Do creationists critically examine their own ideas (re: creationism)?

[Tone]

Consequently, your remark that "light is not independent of suns" is wrong.

It was a question. I know that light is independent of the suns. Now I know that you know as well,therefore, on what basis do people ridicule those who say that the moon gives light...because,it is giving the Sun's light...Who's light is the Sun giving?

 

[Tone]

The Sun gives greater light and the Moon gives lesser light, just like it is written.

 

[Ophiolite]

It was a question. I know that light is independent of the suns. Now I know that you know as well,therefore, on what basis do people ridicule those who say that the moon gives light...because,it is giving the Sun's light...Who's light is the Sun giving?

Trivial has two meanings. You are aiming for one and hitting the other. I'm done here.

 

[KWCrazy]

That is abundantly clear. Based on your comments elsewhere your general grasp of science principles is abnormally constrained. Thank you for your time.

You have yet to prove that we live in a world constrained by scientific principles. In the absence of the supernatural these principles would hold true. However, God, not science, is the Lord of this world and because of that there are many things which science will never be able to explain. Because of that we accept the limitations of science and understand that science; the study of the natural world around us; can never and will never explain the supernatural. Understanding that there are limits to what we can learn from science is not a rejection of what we can learn. Rejecting the notion that everything came from nothing or rejection the absurdity of a single common progenitor is not foolishness. Foolishness is the rejection of the supremacy of God.

 

[Kylie]

While what you are arguing may be correct from a technical standpoint it is perfectly rational, reasonable and commonplace to think of the moon as a source of light in a colloquial sense. Even in a scientific sense, when we are focused on how we are "using" the light, it would be appropriate to call the moon a source. Example:
"When you took these these photographs of badgers, what was your light source?"
"Primarily moonlight, though some of the external house lights were coming through the trees."

This doesn't alter the underlying peculiarity of Tone's position, but if I correct creationists when I think they are mistaken I have to also correct everyone else when I think they are mistaken.

I get what you're saying, but remember - the Bible is meant to be the inerrant word of God. So if God is telling us that the moon is a source of light, and reality shows us that it isn't, then the inerrant word of God is wrong.

 

[Kylie]

You could say the same for anything that reflects, emits, re-emits, absorbs, photosynthesizes,and any other interaction with light...

There may be differences in how the "components" are involved yet,basically, anything that becomes involved with light, becomes that light as expressed in myriad ways.

*The Sun became involved with light in a very hot and volatile way...

This is not true.

My mother was a photographer. She used flashes and reflectors. When she used a flash, then part of the flash was used up, specifically, the chemical energy stored in the batteries.

When she used a reflector instead, what part of the reflector was consumed? No part of it, of course. Because the flash was creating light, the reflector was not. There is a big difference between something creating light and something modifying light that already exists.

 

[dad]

Almost 400 million years.

The only known fossil tree is ~385 million years old. Meanwhile modern humans have only been on the planet for a few hundred thousands years.

The remains of humans have not been here very long. Probably we could not leave remains in Adam's day.

 

[Tone]

There is a big difference between something creating light and something modifying light that already exists.

The Sun creates light...yet, is it created?

*So,there is no light apart from the stars?

 

[Kylie]

The Sun creates light...yet, is it created?

*So,there is no light apart from the stars?

How are you not understanding the concept I am trying to explain.

The sun makes light through nuclear reactions.

The moon does not make light. It is hit by the light that comes from the sun and that light bounces off the moon.

Honestly, this is not a difficult concept. Do you understand the difference between a lightbulb and a mirror?

 

[AV1611VET]

The moon does not make light. It is hit by the light that comes from the sun and that light bounces off the moon.

I don't mint coins; but that quarter lying on my desk is mine.

 

[Tinker Grey]

Bad analogy is bad.

 

[KWCrazy]

So if God is telling us that the moon is a source of light, and reality shows us that it isn't, then the inerrant word of God is wrong.

Your understanding of the world around you is a bit errant. You've never heard of "by the light of the moon?" You've never been outside at night?
The Bible never said the moon is a source of light.
The Bible actually says "God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars."
The Bible does not describe the reflective properties of the moon, the hydrogen conversion processes of the sun or the rotation of the oblate spheroid we live on. None of these things matter. What matters is, will you choose to follow the Lord or reject Him. Quoting arguments formulated by others will not save you from destruction. Only God's grace can do that.

 

[KWCrazy]

She used flashes and reflectors.

Why would she use a reflector if no light came from its surface? Did the reflector absorb light or put light where it was needed?
You illustrate the foolishness of your argument.

 

[Tone]

How are you not understanding the concept I am trying to explain.

The sun makes light through nuclear reactions.

The moon does not make light. It is hit by the light that comes from the sun and that light bounces off the moon.

Honestly, this is not a difficult concept. Do you understand the difference between a lightbulb and a mirror?

My question was, is the Sun created? Also, I asked if there is any light other than the light caused by the nuclear reactions of stars? You didn't answer the first question,however,you did answer the second when you mentioned the light bulb. Thanks.

 

[AV1611VET]

Bad analogy is bad.

Unless you take into consideration proprietary ownership, as that video points out.

 

[AV1611VET]

My question was, is the Sun created? Also, I asked if there is any light other than the light caused by the nuclear reactions of stars? You didn't answer the first question,however,you did answer the second when you mentioned the light bulb. Thanks.

Light bulb is intelligent design.

 

[Tone]

Light bulb is intelligent design.

So, my thing is, if there is light apart from the Sun,why do people call it the Sun's light...and then scoff when we say the Moon's light. I get that one interaction with the light is tumultuous and spectacular (Sun), but does the less spectacular interaction of light with Moon, completely disqualify the Moon as a source (third hand maybe) of light?

 

[Tone]

"God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars."

Exactly...the Sun is a greater light and the Moon is a lesser light, just as the Bible says. It doesn't say that the Sun is the light itself or even the greatest light.

 

[AV1611VET]

So, my thing is, if there is light apart from the Sun,why do people call it the Sun's light...and then scoff when we say the Moon's light. I get that one interaction with the light is tumultuous and spectacular (Sun), but does the less spectacular interaction of light with Moon, completely disqualify the Moon as a source (third hand maybe) of light?

As the video makes clear, the moon isn't reflecting the sun's light ... as academians say.

It is absorbing the light, then re-emitting it as diffused light.

If the moon was a mirror, then it would reflect the light.

But it isn't.

It is a moon ... so it remits captured light from the sun.

This capturing-then-remitting now makes the light the moon's property.

You work hard and make money and give it to me.

I give it to Joe.

I have given Joe my money ... not yours.

 

[Astrophile]

My question was, is the Sun created? Also, I asked if there is any light other than the light caused by the nuclear reactions of stars? You didn't answer the first question,however,you did answer the second when you mentioned the light bulb. Thanks.

There are various forms of light other than that produced by stellar nuclear reactions. For example, lightning is produced by an electric discharge through the atmosphere, and aurorae are produced by interactions between energetic electrons and atoms and molecules in the atmosphere. There is synchrotron radiation, produced by electrons spiralling in a magnetic field; an example is the light from the Crab Nebula. The light of a meteor comes from the conversion of the kinetic energy of a meteoroid into heat. However, there is no known form of light that is of supernatural origin, i.e. that is independent of physical processes in matter.