo writes:
But the process is completely different. The earth got larger because new matter was added to it. The expansion of the universe involves a fixed amount of matter/energy.
That in the beginning was about the size pea.
God Bless,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 564 by ringo, posted 02-17-2018 10:50 AM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 577 by ringo, posted 02-20-2018 10:49 AM ICANT has replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 566 of 1482 (828428)
02-17-2018 4:42 PM
Reply to: Message 563 by NoNukes
02-17-2018 1:01 AM


infinite
Hi NoNukes,
NoNukes writes:
What's wrong here is that you changed the subject from an argument that the universe is infinite in expanse to an argument about whether the universe is eternal.
Well I always thought that infinite was a synonym of eternal.
Is that wrong also?
NoNukes writes:
Now given that I am not making the latter argument, what is the point of your current discussion?
In Message 545 you asked the following question below my statement:
NoNukes writes:
But is ruled out because it would have already run out of energy without an endless supply of energy.
Can I see those computations, ICANT?
So you asked for my computations.
I understood you was asking why the universe would have already run out of energy without and endless supply of energy.
So I explained why the universe would need and endless supply of energy.
Now I ask you, If the following is wrong...?
quote:
1. There is x amount of energy in the universe.
2. To do work energy is transferred from concentrated, to less concentrated, which means there is less energy to do work.
3. That means the amount of usable energy becomes less every time the energy is used.
4. When energy reaches total equilibrium there is no more usable energy to do work.
5. Therefore the universe would begin to get colder and lifeless. It is already 3 degrees K (-454 degrees), in some places.
6. That would mean the universe could not have existed infinitely in the past as it would have run out of energy and reached total equilibrium a long time ago.
To please present the correct information?
God Bless,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 563 by NoNukes, posted 02-17-2018 1:01 AM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 567 by NoNukes, posted 02-17-2018 7:53 PM ICANT has replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 568 of 1482 (828473)
02-19-2018 12:04 AM
Reply to: Message 567 by NoNukes
02-17-2018 7:53 PM


Re: infinite
Hi NoNukes,
NoNukes writes:
In general, yes. In this case in particular, "infinite in expanse" would refer to size rather than duration.
So I am correct that infinite is a synonym of eternal.
Eternal is not a synonym of infinite.
Eternal: existing forever; without end or without beginning.
synonyms: everlasting, never-ending, endless, perpetual, undying, immortal; enduring, infinite, boundless, timeless;
Infinite: limitless or endless in space, extent, or size; impossible to measure or calculate.
synonyms: boundless, unbounded, unlimited, limitless, never-ending, interminable;
Now what was wrong with my statement I made to ringo?
Here is ringo's statement followed by my statement.
Message 566
ringo writes:
No. It only means that the universe was once smaller than it is now. A series of contractions and expansions would produce the same observations.
ringo is telling me that the universe contracted and expanded a series of times.
ICANT writes:
That would mean the universe was infinite, eternal, if that took place. But is ruled out because it would have already run out of energy without an endless supply of energy.
I still don't see where you get 'infinite expanse'.
ringo's statement requires the universe to be eternal.
The universe could not have existed infinitely, or eternally in the past as it would have run out of energy and reached total equilibrium a long time ago.
Unless energy was added as needed.
God Bless,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 567 by NoNukes, posted 02-17-2018 7:53 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 569 by NoNukes, posted 02-19-2018 2:38 AM ICANT has replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 570 of 1482 (828482)
02-19-2018 1:51 PM
Reply to: Message 569 by NoNukes
02-19-2018 2:38 AM


Re: infinite
Hi NoNukes,
NoNukes writes:
ICANT, I said the exact opposite of that. Infinite and eternal are not synonyms Infinite can refer to many things that are not time such as space, money, and an inability to grasp simple concepts. Your ability to not see a point appears to be nigh infinite.
In Message 567 you said:
NoNukes writes:
In general, yes. In this case in particular, "infinite in expanse" would refer to size rather than duration.
In General yes. In particular infinite in expanse would refer to size.
I don't remember where I was talking to ringo about an expanse.
But back to the question I asked.
quote:
Well I always thought that infinite was a synonym of eternal.
Is that wrong also?
Message 566
Question:
Is infinite a synonym of eternal?
Answer:
Eternal
adjective
meaning: lasting or existing forever; without end or beginning.
synonyms: everlasting, never-ending, endless, perpetual, undying, immortal, abiding, permanent, enduring infinite, boundless, timeless;
definition of eternal - Google Search
English Oxford dictionary
Eternal: adj. meaning: 1. Lasting or existing forever; without end.
synonyms: everlasting, never-ending, endless, without end, perpetual, undying, immortal, deathless, indestructible, imperishable, immutable, abiding, permanent, enduring, infinite, boundless, timeless
ETERNAL | Synonyms of ETERNAL by Oxford Dictionary on Lexico.com also antonyms of ETERNAL
God Bless,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 569 by NoNukes, posted 02-19-2018 2:38 AM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 571 by NoNukes, posted 02-19-2018 6:20 PM ICANT has replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 572 of 1482 (828486)
02-19-2018 6:31 PM
Reply to: Message 571 by NoNukes
02-19-2018 6:20 PM


Re: infinite
Hi NoNukes,
NoNukes writes:
Yes, it is also wrong that infinite and eternal are synonyms. And in case that was unclear, I gave also gave you some detail about what was wrong with your supposition.
If infinite is not a synonym of eternal why is it listed as a synonym of eternal in the references I gave you?
In one reference it is listed as a the definition of eternal.
God Bless,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 571 by NoNukes, posted 02-19-2018 6:20 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 573 by jar, posted 02-19-2018 6:39 PM ICANT has replied
 Message 576 by NoNukes, posted 02-20-2018 9:34 AM ICANT has replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


(1)
Message 574 of 1482 (828490)
02-20-2018 2:00 AM
Reply to: Message 573 by jar
02-19-2018 6:39 PM


Re: infinite
Hi jar,
jar writes:
Because Dictionaries do not record what is correct, only how words are used. Ignorance is often rampant.
Eternal is a synonym of everlasting, and unending.
Infinite is a synonym of eternal, everlasting, and endless.
So since you are your own god you make your own rules and you decide what is right and wrong.
Thus your proclamation that eternal and infinite is not a synonym.
God Bless,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 573 by jar, posted 02-19-2018 6:39 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 575 by jar, posted 02-20-2018 6:49 AM ICANT 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