• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.
  3. Please note there is a new rule regarding the posting of videos. It reads, "Post a summary of the videos you post . An exception can be made for music videos.". Unless you are simply sharing music, please post a summary, or the gist, of the video you wish to share.
  4. There have been some changes in the Life Stages section involving the following forums: Roaring 20s, Terrific Thirties, Fabulous Forties, and Golden Eagles. They are changed to Gen Z, Millennials, Gen X, and Golden Eagles will have a slight change.
  5. CF Staff, Angels and Ambassadors; ask that you join us in praying for the world in this difficult time, asking our Holy Father to stop the spread of the virus, and for healing of all affected.
  6. We are no longer allowing posts or threads that deny the existence of Covid-19. Members have lost loved ones to this virus and are grieving. As a Christian site, we do not need to add to the pain of the loss by allowing posts that deny the existence of the virus that killed their loved one. Future post denying the Covid-19 existence, calling it a hoax, will be addressed via the warning system.

How can we see distant stars in a young universe?

Discussion in 'Creation & Evolution' started by caddy, Apr 13, 2005.

  1. caddy

    caddy Junior Member

    41
    +1
    Calvinist
    Married
    US-Republican
    Bunk!

    Miller Urey was was an experiment, nothing more than that, and one now that has been proven to be a poor one, but alas, we ALL have to deal with fits and starts. Most of us learn more from our failures and errors in thought than we do from our successes and good ideas!

    As for reading the post, yes I read it, does that mean I have to be intimately acquainted with Humphreys? No! You seem to have a problem that I don't know him better than what I do. I merely stated the link was interesting reading, nothing more. From there you're drawing all kinds of assumptions on statements you think I've made but haven't.

    Some people get worked up over NOTHING!

    Have you read Icons of Evolution by Jonathan Wells?

    http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0895262002/qid=1113495477/sr=8-1/ref=pd_csp_1/002-4689134-8560802?v=glance&s=books&n=507846





    I am in favor of a dialogue between science and religion, but not a constructive dialogue. One of the great achievments of science has been, if not to make it impossible for an intelligent person to be religious, then at least to make it possible for them not to be religious. We should not retreat from this accomplishment
    Physicist Steven Weinberg


    :eek:


     
  2. Edx

    Edx Senior Veteran

    +106
    Atheist
    Because a miracle isnt scientific.

    Of course you can.

    All you have to do is not "believe it", but logically and reasonably accept conclusions based only on the evidence.

    Evolution has nothing to do with this.

    Same as above.

    Theres 3 steps you suggest here
    1. Matter had to come from somehwere there,
    2. There is a creator, therefore
    3. The creator is male and a God.

    They dont logically follow even if this had anything to do with it this is again the same as the above.

    So you have to have faith in anything you have not witnessed yourself?

    You cant "prove" any scientific theory, thats not how they work. And you seem to think criminals should get away with anything unless someone was either there to witness it or film it.

    That is true.

    Admit what? Science isnt a belief system.

    The scientific method is the only accurate method to know what is true or not, unless you know of a more accurate method.

    Ed
     
  3. LittleNipper

    LittleNipper Contributor

    +165
    Non-Denom
    Married
    US-Republican
    The point of science is to find the actual TRUTH and not simply maintain rigid formality and a set of rules at the exclusion of all other possibilities or input. Science for science sake is pointless if what you establish is a lie...
     
  4. corvus_corax

    corvus_corax Naclist Hierophant and Prophet

    +305
    Seeker
    Private
    US-Others
    Well, if you consider the evaluation of empircal, testable data, repeatable experiments and confirmed or falsified predictions to be too rigid or too rules-heavy, then obviously you have no interest in science.

    Im not saying that's a bad thing. Not everyone is interested in science. That's fine.
    Just dont try to get into debates where science is being discussed, or if you do, realize that you are coming from a completely different perspective, one that is likely not compatible with actual demonstratable evidence and empirical data.
     
  5. LittleNipper

    LittleNipper Contributor

    +165
    Non-Denom
    Married
    US-Republican
    Think about this for a moment. The BIG BANG is supposed to be how the ENTIRE Universe was formed. Now, any BANG I ever saw results in heat and light. NOW, if this matter exploded out in all directions faster then the speed of light, that would mean that the flash of light from the explosion would be seen after the light from the farthest star had already reached half the Universe...
     
  6. corvus_corax

    corvus_corax Naclist Hierophant and Prophet

    +305
    Seeker
    Private
    US-Others
    You dont understand BB theory.
    Do you need it explained to you?

    I'll give you two quick points
    1- It wasnt an explosion in space
    2- It was an expansion of space
     
  7. LittleNipper

    LittleNipper Contributor

    +165
    Non-Denom
    Married
    US-Republican
    The space cannot travel faster then the event that caused it----stew on that.
     
  8. corvus_corax

    corvus_corax Naclist Hierophant and Prophet

    +305
    Seeker
    Private
    US-Others
    :doh:
    Quick rundown on BB Theory.
    I'll do my best to explain it in terms that (hopefully) make sense.....
    The BB did not happen at any one point. That is a misconception. There was no single 'speck'or particle. And there was no explosion. It was simply and expansion of space (that last bit is important to understand the rest).
    The BB happened right where Im sitting
    It also happened right where you are sitting
    It also happened in the area where A Centauri is located.
    It also happened in the area where the Pleiades are currently located.
    It happened everywhere all at once.
    Now, when scientists say something along the lines of "At 'x' time, the universe was only the size of a soccer ball" what they are referring to is the observable universe. With me so far?
    Cool :)
    Here's where it may get a bit confusing.
    Now, in galaxy M51, the observable universe is a bit different than here in the Milky Way. An observer there can see more of certain areas and less of other areas (compared to what we can see at our location). The radius of our observable universe is centered on us. The radius of M51's observable universe is centered on M51.
    So, our observable universe may have only been the "size" (a complete misnomer in this case, by the way) of a soccer ball at some instant after the BB, but so was the observable universe of M51.
    There wasnt one "soccer ball sized" universe. Think of the BB (at 'soccer ball size') as a soccer ball surrounded by soccer balls, and they are surrounded by soccer balls, as are they, as are they, as are they.....infinitely. (This is not a perfect metaphor....its quite broken....but its the best way I can visually explain it)
     
  9. LittleNipper

    LittleNipper Contributor

    +165
    Non-Denom
    Married
    US-Republican
    I'm glad it is only a theory----you had me worried...
     
  10. corvus_corax

    corvus_corax Naclist Hierophant and Prophet

    +305
    Seeker
    Private
    US-Others
    Once more :doh:
    Its a model (scientific theory) that best fits the evidence we currently have.
    Saying that "its only theory" is standard "Mongo no like science, mongo smash' garbage.
     
  11. Randall McNally

    Randall McNally Secrecy and accountability cannot coexist.

    +130
    Agnostic
    US-Others
    According to whom?
     
  12. caddy

    caddy Junior Member

    41
    +1
    Calvinist
    Married
    US-Republican
    :thumbsup:



     
  13. LittleNipper

    LittleNipper Contributor

    +165
    Non-Denom
    Married
    US-Republican
    According to gravity...
     
  14. Battie

    Battie Veteran

    +152
    Christian Seeker
    Single
    What does the speed of the expansion have to do with the theory's validity? What does gravity have to do with an explosion?
     
  15. Physics_guy

    Physics_guy Well-Known Member

    +57
    Better question is: what does an explosion have to do with the Big Bang?
     
  16. Battie

    Battie Veteran

    +152
    Christian Seeker
    Single
    That is a better question, but I'm hoping that bit's been cleared up already. Now I'm just curious about gravity and explosions. :)
     
  17. aeroz19

    aeroz19 Guest

    +0
    False. It is most certainly not. From my College 100-level Chemistry textbook, 1/2 a page out of about 1,000 pages:

    "Although scientists no longer believe molecules necesary for life were formed this way, it is nonetheless a starting point for new experiments in this direction." Chemistry and Chemical Reactivity, Kotz & Treichel, 5th ed.

    This statement is self-explanatory.
     
  18. corvus_corax

    corvus_corax Naclist Hierophant and Prophet

    +305
    Seeker
    Private
    US-Others
    Im just hoping the "BB=explosion" myth has been blown up.

    I fear it hasnt.
    Ive reposted the previous info three times thus far in my short time on CF, and at least 10 times on the other forums I belong to.
     
  19. aeroz19

    aeroz19 Guest

    +0
    It hasn't necessarily been proven false. The conditions under which the molecules formed were not actually present in the beginning. For example, electrical current was not continuous, as it was in the experiment.
     
  20. corvus_corax

    corvus_corax Naclist Hierophant and Prophet

    +305
    Seeker
    Private
    US-Others
    The statement in <> was added by me based on post 53.
    I was just beginning to think that I understood post 47. Then you added "according to gravity".
    According to gravity, space cannot "travel" faster than the event that caused it.
    Okay.....
    How fast was the event that caused the expansion (NOT explosion) of space? And how, specifically, does this violate gravitational theory?
    By the way, which gravitational theory are you speaking of?
    1- Newtonian
    2- Gravity according to Relativity (curved space)
    or
    3- Gravitons
    ?
    Now, you must keep in mind that expanding space can travel faster than the speed of light when taken out of "normal" velocities (ie motion through space)...recession velocity (two objects receding from each other) based on the expansion of a given space can make those two objects travel away from each other faster than the speed of light relative to each other. However, neither object (in their regional space) will ever overtake a beam of light.
    So how does this (expansion of space) violate gravity and it's effect on space?
    Before I can answer your questions, I'll need an answer to all of the above.
    And please, no one-liners, but an actual explanation.

    Thanks in advance :wave:

    Edit- to fix the <>
     
Loading...