Remove this ad
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  Next  Last
The Universe, god can't have created it
Scientist Moderator
digs 
35157 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M
Offline
Posted 6/4/09

KoomoriDesu wrote:

I know things that no one would believe... and if I tried to show you, ther eis chance you won't see.


I am actually very curious? What kinds of things? If you can't say it here would you PM me?
10521 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / In your room stea...
Offline
Posted 6/4/09 , edited 6/4/09

digs wrote:

And how does the OP prove that God couldn't have created the universe? Just because it's big and vast doesn't mean God didn't do it, on the contrary it supports that God did it. The earth is in the perfect spot for life, and many other things in our solar system effect that (like the moon with tides and Jupiter conveniently taking hits from asteroids for us). Our solar system is set up perfectly for life, and that is due to how the rest of the universe was created. God is not constrained by space and time as He is not bound by them. God created space and time so that the laws of the physical universe He created might be able to function in an orderly way. You judge God as if He has the mind of a human child, getting bored with things and then leaving because He is lost in the vastness of the universe. God is greater than the universe and is omnipresent. Here is a scientific article that shows how the universe and it's laws were intelligently designed so that matter and life can exist. http://creation.com/the-universe-is-finely-tuned-for-life


You obviously know nothing about astronomy. While yes our moon does effect tides, it had nothing to do with the formation of life, we are actually losing our moon, and eventually its going to get flung off into space, when it escapes earths gravity, and the moon has/had nothing to do with the formation of life. The moon was created early in the solar system when a mars sized planetesimal collided with the earth, while the planet was still molten, ejecting the material that cooled and now forms the moon, it really had nothing to do with life forming on this planet, as there was no solid crust yet, and thus no liquid water on its surface. And at that point the atmosphere was still mostly hydrogen and helium, thus no oxygen, oxygen came later after Autotrophic organisms turned the mostly CO2 atmosphere into one with oxygen.


Jupiter doesn't take hits from asteroids for us, thousands of meteorites enter the earths atmosphere every day. Every body in the solay system with the execption of the sun as its not solid and anything heading tward it would vaporize before it touched it, every body in the solar system will suffer collisions at some point. The earth is no exception. Also we've been struck by big meteors as well. Actually our solar system isn't set up perfectly for life, a true prefect solar system for life would be formed around a K V star(orange dwarf), which stays main sequence(main sequence = fusing hydrogen into helium) far longer then our G V star(orange dwarfs stay main sequence for 15 to 30 billion years) before swelling up to a red giant, our sun is only a yellow dwarf(G V star), which only stays main sequence for 10 billion years, actually our star will only allow life to exist on earth for another billion years, before the sun's output will increase enough to raise the surface tempature of the earth past the boiling point of water, (increase by 11%) and thus all the liquid water on the earth will boil off into the atmosphere, effectively killing all living things on earth.

Since these orange dwarfs stay main sequence for far longer, life on a planet orbiting the star has far longer to evolve and develop and further advance itself before it swells up into a red giant, thus killing the species. They are a true perfect solar system for life.


Learn more about astronomy before you talk. There are actually lots of things that can threaten life in our solar system, including, things from the oort cloud, comets, astroids, things from other solar systems too, like a planet that got flung out of its solar system could collide. The solar system is far from perfect, its a really delicate balance, a minor glitch could throw the solar system our of balance and cause a number of problems, like earth could get flung out of the solar system, one of the inner planets could collide with us or another inner planet. Learn more about astronomy before you talk. Wikipedia is your friend.
Scientist Moderator
digs 
35157 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M
Offline
Posted 6/4/09

Allhailodin wrote:


digs wrote:

And how does the OP prove that God couldn't have created the universe? Just because it's big and vast doesn't mean God didn't do it, on the contrary it supports that God did it. The earth is in the perfect spot for life, and many other things in our solar system effect that (like the moon with tides and Jupiter conveniently taking hits from asteroids for us). Our solar system is set up perfectly for life, and that is due to how the rest of the universe was created. God is not constrained by space and time as He is not bound by them. God created space and time so that the laws of the physical universe He created might be able to function in an orderly way. You judge God as if He has the mind of a human child, getting bored with things and then leaving because He is lost in the vastness of the universe. God is greater than the universe and is omnipresent. Here is a scientific article that shows how the universe and it's laws were intelligently designed so that matter and life can exist. http://creation.com/the-universe-is-finely-tuned-for-life


You obviously know nothing about astronomy. While yes our moon does effect tides, it had nothing to do with the formation of life, we are actually losing our moon, and eventually its going to get flung off into space, when it escapes earths gravity, and the moon has/had nothing to do with the formation of life. The moon was created early in the solar system when a mars sized planetesimal collided with the earth, while the planet was still molten, ejecting the material that cooled and now forms the moon, it really had nothing to do with life forming on this planet, as there was no solid crust yet, and thus no liquid water on its surface. And at that point the atmosphere was still mostly hydrogen and helium, thus no oxygen, oxygen came later after Autotrophic organisms turned the mostly CO2 atmosphere into one with oxygen.


Jupiter doesn't take hits from asteroids for us, thousands of meteorites enter the earths atmosphere every day. Every body in the solay system with the execption of the sun as its not solid and anything heading tward it would vaporize before it touched it, every body in the solar system will suffer collisions at some point. The earth is no exception. Also we've been struck by big meteors as well. Actually our solar system isn't set up perfectly for life, a true prefect solar system for life would be formed around a K V star(orange dwarf), which stays main sequence(main sequence = fusing hydrogen into helium) far longer then our G V star(orange dwarfs stay main sequence for 15 to 30 billion years) before swelling up to a red giant, our sun is only a yellow dwarf(G V star), which only stays main sequence for 10 billion years, actually our star will only allow life to exist on earth for another billion years, before the sun's output will increase enough to raise the surface tempature of the earth past the boiling point of water, (increase by 11%) and thus all the liquid water on the earth will boil off into the atmosphere, effectively killing all living things on earth.

Since these orange dwarfs stay main sequence for far longer, life on a planet orbiting the star has far longer to evolve and develop and further advance itself before it swells up into a red giant, thus killing the species. They are a true perfect solar system for life.


Learn more about astronomy before you talk. There are actually lots of things that can threaten life in our solar system, including, things from the oort cloud, comets, astroids, things from other solar systems too, like a planet that got flung out of its solar system could collide. The solar system is far from perfect, its a really delicate balance, a minor glitch could throw the solar system our of balance and cause a number of problems, like earth could get flung out of the solar system, one of the inner planets could collide with us or another inner planet. Learn more about astronomy before you talk. Wikipedia is your friend.


Science doesn't know how the moon formed according to naturalism. I know much about astronomy and I will say that the move is moving out by about 3.8cm per year. This fact alone proves that the earth is young, science believes the moon is about 4.25 billion years old, just like earth. Here is some scientific facts talking about the moon and its recession.



Friction by the tides is slowing the earth’s rotation, so the length of a day is increasing by 0.002 seconds per century. This means that the earth is losing angular momentum.7 The Law of Conservation of Angular Momentum says that the angular momentum the earth loses must be gained by the moon. Thus the moon is slowly receding from Earth at about 4 cm (1½ inches) per year, and the rate would have been greater in the past. The moon could never have been closer than 18,400 km (11,500 miles), known as the Roche Limit, because Earth’s tidal forces (i.e., the result of different gravitational forces on different parts of the moon) would have shattered it. But even if the moon had started receding from being in contact with the earth, it would have taken only 1.37 billion years to reach its present distance.8 NB: this is the maximum possible age — far too young for evolution (and much younger than the radiometric ‘dates’ assigned to moon rocks) — not the actual age.


Here are some theories on how the moon was formed. By the way there is no scientific consensus on how it formed if naturalism is correct.



Fission theory, invented by the astronomer George Darwin (son of Charles). He proposed that the earth spun so fast that a chunk broke off. But this theory is universally discarded today. The earth could never have spun fast enough to throw a moon into orbit, and the escaping moon would have been shattered while within the Roche Limit.
Capture theory — the moon was wandering through the solar system, and was captured by Earth’s gravity. But the chance of two bodies passing close enough is minute; the moon would be more likely to have been ‘slingshotted’ like artificial satellites than captured. Finally, even a successful capture would have resulted in an elongated comet-like orbit.
Condensation theory — the moon grew out of a dust cloud attracted by Earth’s gravity. However, no such cloud could be dense enough, and it doesn’t account for the moon’s low iron content.
Impact theory — the currently fashionable idea that material was blasted off from Earth by the impact of another object. Calculations show that to get enough material to form the moon, the impacting object would need to have been twice as massive as Mars. Then there is the unsolved problem of losing the excess angular momentum.


My point is that the earth has been created so so so so uniquely that none of this could have happened by chance and that the earth was created by God.
10521 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / In your room stea...
Offline
Posted 6/4/09

digs wrote:


Allhailodin wrote:


digs wrote:

And how does the OP prove that God couldn't have created the universe? Just because it's big and vast doesn't mean God didn't do it, on the contrary it supports that God did it. The earth is in the perfect spot for life, and many other things in our solar system effect that (like the moon with tides and Jupiter conveniently taking hits from asteroids for us). Our solar system is set up perfectly for life, and that is due to how the rest of the universe was created. God is not constrained by space and time as He is not bound by them. God created space and time so that the laws of the physical universe He created might be able to function in an orderly way. You judge God as if He has the mind of a human child, getting bored with things and then leaving because He is lost in the vastness of the universe. God is greater than the universe and is omnipresent. Here is a scientific article that shows how the universe and it's laws were intelligently designed so that matter and life can exist. http://creation.com/the-universe-is-finely-tuned-for-life


You obviously know nothing about astronomy. While yes our moon does effect tides, it had nothing to do with the formation of life, we are actually losing our moon, and eventually its going to get flung off into space, when it escapes earths gravity, and the moon has/had nothing to do with the formation of life. The moon was created early in the solar system when a mars sized planetesimal collided with the earth, while the planet was still molten, ejecting the material that cooled and now forms the moon, it really had nothing to do with life forming on this planet, as there was no solid crust yet, and thus no liquid water on its surface. And at that point the atmosphere was still mostly hydrogen and helium, thus no oxygen, oxygen came later after Autotrophic organisms turned the mostly CO2 atmosphere into one with oxygen.


Jupiter doesn't take hits from asteroids for us, thousands of meteorites enter the earths atmosphere every day. Every body in the solay system with the execption of the sun as its not solid and anything heading tward it would vaporize before it touched it, every body in the solar system will suffer collisions at some point. The earth is no exception. Also we've been struck by big meteors as well. Actually our solar system isn't set up perfectly for life, a true prefect solar system for life would be formed around a K V star(orange dwarf), which stays main sequence(main sequence = fusing hydrogen into helium) far longer then our G V star(orange dwarfs stay main sequence for 15 to 30 billion years) before swelling up to a red giant, our sun is only a yellow dwarf(G V star), which only stays main sequence for 10 billion years, actually our star will only allow life to exist on earth for another billion years, before the sun's output will increase enough to raise the surface tempature of the earth past the boiling point of water, (increase by 11%) and thus all the liquid water on the earth will boil off into the atmosphere, effectively killing all living things on earth.

Since these orange dwarfs stay main sequence for far longer, life on a planet orbiting the star has far longer to evolve and develop and further advance itself before it swells up into a red giant, thus killing the species. They are a true perfect solar system for life.


Learn more about astronomy before you talk. There are actually lots of things that can threaten life in our solar system, including, things from the oort cloud, comets, astroids, things from other solar systems too, like a planet that got flung out of its solar system could collide. The solar system is far from perfect, its a really delicate balance, a minor glitch could throw the solar system our of balance and cause a number of problems, like earth could get flung out of the solar system, one of the inner planets could collide with us or another inner planet. Learn more about astronomy before you talk. Wikipedia is your friend.


Science doesn't know how the moon formed according to naturalism. I know much about astronomy and I will say that the move is moving out by about 3.8cm per year. This fact alone proves that the earth is young, science believes the moon is about 4.25 billion years old, just like earth. Here is some scientific facts talking about the moon and its recession.



Friction by the tides is slowing the earth’s rotation, so the length of a day is increasing by 0.002 seconds per century. This means that the earth is losing angular momentum.7 The Law of Conservation of Angular Momentum says that the angular momentum the earth loses must be gained by the moon. Thus the moon is slowly receding from Earth at about 4 cm (1½ inches) per year, and the rate would have been greater in the past. The moon could never have been closer than 18,400 km (11,500 miles), known as the Roche Limit, because Earth’s tidal forces (i.e., the result of different gravitational forces on different parts of the moon) would have shattered it. But even if the moon had started receding from being in contact with the earth, it would have taken only 1.37 billion years to reach its present distance.8 NB: this is the maximum possible age — far too young for evolution (and much younger than the radiometric ‘dates’ assigned to moon rocks) — not the actual age.


Here are some theories on how the moon was formed. By the way there is no scientific consensus on how it formed if naturalism is correct.



Fission theory, invented by the astronomer George Darwin (son of Charles). He proposed that the earth spun so fast that a chunk broke off. But this theory is universally discarded today. The earth could never have spun fast enough to throw a moon into orbit, and the escaping moon would have been shattered while within the Roche Limit.
Capture theory — the moon was wandering through the solar system, and was captured by Earth’s gravity. But the chance of two bodies passing close enough is minute; the moon would be more likely to have been ‘slingshotted’ like artificial satellites than captured. Finally, even a successful capture would have resulted in an elongated comet-like orbit.
Condensation theory — the moon grew out of a dust cloud attracted by Earth’s gravity. However, no such cloud could be dense enough, and it doesn’t account for the moon’s low iron content.
Impact theory — the currently fashionable idea that material was blasted off from Earth by the impact of another object. Calculations show that to get enough material to form the moon, the impacting object would need to have been twice as massive as Mars. Then there is the unsolved problem of losing the excess angular momentum.


My point is that the earth has been created so so so so uniquely that none of this could have happened by chance and that the earth was created by God.


Do you know how planets form ? Do you know how stars form ? Do you know what the nebular hypothesis is ? It explains how all the planets in the solar system formed, including earth, when our solar system formed from its nebula, even the gas and ice giants, and earth really isn't too unique, there are other earth like planets out there capable of supporting life as we know it, we have found them, now that we have the ability to detect those small exosolar terestrial planets, we couldn't really before, all we could detect was the jupiter like gas giants in other solar systems. We've found that nature forms planets that can support life, as it did with the earth. We've found a few of em. Earth isn't as unique as we once through it was. Turns out life actually might be a rather common thing in the universe. But if you knew a lot about astronomy you'd know that right ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planet_formation <---- Read this, don't just skim it. Explains step by step how the earth formed.

Besides you obviously don't know too much about astronomy as you once told me that stars do not fuse elements into other elements, and that is exactly what they do, when they are main sequence, they are actively fusing hydrogen into helium. Through nuclear fusion. ANd later on heavier elements get fused.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star <--- Also read this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_fusion <-- In case you don't know what nuclear fusion is, read this.
1114 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Canda
Offline
Posted 6/4/09
do you think that if god made this galaxy, he would make the edge first??
it would make more sense to create the inner, more larger stars first

Okay , Daniel when God Created the universe he had a plan for all of us, because he exist outside time and space. So that means that he would have a plan on why he would create the outside first. Everything that god does is for our love. When he created the universe he started the outside first because he wanted for us to discover truth of the universe.

I'll get back to your other questions XD
13799 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / ~ I am in a hut,...
Offline
Posted 6/4/09 , edited 6/4/09
Instead of unsurely ranting over something that doesn't even really concern your daily life, why not wait till the afterlife, providing there is one to find out.


Let Christians be Christians.

Personally I don't believe in god but I will not say he isn't real, because i'm not completely sure.


Edit*

When you assholes are saying

"When God did this, he did it because blah blah

FUCK YOU! Shut up, you weren't there, you have NO idea what motive he had behind what he did, for all HUMANITY knows he could be a giant rabbit with lazer beam eyes.
Posted 6/5/09

Animelovexx wrote:

Instead of unsurely ranting over something that doesn't even really concern your daily life, why not wait till the afterlife, providing there is one to find out.


Let Christians be Christians.

Personally I don't believe in god but I will not say he isn't real, because i'm not completely sure.


Edit*

When you assholes are saying

"When God did this, he did it because blah blah

FUCK YOU! Shut up, you weren't there, you have NO idea what motive he had behind what he did, for all HUMANITY knows he could be a giant rabbit with lazer beam eyes.


and you could be just another dump on the universe ^^
13799 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / ~ I am in a hut,...
Offline
Posted 6/5/09

life-oxygen wrote:


Animelovexx wrote:

Instead of unsurely ranting over something that doesn't even really concern your daily life, why not wait till the afterlife, providing there is one to find out.


Let Christians be Christians.

Personally I don't believe in god but I will not say he isn't real, because i'm not completely sure.


Edit*

When you assholes are saying

"When God did this, he did it because blah blah

FUCK YOU! Shut up, you weren't there, you have NO idea what motive he had behind what he did, for all HUMANITY knows he could be a giant rabbit with lazer beam eyes.


and you could be just another dump on the universe ^^


My point exactly.
1244 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 6/5/09
Scientist Moderator
digs 
35157 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M
Offline
Posted 6/5/09

Allhailodin wrote:


digs wrote:


Allhailodin wrote:


digs wrote:

And how does the OP prove that God couldn't have created the universe? Just because it's big and vast doesn't mean God didn't do it, on the contrary it supports that God did it. The earth is in the perfect spot for life, and many other things in our solar system effect that (like the moon with tides and Jupiter conveniently taking hits from asteroids for us). Our solar system is set up perfectly for life, and that is due to how the rest of the universe was created. God is not constrained by space and time as He is not bound by them. God created space and time so that the laws of the physical universe He created might be able to function in an orderly way. You judge God as if He has the mind of a human child, getting bored with things and then leaving because He is lost in the vastness of the universe. God is greater than the universe and is omnipresent. Here is a scientific article that shows how the universe and it's laws were intelligently designed so that matter and life can exist. http://creation.com/the-universe-is-finely-tuned-for-life


You obviously know nothing about astronomy. While yes our moon does effect tides, it had nothing to do with the formation of life, we are actually losing our moon, and eventually its going to get flung off into space, when it escapes earths gravity, and the moon has/had nothing to do with the formation of life. The moon was created early in the solar system when a mars sized planetesimal collided with the earth, while the planet was still molten, ejecting the material that cooled and now forms the moon, it really had nothing to do with life forming on this planet, as there was no solid crust yet, and thus no liquid water on its surface. And at that point the atmosphere was still mostly hydrogen and helium, thus no oxygen, oxygen came later after Autotrophic organisms turned the mostly CO2 atmosphere into one with oxygen.


Jupiter doesn't take hits from asteroids for us, thousands of meteorites enter the earths atmosphere every day. Every body in the solay system with the execption of the sun as its not solid and anything heading tward it would vaporize before it touched it, every body in the solar system will suffer collisions at some point. The earth is no exception. Also we've been struck by big meteors as well. Actually our solar system isn't set up perfectly for life, a true prefect solar system for life would be formed around a K V star(orange dwarf), which stays main sequence(main sequence = fusing hydrogen into helium) far longer then our G V star(orange dwarfs stay main sequence for 15 to 30 billion years) before swelling up to a red giant, our sun is only a yellow dwarf(G V star), which only stays main sequence for 10 billion years, actually our star will only allow life to exist on earth for another billion years, before the sun's output will increase enough to raise the surface tempature of the earth past the boiling point of water, (increase by 11%) and thus all the liquid water on the earth will boil off into the atmosphere, effectively killing all living things on earth.

Since these orange dwarfs stay main sequence for far longer, life on a planet orbiting the star has far longer to evolve and develop and further advance itself before it swells up into a red giant, thus killing the species. They are a true perfect solar system for life.


Learn more about astronomy before you talk. There are actually lots of things that can threaten life in our solar system, including, things from the oort cloud, comets, astroids, things from other solar systems too, like a planet that got flung out of its solar system could collide. The solar system is far from perfect, its a really delicate balance, a minor glitch could throw the solar system our of balance and cause a number of problems, like earth could get flung out of the solar system, one of the inner planets could collide with us or another inner planet. Learn more about astronomy before you talk. Wikipedia is your friend.


Science doesn't know how the moon formed according to naturalism. I know much about astronomy and I will say that the move is moving out by about 3.8cm per year. This fact alone proves that the earth is young, science believes the moon is about 4.25 billion years old, just like earth. Here is some scientific facts talking about the moon and its recession.



Friction by the tides is slowing the earth’s rotation, so the length of a day is increasing by 0.002 seconds per century. This means that the earth is losing angular momentum.7 The Law of Conservation of Angular Momentum says that the angular momentum the earth loses must be gained by the moon. Thus the moon is slowly receding from Earth at about 4 cm (1½ inches) per year, and the rate would have been greater in the past. The moon could never have been closer than 18,400 km (11,500 miles), known as the Roche Limit, because Earth’s tidal forces (i.e., the result of different gravitational forces on different parts of the moon) would have shattered it. But even if the moon had started receding from being in contact with the earth, it would have taken only 1.37 billion years to reach its present distance.8 NB: this is the maximum possible age — far too young for evolution (and much younger than the radiometric ‘dates’ assigned to moon rocks) — not the actual age.


Here are some theories on how the moon was formed. By the way there is no scientific consensus on how it formed if naturalism is correct.



Fission theory, invented by the astronomer George Darwin (son of Charles). He proposed that the earth spun so fast that a chunk broke off. But this theory is universally discarded today. The earth could never have spun fast enough to throw a moon into orbit, and the escaping moon would have been shattered while within the Roche Limit.
Capture theory — the moon was wandering through the solar system, and was captured by Earth’s gravity. But the chance of two bodies passing close enough is minute; the moon would be more likely to have been ‘slingshotted’ like artificial satellites than captured. Finally, even a successful capture would have resulted in an elongated comet-like orbit.
Condensation theory — the moon grew out of a dust cloud attracted by Earth’s gravity. However, no such cloud could be dense enough, and it doesn’t account for the moon’s low iron content.
Impact theory — the currently fashionable idea that material was blasted off from Earth by the impact of another object. Calculations show that to get enough material to form the moon, the impacting object would need to have been twice as massive as Mars. Then there is the unsolved problem of losing the excess angular momentum.


My point is that the earth has been created so so so so uniquely that none of this could have happened by chance and that the earth was created by God.


Do you know how planets form ? Do you know how stars form ? Do you know what the nebular hypothesis is ? It explains how all the planets in the solar system formed, including earth, when our solar system formed from its nebula, even the gas and ice giants, and earth really isn't too unique, there are other earth like planets out there capable of supporting life as we know it, we have found them, now that we have the ability to detect those small exosolar terestrial planets, we couldn't really before, all we could detect was the jupiter like gas giants in other solar systems. We've found that nature forms planets that can support life, as it did with the earth. We've found a few of em. Earth isn't as unique as we once through it was. Turns out life actually might be a rather common thing in the universe. But if you knew a lot about astronomy you'd know that right ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planet_formation <---- Read this, don't just skim it. Explains step by step how the earth formed.

Besides you obviously don't know too much about astronomy as you once told me that stars do not fuse elements into other elements, and that is exactly what they do, when they are main sequence, they are actively fusing hydrogen into helium. Through nuclear fusion. ANd later on heavier elements get fused.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star <--- Also read this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_fusion <-- In case you don't know what nuclear fusion is, read this.


Does anyone know how planets form? Or how stars form? People have theories and models, but none have been proven or observed. The planets formed because God created them that way. All the theories suggesting a naturalists view of the cosmos has serious flaws that largely just don't get discussed or are theorized by something else. They say something that they believe could have happened and seems to make scientific sense, but they can't prove it or explain the holes within their theory. Life is not a common thing in the universe, and so far it has been limited just to earth. Scientists may speculate that other planets may be able to support life based on their distance from a star, but they don't know the other factors like the atmosphere, magnetic field, radiation from their star, and other things. Life didn't evolve, and life didn't start on its own because all the right materials were set in place. Even so, why do DNA patterns code for a straight? Who wrote that pattern and who determined the genetics? If life evolved why did it evolve? What guided that process? DNA and genetics have no mind of their own and they can't intelligently choose to adapt to things and nothing within any biological organism causes genetics to change based on what that organism is experiencing. The Big Bang, evolution, and all of naturalistic science has serious flaws and holes and refuses to address them. There is no scientific way to explain those holes, and all of their models and theories have failed. But instead of embracing the truth they want to ignore it and just call creationists "anti-science" and "not science." It's how they address it, but ignoring it and insulting it.
779 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / F / Chair,home,near t...
Offline
Posted 6/5/09
God made the universe and that is it!
10521 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / In your room stea...
Offline
Posted 6/5/09 , edited 6/5/09

digs wrote:



Does anyone know how planets form? Or how stars form? People have theories and models, but none have been proven or observed. The planets formed because God created them that way. All the theories suggesting a naturalists view of the cosmos has serious flaws that largely just don't get discussed or are theorized by something else. They say something that they believe could have happened and seems to make scientific sense, but they can't prove it or explain the holes within their theory. Life is not a common thing in the universe, and so far it has been limited just to earth. Scientists may speculate that other planets may be able to support life based on their distance from a star, but they don't know the other factors like the atmosphere, magnetic field, radiation from their star, and other things. Life didn't evolve, and life didn't start on its own because all the right materials were set in place. Even so, why do DNA patterns code for a straight? Who wrote that pattern and who determined the genetics? If life evolved why did it evolve? What guided that process? DNA and genetics have no mind of their own and they can't intelligently choose to adapt to things and nothing within any biological organism causes genetics to change based on what that organism is experiencing. The Big Bang, evolution, and all of naturalistic science has serious flaws and holes and refuses to address them. There is no scientific way to explain those holes, and all of their models and theories have failed. But instead of embracing the truth they want to ignore it and just call creationists "anti-science" and "not science." It's how they address it, but ignoring it and insulting it.


We know how stars and planets form, because we have seen them form, we have observed them form, and we have ample evidence to back up the nebular hypothesis theory, it is how planets form, you didn't even read it did you, so go and read it before saying something like we've never observed it or it has holes in it. We can determine the contents of a distant planets atmosphere, i don't personally know all the details as to how that works, but i know we can. So we can determine if a exoplanet is capable of supporting life. And if it is then chances are life is there. The big bang really doesn't have any flaws either. not to mention. there is an entire mountain range of evidence to support and back up the big bang theory. So actually read the articles before saying they have flaws.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_formation <--- Star formation, actually read it. Has been observed, says so in the article.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planet_formation <---- Planet formation, again actually read it. Explains step by step how the earth formed, read. I believe it too has been observed, as protoplanetary disks around a star.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_bang <--- Big bang, which has ample evidence to support it.
11142 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
18 / F / Indonesia Raya
Offline
Posted 6/5/09
why you guys always not make your post shor?t.

Or at least give some space before you posting?

Like What I did here?
Tl;dr.

God is God. Big Bang proven that. God says in Holy Book that He created planet fro explosion.

And scientist opened their mouth widely when they saw Big Bang
Scientist Moderator
digs 
35157 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M
Offline
Posted 6/5/09 , edited 6/5/09

Allhailodin wrote:


digs wrote:



Does anyone know how planets form? Or how stars form? People have theories and models, but none have been proven or observed. The planets formed because God created them that way. All the theories suggesting a naturalists view of the cosmos has serious flaws that largely just don't get discussed or are theorized by something else. They say something that they believe could have happened and seems to make scientific sense, but they can't prove it or explain the holes within their theory. Life is not a common thing in the universe, and so far it has been limited just to earth. Scientists may speculate that other planets may be able to support life based on their distance from a star, but they don't know the other factors like the atmosphere, magnetic field, radiation from their star, and other things. Life didn't evolve, and life didn't start on its own because all the right materials were set in place. Even so, why do DNA patterns code for a straight? Who wrote that pattern and who determined the genetics? If life evolved why did it evolve? What guided that process? DNA and genetics have no mind of their own and they can't intelligently choose to adapt to things and nothing within any biological organism causes genetics to change based on what that organism is experiencing. The Big Bang, evolution, and all of naturalistic science has serious flaws and holes and refuses to address them. There is no scientific way to explain those holes, and all of their models and theories have failed. But instead of embracing the truth they want to ignore it and just call creationists "anti-science" and "not science." It's how they address it, but ignoring it and insulting it.


We know how stars and planets form, because we have seen them form, we have observed them form, and we have ample evidence to back up the nebular hypothesis theory, it is how planets form, you didn't even read it did you, so go and read it before saying something like we've never observed it or it has holes in it. We can determine the contents of a distant planets atmosphere, i don't personally know all the details as to how that works, but i know we can. So we can determine if a exoplanet is capable of supporting life. And if it is then chances are life is there. The big bang really doesn't have any flaws either. not to mention. there is an entire mountain range of evidence to support and back up the big bang theory. So actually read the articles before saying they have flaws.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_formation <--- Star formation, actually read it. Has been observed, says so in the article.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planet_formation <---- Planet formation, again actually read it. Explains step by step how the earth formed, read. I believe it too has been observed, as protoplanetary disks around a star.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_bang <--- Big bang, which has ample evidence to support it.


I'll read them, but wikipedia isn't the best source and anyone can edit, so it's highly scientific unless you draw from the cited sources.

And we have never observed a planet or star being created, we have seen nebulas and figured one was being made, but we can't prove it and we haven't documented the creation of a planet. Here is a good site discussing some of the major flaws and holes within evolutionary and naturalistic explanations to the existence of the universe and the formation of things within the universe. http://creation.com/astronomy-and-astrophysics-questions-and-answers

More specifically, you might want to read this.


Some of the moons have so many craters that present processes cannot explain them, even using evolutionary time scales. An authoritative book said about Saturn’s moon Iapetus: ‘At estimated current rates it would require one thousand billion years to produce the crater density observed.’7 This implies that there must have been much higher, (i.e. catastrophic) rates of cratering in the past, which would explain how our moon, for example, can be only thousands of years old, yet have the craters it does.

What could cause catastrophes in the solar system? First, a planet in the region between Mars and Jupiter is a possibility that has been suggested by many scientists, destroyed to produce the objects we now call the asteroids. A further possibility would be a cloud of solid debris from outside the solar system passing through the solar system.

A large collision in the region beyond Neptune would obviously produce many fragments that could take many different paths away from the impact. A few fragments could be ‘captured’ into orbit around a planet, for instance. Neptune’s moon Nereid seems to be a likely candidate for having been captured, because of its extremely elongated orbit.

Neptune’s rings have thick regions and thin regions. This unevenness means they cannot be billions of years old, since collisions of the ring objects would eventually make the ring very uniform. A collision near Neptune could lead to the destruction of one or more moons, as they were forced to pass too close to the planet. At a certain distance near a planet, known as the Roche limit, an object can be literally pulled apart by gravity. This could explain at least some of the rings of the planets, especially those of Neptune. One major collision event could cause a number of other collisions, capture, or breakup events.

The moons of Jupiter, studied by the Galileo mission, display a surprising mix of ‘old’ and ‘young’ features. Using the assumption of uniformity (i.e. that cratering rates have always been more or less the same) older objects should be more heavily cratered than young ones. Yet here we find the moon Callisto, which is the most heavily cratered object known in the solar system, and its sister moon Europa, with the smoothest surface of all.8 Although Europa’s craters may have been filled with ice, the heavier cratering on Callisto could be the result of regional catastrophic events, with both moons the same age.

Another Jovian moon, Io, surprised astronomers by indications of volcanic activity. Such a body, much smaller than the earth, should have long ago lost all its internal heat, if it was billions of years old. So in line with the ‘old ages’ idea, a complex model was developed in which Jupiter’s gravity rhythmically ‘squeezes’ Io to keep heating it by friction. However, this heat from Jupiter’s gravity cannot account for all the heat coming from Io and its volcanoes. This points to Io being young, not billions of years old.

Problems for evolution
The accepted evolutionary view of the origin of the solar system is usually called the Nebular Hypothesis. In this model, a giant cloud in space made up of mainly spinning, ionized gas with a magnetic field is believed to have pulled together by gravity into the sun, planets and other objects in our solar system. Computer simulations of this process do not start with initial conditions like those of real nebulas, and have other problems. One scientist summarized these by saying ‘The clouds are too hot, too magnetic, and they rotate too rapidly.’9 The contraction produces effects that tend to make the formation of planets impossible.10 One scientist described the Nebular Hypothesis as the theory with the ‘best fit’ to the observational evidence. However, he then stated that: ‘The argument is highly speculative and some of it borders on science fiction.’11

There is a particularly thorny problem for evolutionary solar system models. Everyone has watched accomplished skaters spin on ice. As skaters pull their arms in, their radius decreases and they spin faster. This effect is due to what physicists call the Law of Conservation of Angular Momentum. In the formation of our Sun from a nebula in space, the same effect would occur as the gases contracted into the centre to form the Sun. This would cause the sun to spin very rapidly as a result of this law. Actually, our sun spins very slowly while the planets move very rapidly around the sun.12 This pattern is directly opposite to the pattern predicted for the Nebular Hypothesis. Many scientists today no doubt assume that modern theories have solved this problem. But a well-known solar system scientist Dr Stuart Ross Taylor, has said in a recent book, ‘The ultimate origin of the solar system’s angular momentum remains obscure’.13

There is a competing evolutionary model for the origin of the solar system, called the Capture Theory. In this, a passing protostar, loosely held together, passes close to our Sun whose gravity pulls off a filament of the star’s material, which breaks up into segments that become six planets (not the current nine). Then two of these six collide and the asteroids, Venus, Earth, Mars, and our Moon represent either fragments of the collision or moons of the two planets that collided.14 The Capture Theory is considered unlikely by most astronomers and has unique problems of its own. Interestingly, today some catastrophes are being invoked to explain the solar system.

Dr Jonathan Henry, who teaches science at Clearwater Christian College, believes the solar system evidence to be consistent with a universal catastrophe, which he associates with God’s curse on all creation (Genesis 3). Dr Henry postulates that this was when (initially rapid) radioactive and other decay processes (including of planetary magnetic fields) began. This led to enormous interior heating and volcanism. By this approach, the asteroids would be the remnants of the disintegration of a planet from such internal overheating.15 This heating could have been a trigger of some processes in the Flood of Noah. It is also possible that some asteroids were created as they are and some are the result of collisions. A solar-system-wide bombardment event of some kind would explain widespread cratering within a young universe.

Christians should welcome the flow of new discoveries in space which, stripped of their evolutionary assumptions, continually highlight the incredible greatness and creativity of our God.


The planet Mercury also causes many problems for naturalism.
http://creation.com/mercurythe-tiny-planet-that-causes-big-problems-for-evolution

Also, the earth isn't just a special and completely unique planet created just perfectly for life, but our sun was also created and positioned perfectly in our galaxy, it's orbit is also perfect and it's stability is extremely rare yet just right for life. http://creation.com/the-sun-our-special-star


Anti-theists are fond of dismissing the sun as a run-of-the-mill star in a not-too-special place in a galactic spiral arm. It is true that many stars are far bigger and brighter than the sun. However, saying that bigger stars are more important is as illogical as saying that a 7–foot man is more important than a 5–foot woman.

Recent research has called the sun ‘exceptional’.2 Our sun is among the top 10% (by mass) of stars in its neighbourhood.2 It is actually an ideal size to support life on earth. There would be little point in having a red supergiant star like Betelgeuse, because it is so huge that it would engulf all the inner planets! Nor would we want a star like the blue-white supergiant Rigel, 25,000 times as bright as the sun, and emitting too much high-frequency radiation. Conversely, a star much smaller than our sun would be too faint to support life, unless the planet were so close to the star that there would be dangerous gravitational tides.

The sun is in an ideal environment. It is a single star—most stars exist in multiple-star systems. A planet in such a system would suffer extreme temperature variations. The sun’s position in our spiral Milky Way Galaxy is also ideal. Its orbit is fairly circular, meaning that it won’t go too near the inner galaxy where supernovae, extremely energetic star explosions, are more common.2 It also orbits almost parallel to the galactic plane—otherwise, crossing this plane would be very disruptive.2 Furthermore, the sun is at an ideal distance from the galactic centre, called the co-rotation radius. Only here does a star’s orbital speed match that of the spiral arms—otherwise the sun would cross the arms too often and be exposed to supernovae.2

Our sun is a powerful object, often throwing out flares, and every few years (usually around sunspot maximum—Sunspots, Galileo and heliocentrism), more violent ejections called coronal mass ejections (see photo, left). They cause huge electric currents in earth’s upper atmosphere and disrupt power grids and satellites. In 1989, one disabled a power grid in northern Quebec. But the sun turns out to be an ‘exceptionally stable’3 star. Three astronomers recently studied single stars of the same size, brightness and composition of the sun. Almost all of them erupt about once a century in superflares 100 to 100 million times more powerful than the one that blacked out Quebec. If the sun were to erupt in such a superflare, it would destroy earth’s ozone layer, with catastrophic results for life.4


Evolutionists and Naturalists like to push the Nebular hypothesis, the Big Bang model, and other theories as facts that prove that the universe came to existence through natural and sometimes catastrophic processes. These things aren't fact.
5231 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / M / Mammago Garage, Y...
Offline
Posted 6/5/09

Ryutai-Desk wrote:

why you guys always not make your post shor?t.


Because this is Extended Discussion, meaning that people are supposed to give extended, detailed, thoughtful responses. If you want something simple and short, go pick up a picture book.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.