Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Actually it does.
Are you going to back up your claims here?Really? Care to show some pics? Cause it should be super-bright. Or are you one of these guys who just says stuff without ever bothering to back it up?
Plus I forgot to mention - applying the inverse square rule to the luminescence of moonlight (as that's how light diminishes in intensity relative to its source), we'd find the supposed moon landing astronauts would have had their retinas burned out.
there is no experimental precedent for sunlight reflecting off dust in a luminescent manner.
If there is no experimental precedent for sunlight reflecting off dust in a luminescent manner, how do you know that a 70% water covered planet would be a "far more" reflective medium than moondust?Presumably there are many angles at which the supposed ball earth, covered in 70% water, a far more reflective medium than moondust, should illuminate that hunk o' cheese.
First off, it is entirely possible that the greater light is a reference to the sun and the lesser light is a reference to all the stars we see at night.And last but not least, we have the irrefutable testament of the manufacturer in Gen 1:16 that there are 2 great lights, one to rule the day and the other the night.
And your point is...Photos of the moon and a paper covered incandescent light.
View attachment 265940
View attachment 265941
View attachment 265942
View attachment 265943
View attachment 265944
View attachment 265945
If there is no experimental precedent for sunlight reflecting off dust in a luminescent manner, how do you know that a 70% water covered planet would be a "far more" reflective medium than moondust?
First off, it is entirely possible that the greater light is a reference to the sun and the lesser light is a reference to all the stars we see at night.
It's altogether possible that the lesser light is reflecting the greater light.
You have to do a lot of reading into the text to come away with your exclusive interpretation.
More importantly though, nobody has ever been able to demonstrate that the moon actually projects its own light or given any sort of plausible explanation as to how it is projecting its own light.
It is curious that the properties of sunlight and moonlight are fundamentally different. How would you explain that, my furry friend?
Really? Care to show some pics? Cause it should be super-bright. Or are you one of these guys who just says stuff without ever bothering to back it up?
Plus I forgot to mention - applying the inverse square rule to the luminescence of moonlight (as that's how light diminishes in intensity relative to its source), we'd find the supposed moon landing astronauts would have had their retinas burned out.
Congratulations, you have demonstrated that the moon is not a paper covered lightbulb.Photos of the moon and a paper covered incandescent light.
View attachment 265940
View attachment 265941
View attachment 265942
View attachment 265943
View attachment 265944
View attachment 265945
Congratulations, you have demonstrated that the moon is not a paper covered lightbulb.Photos of the moon and a paper covered incandescent light.
View attachment 265940
View attachment 265941
View attachment 265942
View attachment 265943
View attachment 265944
View attachment 265945
I'm confused, you're attempting to use footage that you think is fake as evidence for your position? That seems... odd.Because we have 'footage' of the 'astronauts on the moon', on the sunlit side, exhibiting the low reflectivity of the dust. Lol a fistful of sparkling moondust. Dust, my 4-footed friend, it's dust. As in 'God remembers our frame and that we are dust, and takes pity'.
Thank you.Sure it is. You win.
Can you remind me of what I have said regarding Scripture and the standard model cosmology? You must know since you made this claim.That's funny, coming from someone who thinks scripture is consistent with the 'standard model' cosmology.
I would explain that by saying the sun is a fiery ball of fusion that emits its own light and the moon is a cold, dead rock that reflects the sun (and earth). That is how they are fundamentally different.It is curious that the properties of sunlight and moonlight are fundamentally different. How would you explain tha
I'm confused, you're attempting to use footage that you think is fake as evidence for your position? That seems... odd.
Thank you
Can you remind me of what I have said regarding Scripture and the standard model cosmology? You must know since you made this claim.
I would explain that by saying the sun is a fiery ball of fusion that emits its own light and the moon is a cold, dead rock that reflects the sun (and earth). That is how they are fundamentally different.
1) Emit it's own light,
2) Have different phases
Goes dark at eclipses at the exact predicted time when the prediction is based upon the "standard model" cosmology?
Ain't God great! It's for the months.
Finally, can someone who believes the moon is its own light source actually explain geologically what's going on with the moon that causes it to 1) Emit it's own light, 2) Have different phases, and 3) Goes dark at eclipses at the exact predicted time when the prediction is based upon the "standard model" cosmology?
It's an old question.
The dark side visible is illuminated by earthlight which reflects back to us.
So the bright moon is illuminated by both the earth and sun, but the shadow is illuminated by the earth....and the stars to a tiny degree.
So the visible dark side of the moon is much more blue due to the blue earth in it's sky.
Of course He can. I never said He couldn't. I'm asking for someone to explain to me how it works. We know why volcanoes erupt, we know why trees grow, we know why sometimes it snows instead of rains, we know how the human body works and how to repair it when it becomes damaged.So God can not created an object that can emit light, go through lighting stages/phases, block out the light of the sun, and produce its own eclipse stages.
Are you going to back up your claims here?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?