Magellanic Stream is on a Collision Course with Earth

[Hans Blaster]

I tend to believe if it's not nuclear type weapons used, the sun itself or God will cause it to go supernova.

It is physically impossible for the Sun to "go supernova".

 

[Sheila Davis]

It is physically impossible for the Sun to "go supernova".

"I deeply apologize to you" _ I used the wrong word "supernova" should have said burned out, even though that's supposedly billions of years away too. Still vaporized is vaporized whether from a giant red star or exploding star __ And to/for man much is impossible, but God all things are possible.
Matthew 19:26 But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible. | King James Version (KJV) | Download The Bible App Now

God can change what he wants as well as when he wants. Then considering nothing is made of what it appears to be.
HEBREWS 11:3 KJV "Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are..."


What's this 9th planet
There’s a mysterious planet on the edge of our solar system that is going to destroy it

8 terrifying ways the world could actually end

Thank you for your correction.

 

[Bob Crowley]

One thing about this star-gazing and the phenomenal amounts of energy we witness being consumed in the process - it gives us some idea of God's power.

He made and controls all this stuff, and it serves His purpose.

As Christ said - Matthew 10:28 NIV "Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell."

 

[Hans Blaster]

One thing about this star-gazing and the phenomenal amounts of energy we witness being consumed in the process - it gives us some idea of God's power.

He made and controls all this stuff, and it serves His purpose.

As Christ said - Matthew 10:28 NIV "Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell."

Or, you could trust those that study these things professionally...

The energy "consumed" in the astronomical processes comes from forming gravitational wells and from nuclear fusion.

 

[Bob Crowley]

The experts can tell us what form the energy takes and how it gets there, but they don't create it, any more than biologists create life. They study it - they don't create it.

Moreover they use technology which requires a great deal of intelligent design before it is manufactured, but they're dead set against any idea God might be intelligent.

Every step of the so-called evolution of technology uses intelligent design. The process leading from the Model-T Ford to the Ferrari was incremental, but every single step was designed to the last nut and bolt.

 

[Ophiolite]

The experts can tell us what form the energy takes and how it gets there, but they don't create it, any more than biologists create life. They study it - they don't create it.

Yes. But so what?

Moreover they use technology which requires a great deal of intelligent design before it is manufactured, but they're dead set against any idea God might be intelligent.

Many scientists are religious and believe in a god, or gods, yet have no trouble accepting such concepts as evolution through natural selection. Please stop equivocating acceptance of evolution with atheism. It is not only mistaken, but when repeatedly argued, despite correction, it gets uncomfortably close to lying.

Every step of the so-called evolution of technology uses intelligent design. The process leading from the Model-T Ford to the Ferrari was incremental, but every single step was designed to the last nut and bolt

In my experience, many of the features of mechanical equipment is arrived at by chance. That negates your last statement and calls into question any argument that depends upon its truth.

 

[Hans Blaster]

The experts can tell us what form the energy takes and how it gets there, but they don't create it, any more than biologists create life. They study it - they don't create it.

Huh?

I didn't claim that astronomers (or cosmologist) *created* the energy. What I did say was that the power seen in stars and galaxies comes from gravity and nuclear fusion. Do you doubt that?

Moreover they use technology which requires a great deal of intelligent design before it is manufactured, but they're dead set against any idea God might be intelligent.

Every step of the so-called evolution of technology uses intelligent design. The process leading from the Model-T Ford to the Ferrari was incremental, but every single step was designed to the last nut and bolt.

This is some of the weirdest irrelevancy I've seen here. Of course humans designed our technologies.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Huh?

I didn't claim that astronomers (or cosmologist) *created* the energy. What I did say was that the power seen in stars and galaxies comes from gravity and nuclear fusion. Do you doubt that?



This is some of the weirdest irrelevancy I've seen here. Of course humans designed our technologies.

He appears to be trying to argue for ID, but that has nothing to do with the thread. It is such a poor argument that it makes everyone go

 

[Bob Crowley]

In my experience, many of the features of mechanical equipment is arrived at by chance. That negates your last statement and calls into question any argument that depends upon its truth.

Right down to which way to hold the screwdriver so the screw goes in the right way, and the right torision; how to manufacture the screwdriver in the first place, how to manufacture the screw out of the right metal so it will do the job, how to know which screws to put in and the right sequence, the right size of the screw, whether to use a phillips head or flat head screwdriver, where to find the box of screws, how to pull out the drawer to find the right screws, and then to push it back in again to close it up.

All pure chance, and not an ounce of intelligent design anywhere.

Sure. Pigs might fly.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Right down to which way to hold the screwdriver so the screw goes in the right way, and the right torision; how to manufacture the screwdriver in the first place, how to manufacture the screw out of the right metal so it will do the job, how to know which screws to put in and the right sequence, the right size of the screw, whether to use a phillips head or flat head screwdriver, where to find the box of screws, how to pull out the drawer to find the right screws, and then to push it back in again to close it up.

All pure chance, and not an ounce of intelligent design anywhere.

Sure. Pigs might fly.

Yes, intelligent design does exist for man made products. We do not see intelligent design in nature. If anything we see incompetent design. Life looks more like being a kludge than an example of ID. What we see is a set feature that is originally useful which instead of doing the hard thing of throwing it away and starting all over, as is often done with mand made products, instead we see that trait preserved and continually adapted, getting less and less efficient as time goes by.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Right down to which way to hold the screwdriver so the screw goes in the right way, and the right torision; how to manufacture the screwdriver in the first place, how to manufacture the screw out of the right metal so it will do the job, how to know which screws to put in and the right sequence, the right size of the screw, whether to use a phillips head or flat head screwdriver, where to find the box of screws, how to pull out the drawer to find the right screws, and then to push it back in again to close it up.

All pure chance, and not an ounce of intelligent design anywhere.

Sure. Pigs might fly.

I think the point was that all those things you describe are products of long periods of trial and error, discovering that some ways of doing things didn't work very well and there were better ways. Consider all the ways to fasten things together; how many improvements on slot-head screws & drivers have been tried; how many materials have been tried for different applications; etc.

Many of these developments seem obvious with hindsight, but the history of the variation and options leading up to the current 'best' implementations indicates that they could have resulted in different, perhaps even better, implementations that, in the event, were never thought of or tried.

 

[Bob Crowley]

Eve

I think the point was that all those things you describe are products of long periods of trial and error, discovering that some ways of doing things didn't work very well and there were better ways. Consider all the ways to fasten things together; how many improvements on slot-head screws & drivers have been tried; how many materials have been tried for different applications; etc.

Many of these developments seem obvious with hindsight, but the history of the variation and options leading up to the current 'best' implementations indicates that they could have resulted in different, perhaps even better, implementations that, in the event, were never thought of or tried.

And every single one of them required intelligent design. They may not have been thought of initially, but they were as improvements were made. People thought about them, every single time - they didn't just happen, or blindly "evolve".

To make the transition from riveting ships together to welding them together didn't happen by chance - not one bit.

As for there being no intelligent design in nature, how about enzymes?

Enzymes: The Magic Wand of Life – St Edmund Hall MCR

Enzymes are biological catalysts (or biocatalysts) that help speed up a metabolic reaction under normal physiological conditions such as temperature and pressure in living systems. Catalysts are chemical substances that alter the speed of a chemical reaction without being consumed in the reaction. The importance of enzymes in such chemical reactions are such that they occur in a fraction of a second, but would take a trillion years to complete in its absence.

So the cell needs a critical reaction to take place, and somehow the forces that be just magically generate a complex enzyme that speeds up the necessary reaction from a trillion years to a fraction of a second?

Meanwhile how is the cell surviving while it works around this trillion year gap?

Random chance processes??!! Pigs might fly.

 

[GreekOrthodox]

All pure chance, and not an ounce of intelligent design anywhere.

Sure. Pigs might fly.

FYI, try working for the government... not an ounce of intelligent design either

 

[Bob Crowley]

FYI, try working for the government... not an ounce of intelligent design either

I've seen a theatrical play a couple of times about a bunch of public servants working in an Australian government office somewhere. Half the time they're talking about some other employee named "Max", whom the audience never sees, although we're well aware he exists.

There's a promotion going and they're all bidding for it. At one point one of the other employees walks over to Max's desk and pulls out a long chain of paper clips. He holds it up for everyone to see and says "This must have been one of Max's busier days!"

Needless to say Max gets the promotion!

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Eve


And every single one of them required intelligent design. They may not have been thought of initially, but they were as improvements were made. People thought about them, every single time - they didn't just happen, or blindly "evolve".

To make the transition from riveting ships together to welding them together didn't happen by chance - not one bit.

Yes, intelligence was used to solve the problems, but the solutions arrived at were chance in as much as there are a vast number of possibilities that could have been chosen. The particular solutions arrived at depended on the knowledge, experience, creativity, and inspiration of the particular individuals who happened to put their minds to it, and the paths by which any one of them came to be involved would have been largely a matter of chance; IOW, it could easily have been someone else who tackled it and came up with a different solution.

 

[GreekOrthodox]

I've seen a theatrical play a couple of times about a bunch of public servants working in an Australian government office somewhere. Half the time they're talking about some other employee named "Max", whom the audience never sees, although we're well aware he exists.

There's a promotion going and they're all bidding for it. At one point one of the other employees walks over to Max's desk and pulls out a long chain of paper clips. He holds it up for everyone to see and says "This must have been one of Max's busier days!"

Needless to say Max gets the promotion!

Sounds like the government version of "Waiting for Godot"

 

[Subduction Zone]

Eve


And every single one of them required intelligent design. They may not have been thought of initially, but they were as improvements were made. People thought about them, every single time - they didn't just happen, or blindly "evolve".

To make the transition from riveting ships together to welding them together didn't happen by chance - not one bit.

As for there being no intelligent design in nature, how about enzymes?

Enzymes: The Magic Wand of Life – St Edmund Hall MCR



So the cell needs a critical reaction to take place, and somehow the forces that be just magically generate a complex enzyme that speeds up the necessary reaction from a trillion years to a fraction of a second?

Meanwhile how is the cell surviving while it works around this trillion year gap?

Random chance processes??!! Pigs might fly.

No, magic appears to be your belief system. Reproduction with variation and natural selection are two of the main driving forces of evolution. That can and does explain how new traits arise.

You are making the typical false creationist assumption that a change will either make a new trait or it will be nonfunctional. That is far from the case and is shown by the corona virus. A change in a gene that changes an enzyme made will usually result in a working enzyme. It will work either better or worse in a particular environment than its predecessor. If it works better there is a very good chance that it will be the dominant variation in the future. The Omicron variant has some changes to the spike protein. The proteins still work fine. In fact they appear to work better.

Here is a very rough example. In is not unreasonable to have a trillions of one particular speciesw one celled life in existence. Let's say that the odds of a mutation happening to a particular gene that makes a protein or enzyme was one out of a million. Those are some very low odds. That would mean with trillions of cells that there would be millions of on going trial and error experiments going on with every generation. In some of those the variation will be deadly. They will immediately die out. In some the change in the environment at that time will be detrimental but not fatal. The cell with those may reproduce, but it is less likely to succeed than other variations and again will die out. Some variations will be neutral. Those changes can and will slowly accumulate. But again no real change.

But let's say that one out of a million of those changes (and the number appears to be higher) will be positive. That means that every generation of those bacteria and an average bacteria will go through several generations in a day, will have a positive change. Improvements in the bacteria would be faster than creationists think

And when it comes to evolution sexual reproduction allows for changes to be incorporated even faster.

Asking questions is a good idea. But it is a very bad one to assume that one knows the answers when in reality one has no clue at all.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

As for there being no intelligent design in nature, how about enzymes?

Enzymes: The Magic Wand of Life – St Edmund Hall MCR



So the cell needs a critical reaction to take place, and somehow the forces that be just magically generate a complex enzyme that speeds up the necessary reaction from a trillion years to a fraction of a second?

Meanwhile how is the cell surviving while it works around this trillion year gap?

Random chance processes??!! Pigs might fly.

Enzymes are a very good case of co-evolution - the evidence shows that the chemistry of early life was slow and inefficient because of the paucity of enzymes and their inefficiency, but the number and efficiency of enzymes increased as the number and length of biological proteins in general increased. More efficient enzymes are a huge selective advantage, so would be expected to be among the most rapidly developing features of early metabolism.

Most biological enzymes are proteins, and many (most?) have evolved via mutations in duplicated genes for other functional proteins. Biological proteins typically depend on their folded shape for their functionality and a point mutation in the gene will produce a protein that folds slightly differently - or very differently. There are numerous examples of cellular enzymes whose gene sequences are very similar to those of proteins with a completely different function.

So, no. Complex enzymes are evidence for evolution, not ID.

 

[Hans Blaster]

To make the transition from riveting ships together to welding them together didn't happen by chance - not one bit.

An that's relevant to the discussion of anything on this board in what way?

It's not about gas streams forming new stars at all.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Sounds like the government version of "Waiting for Godot"

As written by Ayn Rand.