Huge!

[prometheus]

I would explain it all to you if you would actually care. If you really do want to know how stars work then you need to abandon the ideas you already have about their workings.

You need to accept nature as she is. Now I doubt your ability or intention here because of past experiences. One of those recents statements:

if everything was up to 'chance,' there would be no life on earth.

This was aimed at evolution, which says something totally different. And that is something I have tried to explain many times.

So maybe buy a book.

Or maybe try this:
https://webcast.berkeley.edu/courses/archive.php?seriesid=1906978334


The one of last year that is already finished:
https://webcast.berkeley.edu/courses/archive.php?seriesid=1906978237

[pianistimo]

www.astro.queensu.ca/~hanes/p015/Notes/33._Radio_Astronomy.html#PART%203

five second ago.  i was speed reading about radiometry.  it didn't help  my argument.  just be nice and argue both sides for me, ok.  what i understand is that our 'science' is very 'imprecise' and different things that are 'for sure' 10 years ago - are proven something else now.  all i'm saying is 'why doubt God?'  if He says it was 6,000 years ago - then it was.

dear prometheus,

berkley doesn't have any major astronomical equipment. 

[thalbergmad]

all i'm saying is 'why doubt God?'  if He says it was 6,000 years ago - then it was.

Where does God say that the sun is 6,000 years old??

I think (i might be wrong) you are referring to a Bishop who arrived at that age by adding up the ages of the ancestors of Jesus all the way back to Adam. If memory serves me, he worked out that the Universe was created in 4084BC.

Therefore, God has not said that the Sun or Universe is 6,000 old and neither has the Bible, it was just some Bishop with a sense of humour.

So please do a bit more research before posting nonsense.

Thal

[prometheus]

What i understand is that our 'science' is very 'imprecise'

Doesn't matter. There is no alternative. You either know things imprecise or you don't know anything. We do know that science gets less imprecise every day.

and different things that are 'for sure' 10 years ago - are proven something else now.

Well, the big bang theory exists since 1927 and has only been improved.

Darwinistic evolution was first proposed in 1859 and has been revisited many times and is thus getting stronger every day.

berkley doesn't have any major astronomical equipment. 

It is an alternative to a book. The guy that does the lectures does do research. But not at Berkeley because it is an university.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexei_Filippenko
 The things he says are largely accepted scientific consensus based on all the astronomical equipment we humans created.

Ok, I just discovered the first lecture of this season was recorded with a broken mike. Just use the first lecture of a previous year. The other lectures are ok.

[pianistimo]

dear thal,

if it was 4,084 BC then adding 2006 years to that would be 6,090 total. 

dear prometheus,

i will listen to the lectures now.  wow.  prometheus.  you hit the jackpot on lectures from this guy.  this may take some time.  the stupid computer i have here doesn't have sound right now.  i might have to wait until tommorrow morning when my daughter is gone to listen on hers.   i have something for you:

www.detectingdesign.com/definingevolution.html

at exactly what rate is the universe expanding?

[thalbergmad]

Dear Pianistimo,

Please answer my question.

I need to know where God says the sun is 6,000 years old.

Thanks

[pianistimo]

Dear Thal,

you answered your own question.   ok.  here's the thing.  we have geneological records that the rabbis did back to adam and eve.  i've done this myself.  the bible usually states how old a person is when they have their firstborn son.  then, you take the age of the firstborn son when he has his son - and so on.  it's really quite easy.  then we add 2006.  it's simple math.  if our current creation was at the time of adam and eve - then it couldn't have been more than a few years plus or minus 6,000 years.  Susan

[cziffra]

he asked where god had said it, not how you or any other mere mortal reached that conclusion.

[pianistimo]

oh.  i see.  i could never be a scientist.  in any case - it's all wrapped up neatly.  now if you want to go and mess it all up - be my guest.  just don't expect me to be cleaning it up all the time.

[donjuan]

oh.  i see.  i could never be a scientist.

nope, I guess not; the world knows better.

God creating the sun 6000 years ago doesn't make any sense, considering the plant fossils found here on earth and proven to be millions of years old.

don

[cziffra]

oh.  i see.  i could never be a scientist.  in any case - it's all wrapped up neatly.  now if you want to go and mess it all up - be my guest.  just don't expect me to be cleaning it up all the time.

What is this rambling supposed to convey?

[prometheus]

Like I said, Pianistimo must believe god created everything 6000 years ago looking 13,7 billion years old. So with the fossil record we see now. Dinosaurs never existed, god just created their fossils looking older than 65 million years.

In other words, a trickster god.

Otherwise, you have a huge huge problem.

[jpianoflorida]

so basically it's easier for some people to believe what scientists claim(ok, you are going to say " proved", which you are still relying on what they "find"--you can't really prove science as well as one might think)   and that everything just evolved ,rather than believing in a God who made it all happen.     Hmnnn...weird that you can have faith in "happenstance" rather than something planned.

[jpianoflorida]

and prometheus..since you will have a reply to this one...tell me in a few words how you think the universe started?  where did it all begin? 

[prometheus]

I don't know.

I only know that we can observe what happened after the universe started to exist. We see all the signs of an universe that expanded from a singular point 13.7 billion years ago. We don't know much about the first moments. But after a while the universe cooled down because it had expanded and then protons and neutrons formed. And they later formed hydrogen and a little helium. And they formed stars. Stars fuse hydrogen into heavier atoms. This means that all the matter from which you and I exist come from the core of a now long-dead star. We are all star dust.
This all goes according to the laws of nature, as they now are. It goes automatically.

So I don't know, but I am not satisfied with that. Saying 'God did it' has the same meaning, you don't know, except that it has the nuance you are satisfied with it.

I just want to be sure. I don't want to believe in something just to have the illusion I know something. So I rather don't know while being unsatisfied while not knowing and being satisfied.

 

[jpianoflorida]

Thanks..that was what I wanted, just to understand why you think the way you do! I didn't want to start a debate or more controversy..I just wanted to understand more! and you did that .thanks.

[ihatepop]

The universe is so....big. How does anything we do matter at all? (thinking about big question)

ihatepop

[prometheus]

Doesn't it matter for us? For the people around us? For the planet earth? The animals and plants on it?

In the end this is small. But the idea that we should have an effect on the cosmic scale is a very strange one, isn't it?

[jpianoflorida]

ihatepop you are very young....no offense meant but you don't totally grasp it all yet...   does prometheus know your age?

[prometheus]

Yes 12, but the question is a fair one. I have had it sometimes. Some people think that our lives have to be able to influence the course of the entire universe before they are worthwhile. I think I had that idea somewhere in my life as well.

[jpianoflorida]

yes..we all question..and our views are often different as we age..

i thought differently at 12, and 24 and 30 and 40   ..ok ,41 now...and i look back and can't believe some of the things I use to think about life! 

I took ihatepop's post to mean "It doesn't matter what we do"....maybe i read it wrong, maybe he was actually asking a question. 

[pianistimo]

we are all star dust?  i thought the dirt of the earth had more 'elements' than star dust.  but, not being a scientist - i could be proven wrong.  also, in response to the question about fossils of plants being supposedly older than 6,000 years.  IF they are - they could have been another creation before ours.  the angels that fell away from God (1/3 of the angels) may have been responsible for a first creation of the earth which might have included the dinosaurs and plant life.  but, if this was occuring BEFORE our creation - then we would have a NEW sun and a NEW moon.  this is not an impossible thought -because a whole new 'heavens and earth' await us according to revelations.  a sun and moon are easy for God to create.  if all He has to do is say the Word - then He can make anything into anything at any time and any place - and He can make it look old or young.

take adam and eve - for instance.  He could have made them babies - but He chose to make them adults.  now, imagine that right after adam was created - if we hadn't seen God - we would ASSUME that adam was not the first man.  and, that he had been a child and grown to adulthood (perhaps raised by a wolf - if no humans were around).  but, this is the point - miracles go beyond what we see and think and assume.  so - time is really a trick!  we don't know!  we don't know how old the earth is - we don't know how old the universe is - and we are told how old our literal creation is.  if God chose to have another creation before ours - how can we argue?  perhaps the earth in genesis was covered with water (as genesis 1:1 - 2) implies that in the VERY beginning God made the heavens and the earth - and the earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep; and the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the WATERS.  now - this could either be the CORE of the earth - or a flooded creation that existed before us.  but certainly could not include our present day sun/moon because they were created on the fourth day.  also, he made our stars (perhaps only in our galaxy - but, who knows?)  i don't know if God expected that we would find other galaxies or not.  but, so far - we have not found other life. 

[pianistimo]

i am curious what is at the core of the earth because it was once thought that it was iron and something else (nickel?) - and now scientists are looking at holes in the ocean floor that seem to be allowing water to pass from under the ocean, into it.  fissures. 

another curiousity - is how stars form.  we know how they burn - but how do they start?  i read something about creation in nebula...but have we actually witnessed stars being born?  how about our own galaxy?  are they only born outside our galaxy? 

[debussy symbolism]

If you want to know how stars were formed, what better way to know than to actually study them, and not follow some text pronounced holy. Yes, science is evolving and is constantly disproven, but the Bible has no proof to start with. It might just as well be a book of fake knowledge.

[pianistimo]

why do you say that, if you cannot disprove it?  if we are as small as is indicated by the picture this thread started with - we can keep finding things out (and science is good for that) but we cannot get to the end of things very fast.  yet, the bible tells us the end from the beginning.  so, imo, it's a good starting point.

why do some people think that all religious people are anti-science?  none of my friends are. i'm not.  i have not studied science in depth - but my husband has a degree in physics.  i admired this about him - to study electronics and radio waves, etc.

i actually find genesis interesting to glean info from and compare to what scientists have discovered.  for instance, with the 'big bang' theory - it is thought that a huge amount of energy emanated from a single atom.  but, if there are so many elements to the universe - this single atom would have had to be able to generate all these elements. 

genesis says simply that God created them (heavens and earth) and therefore the elements would also be created.  and, the energy behind them (perhaps more than microwave energy?). 

[debussy symbolism]

why do you say that, if you cannot disprove it?  if we are as small as is indicated by the picture this thread started with - we can keep finding things out (and science is good for that) but we cannot get to the end of things very fast.  yet, the bible tells us the end from the beginning.  so, imo, it's a good starting point.

why do people think that all religious people are anti-science?  none of my friends are. i'm not.  i have not studied science in depth - but my husband studied physics.  i admired this about him - to study electronics and radio waves, etc.

You are right, I can't prove it, but at least science strives to achieve proof. Bible doesn't do that. It gives you "proof," with no way to prove it, and a lot of ways to disprove it, hence the Bible/Science contradiction. You offer no proof of the Bible, but take it for granted, and that is bound to lead to no good.

Religion is anti-science because it offers points that are unscientific and that contradict all proof. Pursuing religion is equivalent to pursuing Santa Claus, with Santa Claus being an ethereal entity that only exists in "holy" texts.

According to you, the "world" is only but 6000 years old, but according to science, it is much older. That naturally leads to the text as being spurious and not outright somewhat not arrogant.

[pianistimo]

if i had the time to do more than what i'm doing now - attempting to study music to be able to play a few piano concertos -i'd spend time with archeology.  i'm really interested in that.  the stars seem a much much more difficult and mathematical thing to study - and would need a much more scientific mind than mine.  but, i would like to at least understand a few basic things about the heavens - so yes!  i would like to listen to the lectures that prometheus put up and just take in the information that scientists have gleaned up to this point.

i don't think it is arrogant (if i don't really know of any proof against a young sun/star) to say that the earth COULD be older than 6,000 years.  the bible makes it sort of vague in genesis - because the Spirit of God was moving over the 'waters' before the creation of LIGHT and the first day.  of course, God's own light could have been the light that he allowed the earth to see.  in the bible - it is always His 'signature.' 

imo, we are not at odds.  truth is always truth.

[prometheus]

You can't disprove anything.

If you want to know about astrology or cosmology buy a book or use the site I gave you. Then when you have questions I will try to answer them.

[debussy symbolism]

You just assimilate the theory of "vagueness." If one passage of the Bible is vague, then the entire Bible is ambiguous in meaning.

In order for you to study stars and anything such as that, you must abandon the reason of the Bible completely, as it will disrupt the study. To avoid such internecine conduct, either study something completely, or avoid scraping something as you will still refer to your original beliefs.

[pianistimo]

i think there is more vagueness to the idea that everything came from one atom.  even if one atom did spontaneously pop into existence, what would cause it to start expanding and being 'alive.'  an analogy to putting dots on a balloon and blowing it up - is supposed to show us how the earth and stars and our heavens are expanding.  but, i'm not so sure that einstein was completely satisfied with the 'theory of relativity' and the explainations that he came up with for an ever expanding universe.  some astronomers said that it was hard to predict anything - looking at the heavens - and that there was a state of stability to it that they couldn't figure out. 

if things are expanding (speeds) at twice the rate as when they are twice the distance away - how do we know where we fit into things?  are we the center and they measure it from us?  remember - we're in space.  where do we fit into this whole thing.  we're a speck.  where's the center of the universe?  we can measure these things from the earth - but it's a rough estimate only.  which direction are these galaxies expanding.  in our way of thinking on earth - -it would be outward.  but which way is out?

[pianistimo]

also, i wonder if there is another 'model' of reality we haven't seen yet.  for instance, if this temporary heavens and earth were to be 'folded up like a tent.'  what would we see then?  what if what we think is reality - is not? 

in our minds - because space keeps repeating itself - it must be a model for what's out there. 

[donjuan]

So I don't know, but I am not satisfied with that. Saying 'God did it' has the same meaning, you don't know, except that it has the nuance you are satisfied with it.

I just want to be sure. I don't want to believe in something just to have the illusion I know something. So I rather don't know while being unsatisfied while not knowing and being satisfied.

right there.  As soon as I read that, I know prometheus and I are looking for exactly the same thing.  Maybe when I'm a tired old man, I'll give in to lying to myself to be happy, but I'm too interested in seeking the truth to be content with that right now.

i think there is more vagueness to the idea that everything came from one atom. even if one atom did spontaneously pop into existence, what would cause it to start expanding and being 'alive.'

I don't think even scientists can or ever will be able to answer that.  All we have are theories.  However, Any non-creationist theory out there is easier to swallow than:

a sun and moon are easy for God to create. if all He has to do is say the Word - then He can make anything into anything at any time and any place - and He can make it look old or young.

take adam and eve - for instance. He could have made them babies - but He chose to make them adults.

i.e. he invented Magic.

one more thing:

in response to the question about fossils of plants being supposedly older than 6,000 years. IF they are - they could have been another creation before ours. the angels that fell away from God (1/3 of the angels) may have been responsible for a first creation of the earth which might have included the dinosaurs and plant life. but, if this was occuring BEFORE our creation - then we would have a NEW sun and a NEW moon. this is not an impossible thought -because a whole new 'heavens and earth' await us according to revelations.

I thought according to genesis, 'In the Beginning, God created the Heavens and the earth.'  What makes you think this movie has a prequel?

[thalbergmad]

also, i wonder if there is another 'model' of reality we haven't seen yet. 

If there is another reality, then you are most probably living in it.

Your faith and love of God is commendable, but your attempts to use a highly edited book of short stories to try to prove the sun is 6,000 years old is actually very worrying. You are like a blinkered horse in as much that you can only see in one direction. In addition, i feel that it is impossilbe to engage you in sensible debate, as when cornered, your answer is likely to be "coz God says so".

I love you to bits, but find your posts to be frustrating.

Thal

[pianistimo]

just trying to understand God's word - and I do put it first in terms of which comes first ?  God or scientific experiments.  'in the beginning...' simply means that before we were in existence as we are in the current world we live in.  there was no light.  therefore - no time.  no day.  no night.  how long was this?  i don't know.  there was nothing.  not even time.  so how, can scientist measure this?  they can't.  there wasn't anything to measure at this point.  how long ago was this?  longer than 6000 years - scientists tell us.  so, i say - ok - let's take genesis 1:1 for what it says.  it doesn't say 6000 years ago.  there was no day and night between genesis 1:1  and genesis 1:2.  'and the earth was formless and void - was it destroyed to be a new creation?  i don't know.  do you?  if life was on the earth before 6,000 years - according to the bible - this old creation was fossilized and died out during an ice age.  perhaps it was the time the dinosaurs lived and also the wooly mammoths.  the world was a rather vicious place for a man to be - if the descriptions of these bones and fossils were as they are pictured.  perhaps there was no place for man the way he is today.  perhaps God created a new heavens and new earth - by allowing an ice age and then flood (when melted) to recondition the earth.  only by verse 5 of genesis (after light was created) was there day/night.  the beginning of time for us.  perhaps in a previous 'beginning' there was another form of light (another sun - or being that was light).  if it was satan - he would have lost this light by now.  he was created perfect (full of light) - but turned to darkness.  thus, he could not sustain anything by heat or light of and by himself.  perhaps i'm thinking too metaphysically - or spiritually metaphysically - but i believe that 'Lucifer' once meant 'light bringer.'  but, if he is in eternal bonds of darkness - he can no longer have this 'light.'

isaiah 14:12 'how you have fallen from heaven, o star of the morning, son of the dawn!  you have been cut down to the earth (sent to the earth - from being at God's throne), you who have weakened the nations!  but, you said in your heart, i will ascend to heaven, i will raise my throne above the stars of God, and I will sit on the mount of assembly in the recesses of the north (God's throne).  i will ascend above the heights of the clouds; i will make myself like the Most High.  nevertheless you will be thrust down to sheol, to the recesses of the pit.  those who see you will gaze at you, they will ponder over you, saying, is this the man who made the earth tremble, who shook kingdoms, who made the world like a wilderness and overthrew its cities, who did not allow his prisoners to go home?  all the kings of the nations lie in glory, each in his own tomb.  but you have been cast out of your tomb like a rejected branch.  clothed with the slain who are pierced with a sword, who go down to the stones of the pit.  like a trampled corpse.  you will not be united with them in burial (even though satan may wish to die), because you have ruined your country (the place where he was to rule), you have slain your people.  May the offspring of evildoiers not be mentioned forever.  prepare for his sons a place of slaughter because of the iniquity of their fathers.  they must not arise and take possession of the earth and fill the face of the world with cities.'

[thalbergmad]

You type many words but say nothing.

Your last post would probably warrant entry into most lunatic asylums.

Thal

[pianistimo]

most lunatics want nothing to do with God.  therefore, you should think before you speak.  lunatics are sometimes possessed by what we would call 'irrational thought.'  God is completely rational and completely thoughtful - and what He says just IS.  because He said it.

what the real deal is - is the same thing that the prophets and disciples dealt with.  a misunderstanding and an understanding beyond belief.  that they were dealing with something (SOMEONE) supernatural.  beyond boxing and packaging.  who was returning to be KING.

if i were to do theological research - it would be to prove that not only the places of the bible are all correct in their addressing of locations - but, geological time frames are also correct.  i do not doubt the accuracy of the bible.  and, i do not doubt that God is supreme and Satan is an archangel (with much less power) created at first in perfection - that moved to take over God's throne.  he took 1/3 of the angels.  now, he is the personification of evil.  if you have ever been near evil or experienced what evil feels like around an evil person - then you know!

i think that a common misperception is that satan cannot exist with modern society.  i say 'look around - because his spirit is everywhere.'  when a woman dies of anorexia after becoming a model - you know that the knowledge that we were once given as to beauty and perfection is quite misguided now.  what caused this woman to starve herself to nothing?  was it her own ideas - or ideas from society that satan manipulates?  just a question.  i believe that it is the latter.  i believe that he is the author of confusion.

[thalbergmad]

most lunatics want nothing to do with God.  therefore, you should think before you speak.  lunatics are sometimes possessed by what we would call 'irrational thought.'  God is completely rational and completely thoughtful - and what He says just IS.  because He said it.

what the real deal is - is the same thing that the prophets and disciples dealt with.  a misunderstanding and an understanding beyond belief.  that they were dealing with something (SOMEONE) supernatural.  beyond boxing and packaging.  who was returning to be KING.

if i were to do theological research - it would be to prove that not only the places of the bible are all correct in their addressing of locations - but, geological time frames are also correct.  i do not doubt the accuracy of the bible.

Paragraphs 1 & 2 - please translate.

Paragraph 3 - Why would you need to do any research, when you already know the answers?. I do wish you would do some research, but preferably a balanced research, not relying upon Isiah and Lucifer.

Thal

[donjuan]

i do not doubt the accuracy of the bible. 

yeah, we know.  

[pianistimo]

the subject shifted when you called into question the ultimate power of God.  he can make anything in any state he wants.  He is not limited to the physical.  He is Spirit.  therefore, we must worship Him in spirit and in truth.  if 'Thy Word is truth'  then either it is or it isn't.  i believe it is - by faith. 

faith seems lunacy.  but, for Christians it is real.  just as real as looking through a telescope at the stars.  Christ himself was called into question for sanity when He said he was the Son of God.  if He is willing to put Himself on the line (as God) to us humans- why should we be in doubt (after His loving acts) for His deliverance from the bondage of sin and death.  it is only after death - that we will have the last laugh.  although, most christians i know - do not want to laugh at someone else's pain or sorrow.

[thalbergmad]

the subject shifted when you called into question the ultimate power of God. 

No, when i called into question your power of reason and asked where God said that the Sun is 6,000 years old.

Thal

[pianowolfi]

Honestly i don't read anything here. But it concerns me again. Especially I'm concerned about Pianistimo once more. Pianistimo, what ever you may write. Do you write 24/7?
Where is your private life? What is going on? Is your bicycle rosting in the cellar? Do your (surely very likeable) kids feed themselves? What does your piano teacher say about your lack of practising? I could add more questions...

[thalbergmad]

For any insomniacs in the UK, there is gonna be a meteor shower starting at 4am Sunday morning.

Thal

[asyncopated]

Why can't we bury this thread? 

You know that the god loving people will stay that way -- they can't be swayed.  As long as they remain nice and don't insist on teaching fallacy as fact, let them be. 

There is no harm in believing, in fact perhaps we were even evolved to "believe" or have faith in a sense.  Certainly we were evolve to try to look for correlations and make sense of the world around us.  One way to try and do so is to use a concept of an all mightly being like god -- many cultures have independently developed some sort of concept of god.  An in today's social climate, this (innate??) tendency still seems to be strong.

What if I told you that needing to believe in god is like being gay -- you simply don't have a choice.  It's written in your genetic code.  Sometimes, when I can't for the life of me understand hardline religious people, I think this is a good model of our social world as any.

haha... wonder how many counts of heresy I've commited here. 

[thalbergmad]

You know that the god loving people will stay that way -- they can't be swayed.  As long as they remain nice and don't insist on teaching fallacy as fact, let them be. 

Couldn't agree more, but when the Bible is used to try to prove the age of the Universe, i will not let them be.

Thal

[debussy symbolism]

Yes.

The point of this thread is of course to not destroy religion, but eliminate that which contradicts proof, whether in the form of religion or not. Obviously, if everything the Bible said would be pinpoint scientific, then there would be other questions such as "who wrote the Bible"? Given that the Bible is obviously wrong, all ambiguities aside, it is reasonable to contradict the text, hence the discussion here. What seems to be the problem is that even with concrete proof, certain believers remain their dogmatic ideal and hold recalcitrant to all forms of persuasions, however logical or for that matter illogical those might be.

[prometheus]

It was too clouded to see anything.

[debussy symbolism]

Yeah

[pianistimo]

ok.  why hasn't the sun burned up yet.  huh. huh.  thalbergmad, come back here.  i want another round.  prove to me that the sun is older than 6000 years.  it just isn't. face it.  the sun can only have so many nuclear fusions that feed upon itself - because it is losing heat/energy.  it will not continue to nuclear fuse forever.  if the sun was as old as people say it is - it would have become a smoking star quite a while ago.

what about the moon?  no scientist has ever proven it is very old at all.  many moons of other planets in our solar system appear quite young as well.

say, pianowolfi, this is what is happening today.  i went on strike.  i pianoforumed most of the day.  tommorrow - i will be going to take another child to the dentist, to a parent/teacher meeting, to the park - home - clean like a blizzard anything left undone (like bedrooms). 

[prometheus]

Pianistimo, why don't you just shut up. Keep your vile lies to yourself.

[pianistimo]

if you cannot prove they are lies, how are they vile?  if i believe the bible, that is much less vile than lying about everything coming from one atom.  who knows?  perhaps God created  the elements very fast.  but the days of the creation week were one day each.  that meant more time than a big bang.  how is the big bang more precise in knowledge.  you cannot go that far back in time to know for sure yourself!

btw, here's a site which is non-religious - which i find interesting about the birth of stars.  don't know if it proves or disproves anything.  just interesting.  i believe by faith that God can create anything in the state that it was at creation (just as adam and eve were created adults and not babies).

www.astrobio.net/news/article1491