Any Science lovers here?

[CruciFixed]

-

 

[Nadiine]

*blank stare*

 

[porterross]

I'm merely a thick-headed civil engineer and this does not compute. When my husband gets home, I'll ask him to give you his analysis. He's too knowledgeable for me to grasp what he's talking about and when he starts going on about astronomy, my eyes glaze over.

 

[porterross]

OK, planet collisions are a fact in universe formation due to early formed masses of planetary material being on the same orbital path. My husband described the process from the very start to that point (in condensed form), but that's the part I remember as it pertains to your question. In fact, he says our moon was likely formed from an early collision and merge of Earth with another planetary mass, which is why the moon keeps moving further away from us.

Here are some links for you that might help:

Space.com

Wikipedia


If you want to ask questions of some real astronomical nerds and scientists, go here:

Bad Astronomy forum

My husband posts there, but he cautions you about bringing religion or politics into any discussion. It causes too many disagreements and takes away from the seriousness of the topic. At least that's how the mods see it.

There is (or was) a Christian astronomers site which might be helpful with the links it has to offer, but you might have to register and I have no idea how long that might take:

Chr-Astro


Rotsa ruck!

 

[KWCrazy]

No, it isn't true. It's an UNPROVEN THEORY. The people who produced your text book knew when they were including it that they were passing this theory off as fact; which to say they were lying.

From the link:
"The leading theory for the Moon's formation has a Mars-sized object slamming into Earth about 4 billion years ago, shortly after our planet formed... The theory goes back to the 1970s and is well established as the most likely way to make the Moon.... The scenario was recently proposed by astrophysicist J. Richard Gott and mathematician Edward Belbruno, both of Princeton University."

The problem with our science text book publishers is that they routinely misrepresent the truth, even decades after what they have been publishing has been discredited.

 

[porterross]

Science is theoretical by its very nature. How can it not be?

The Bible gives no details about how solar systems were created and I find arguing over timelines an exercise in distraction. God has always been and will always be and we know natural processes are of His creation by their very existence, so the hangups, lines of divisions and obstacles generated by science vs. faith posturing are completely man made and not at all helpful.

We have nothing to fear from the revelations of scientific discovery; discovery that can only be made through hypotheses and exploration. God blessed us with incredible mental abilities and we should apply them to their full extent as often as we can. To do otherwise is unnatural, isn't it?

I'll step off my little soapbox now.

 

[ReformedChapin]

I wonder if there is any scientific data to prove this theory or if its just based on naturalistic pressupositions.

BTW...

Civil Engineers Rock!

 

[CruciFixed]

-

 

[CruciFixed]

OK, planet collisions are a fact in universe formation due to early formed masses of planetary material being on the same orbital path. My husband described the process from the very start to that point (in condensed form), but that's the part I remember as it pertains to your question. In fact, he says our moon was likely formed from an early collision and merge of Earth with another planetary mass, which is why the moon keeps moving further away from us.

Here are some links for you that might help:

Space.com

Wikipedia


If you want to ask questions of some real astronomical nerds and scientists, go here:

Bad Astronomy forum

My husband posts there, but he cautions you about bringing religion or politics into any discussion. It causes too many disagreements and takes away from the seriousness of the topic. At least that's how the mods see it.

There is (or was) a Christian astronomers site which might be helpful with the links it has to offer, but you might have to register and I have no idea how long that might take:

Chr-Astro


Rotsa ruck!

Thanks for that information. Like I said I can't second guess people with Science degrees but if it sounds strange I'm questioning it. So I had to pose the question because I'm unfamiliar with the theory.

Plus it was worded in a way that almost looks like they are speaking to 3rd graders when they are in fact speaking to high school aged students and even more in our school we're adults for most part.....so
Its weird.

 

[CruciFixed]

No, it isn't true. It's an UNPROVEN THEORY. The people who produced your text book knew when they were including it that they were passing this theory off as fact; which to say they were lying.

From the link:
"The leading theory for the Moon's formation has a Mars-sized object slamming into Earth about 4 billion years ago, shortly after our planet formed... The theory goes back to the 1970s and is well established as the most likely way to make the Moon.... The scenario was recently proposed by astrophysicist J. Richard Gott and mathematician Edward Belbruno, both of Princeton University."

The problem with our science text book publishers is that they routinely misrepresent the truth, even decades after what they have been publishing has been discredited.

Yeah they never mentioned in the book that it was just a theory. IT was answered in a manner that made me think they were saying "Definite fact"

Our school also does this with evolution sometimes.

 

[Criada]

It is just a theory in that no one was there taking photographs, but it's a pretty well founded theory.

 

[Nadiine]

Science is theoretical by its very nature. How can it not be?

The Bible gives no details about how solar systems were created and I find arguing over timelines an exercise in distraction. God has always been and will always be and we know natural processes are of His creation by their very existence, so the hangups, lines of divisions and obstacles generated by science vs. faith posturing are completely man made and not at all helpful.

We have nothing to fear from the revelations of scientific discovery; discovery that can only be made through hypotheses and exploration. God blessed us with incredible mental abilities and we should apply them to their full extent as often as we can. To do otherwise is unnatural, isn't it?

I'll step off my little soapbox now.

I cannot grasp scientific stuff as much as I can't grasp math.

But this past week on NRB, they had a few Creationist shows
that I watched. The one thing they were saying was that
you cannot study science without using some philosophy
(non scientific means) to come to conclusions.

I believe that can include faith too.
I'll stay out of the convo tho, I'm too ignorant in this subject.
But I thought that might support what you were saying here
if I even understand it correctly

 

[porterross]

I wonder if there is any scientific data to prove this theory or if its just based on naturalistic pressupositions.

BTW...

Civil Engineers Rock!

Being here in UK now, I have no idea what I'll end up doing, but until we get the family home renovated, my knowledge won't be going to waste. It's a different world here, though. The historical society here is VERY strict. Imagine that.

Natural suppositions are the best place to start from a practical perspective, right? Logic and common sense go a long way to getting to the facts and God is so good about making all the answers we need readily available in nature. He's my favorite physicist.

Yeah they never mentioned in the book that it was just a theory. IT was answered in a manner that made me think they were saying "Definite fact"

Our school also does this with evolution sometimes.

Yes, that's been a problem in public schools ever since the Scopes Monkey Trial. If you think it's bad now, it was far worse 30 years ago. Evolution was presented to me as proven fact. Of course, I knew better, but not all the information presented was without basis, i.e, microevolution is an obvious fact, but carrying that over with the assumption that it proves macroevolution is lazy science.

Why it has to be all or nothing with government funded education is a mystery, but it's no only a US problem, as we're learning here. Eat the fish, spit out the bones.


BTW, I think it's wonderful and brave of you to be following through with school.

It is just a theory in that no one was there taking photographs, but it's a pretty well founded theory.

Yes, my husband mentioned something about the debris fields being consistent around other planets or solar systems and it made sense. Again, why some people have a problem with time lines and methods of creation has always baffled me.

I was never taught in catechism that the universe was less than 20, 000 years old (as some have tried to tell my daughter) and if I had been, I would have had to ask how that figure was reached. Only God knows when and exactly how all things were created. Everyone else is giving their opinion based on the available information they're most focused on. It's not worth fighting about, but a lot of people on both sides of the argument would be better served by just stating they don't know while being willing to listen to other theories.

 

[daydreamergurl15]

Science is theoretical by its very nature. How can it not be?

The Bible gives no details about how solar systems were created and I find arguing over timelines an exercise in distraction. God has always been and will always be and we know natural processes are of His creation by their very existence, so the hangups, lines of divisions and obstacles generated by science vs. faith posturing are completely man made and not at all helpful.

We have nothing to fear from the revelations of scientific discovery; discovery that can only be made through hypotheses and exploration. God blessed us with incredible mental abilities and we should apply them to their full extent as often as we can. To do otherwise is unnatural, isn't it?

I'll step off my little soapbox now.

You're right, there will never be a scientific fact that contradict God, but the theories on the other hand....

I'm one of those weird people whom absolutely love science, it shows just how detailed God truly is, and then when I go back and read Exodus when God is describing to Moses on how He wants His tabernacle to be done, it makes so much sense for Him to be so detailed when He was just as detailed when creating the world (haha, I do not mean the details or the same I mean the fact that He was that detailed). I don't know, I find science fascinating and I like the verse that Paul says
For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse! Romans 1:20

God, who made the world and everything in it, since He is Lord of heaven and earth, does not dwell in temples made with hands. Nor is he worshiped with men's hands, as though he needed anything, since He gives to all life, breath, and all things.
Acts 16:24-25 (but continue reading til the end, God truly is amazing).

Psalms 89:11-18
11 The heavens are Yours, the earth also is Yours;
The world and all its fullness, You have founded them.
12 The north and the south, You have created them;
Tabor and Hermon rejoice in Your name.
13 You have a mighty arm;
Strong is Your hand, and high is Your right hand.
14 Righteousness and justice are the foundation of Your throne;
Mercy and truth go before Your face.
15 Blessed are the people who know the joyful sound!
They walk, O LORD, in the light of Your countenance.
16 In Your name they rejoice all day long,
And in Your righteousness they are exalted.
17 For You are the glory of their strength,
And in Your favor our horn is exalted.
18 For our shield belongs to the LORD,
And our king to the Holy One of Israel.


And to the original poster, I have no idea.

 

[Nadiine]

You aren't wierd for loving science DDG =)
God has gifted you in that area to have interest in it like
so many others

 

[SpiritualAntiseptic]

We can see it happening all around us.

What you are seeing a molecular cloud, which is made up of gases and is of a size beyond what anyone could even begin to imagine. We can see it because it is so far, far, far away. From it stars are born- you can see little purple bits of lights- those are newborn stars. Around the stars are other particles which collide with each other and over time, formed planets and other objects.

I believe that the power and complexity of God, who created our incredible universe is shown through science- not disproved.
It seems overly simplistic to think that God popped the earth into existence, then the Earth and then a bunch of animals and planets.

Wouldn't God's true power and the true nature of our universe best be represented by throwing the universe into motion 13 billion years ago. God predicted the motion of every little particle perfectly that the Earth came to be formed and life evolved on this planet. Just as God knows every hair on our heads, I believe that God knew every atom from the beginning of time and set them in motion to create us.

 

[Avatar]

No time to get into this, just one quick note before I head out to work. Was not 434 billion years ago, the universe is only ~13.5 billion years old. It was about 5 billion years ago.

Anyway, gotta go.

 

[Nadiine]

I'm at a loss as to why evolution (by God) keeps being embraced.

The creation shows I just watched last week are strongly against
this as false.
Also I don't see Genesis allowing for it either -
He spoke it into existance and gave a "report" after it was done
"and there was.... and saw that it was good"

And I would think that a true, omnipotent God could and would
create them immediately instead of giving things time to
evolve where mankind could then point to natural elements
doing everything themselves.
It doesn't at all seem simple to me that He created them
at that moment. Quite the opposite.

Anyways, I don't want a creation/evolution derail. Just
making a note to those statements.

=)

 

[CruciFixed]

Weird I hope I didn't start some debate. I just didn't understand it. The whole thing was so simplified that I felt like a 3rd grader and then that oddly made it more confusing than the actual terminology they could have used "bumping contest" sounds stupid IMO but that's just me.
Maybe they gave us the wrong book? Maybe this book really is meant for 3rd graders?

I don't really know how brave I am to go back to school lol. I'm just afraid of falling so deep I can't get out. I wanna go to college to provide for my family......
I hate seeing people fail because they are afraid of high school or college.

I'm afraid of the debt that comes after college but a decent enough career will help me in that field.

I wanted to be an RN but if doctors are actually going to be forced to perform abortions and I'm supposed to help the doctors uh I can't be involved in it at all in anyway.

SO what do I do? =\

 

[JustAsIam77]

Weird I hope I didn't start some debate. I just didn't understand it. The whole thing was so simplified that I felt like a 3rd grader and then that oddly made it more confusing than the actual terminology they could have used "bumping contest" sounds stupid IMO but that's just me.
Maybe they gave us the wrong book? Maybe this book really is meant for 3rd graders?

I don't really know how brave I am to go back to school lol. I'm just afraid of falling so deep I can't get out. I wanna go to college to provide for my family......
I hate seeing people fail because they are afraid of high school or college.

I'm afraid of the debt that comes after college but a decent enough career will help me in that field.

I wanted to be an RN but if doctors are actually going to be forced to perform abortions and I'm supposed to help the doctors uh I can't be involved in it at all in anyway.

SO what do I do? =\

Brikkz.. IMO you would serve yourself well for the rest of your life by pursuing your interest in the healthcare field. My daughter is an LPN and loves her work. Good wages also. RN 's are even more in demand.

Once you have that nursing certification you can find gainful employment anywhere.