Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 916,397 Year: 3,654/9,624 Month: 525/974 Week: 138/276 Day: 12/23 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   SIMPLE Astronomical Evidence Supports the Bible
coffee_addict
Member (Idle past 498 days)
Posts: 3645
From: Indianapolis, IN
Joined: 03-29-2004


Message 38 of 197 (199683)
04-15-2005 9:19 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by jar
04-15-2005 8:35 PM


Re: I know you think you're saying something
Where's Brad? Perhaps he could help us out.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by jar, posted 04-15-2005 8:35 PM jar has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by Brad McFall, posted 04-15-2005 9:37 PM coffee_addict has not replied

  
coffee_addict
Member (Idle past 498 days)
Posts: 3645
From: Indianapolis, IN
Joined: 03-29-2004


Message 187 of 197 (202824)
04-26-2005 9:27 PM
Reply to: Message 183 by ptolemy
04-26-2005 12:43 PM


Re: I'll bow out of this one I think.
ptolemy writes:
Eta writes:
ptolemy writes:
#4 Every spiral galaxy is a gravitational anomaly. Yet we can visibly see gas streams that connect their arms back to the core as though they were ejected.
Please get out your calculator and justify #4.
Physics, like all the sciences, eventually comes down to the fact you can either do it or you cannot. I don't think you can. You never provide a single calculation to be tied down to. It's all some artsy fartsy vague language and total off the wall craziness.
Even our ideas about gravity and our mathematical laws can’t explain a spiral galaxy without inventing invisible, undetectable things. You are proving my point. It is easier to believe in invisible things, than to question the assumption upon which the whole system is historically founded. If our first principle, an assumption, the one Peter predicted, is false, mathematics could not model the long ago or far away. Yet it could be adjusted to work with precision in close by spaces and times.
Of course it is vague. It is impossible to define with precision things like Western concepts of mass, energy and time if this little assumption is false.
You didn't answer his question. You said it is vague but you need to tell us how it is vague. Some calculations would be nice.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 183 by ptolemy, posted 04-26-2005 12:43 PM ptolemy has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024