Moon light - the word of God vs falsely so called science

[durangodawood]

...Could you duplicate a crescent moon with your internally illuminated sphere set up, please?

I think you could do it if exactly half the moon "glows" and the other half doesnt..... and the moon revolves in a precise way as it orbits earth.

Maybe thats what "they" arent telling us!

 

[d taylor]

Half of the moon is always illuminated by the sun, but the phases are what the moon looks like from earth, because we can see different amounts of the lit and unlit halves as the moon goes around the earth. It is only a 'full moon' when it's a full moon. Duh.

Could you duplicate a crescent moon with your internally illuminated sphere set up, please?

No a sphere can not produce a crescent moon as seen in the photo of the moon below. The crescent made by reflected light on a sphere is less in the degree of the curvature of the crescent like in the photo of the person holding a sphere. That is again more proof that the moon is not a sphere. But that can be done on a moon with a flat back and and a slight convex front. Something like this image below.

Can you reproduce this slender crescent seen on the moon here on a sphere. Which goes from the black dot to the other black dot.

This person does not in their demonstration.

 

[essentialsaltes]

No a sphere can not produce a crescent moon as seen in the photo of the moon below. The crescent made by reflected light on a sphere is less in the degree of the curvature of the crescent like in the photo of the person holding a sphere. That is again more proof that the moon is not a sphere. But that can be done on a moon with a flat back and and a slight convex front. Something like this image below.

So your position is that the moon is not a sphere or a disk, but some kind of lentil shape?

And this lentil shines with its own light.

How do we get phases? Is the dark part just not lit?

Can you reproduce this slender crescent seen on the moon here on a sphere. Which goes from the black dot to the other black dot.

This person does not in their demonstration.

The one in the demo looks pretty good, but maybe this one is better since there's less stray light around:

 

[sjastro]

The halo is due to an overexposed image which also results in the lunar detail being washed out and of low contrast.
Since solar eclipses have been brought up in this thread here is an image of a partial solar eclipse I took a few years ago.

Where is the moon's light?

As a human interest story the sunspots in the image is a historical reminder for yet another reason why Galileo got himself in serious trouble with the Catholic Church by suggesting sunspots were part of the solar structure and not objects such as planets transiting the surface.

'Flaws' in the Sun[edit]
The cosmology of Galileo's time, based on Aristotle's Physics, held that the Sun was 'perfect' and unflawed.[38][39] In 807 A.D. there was a sunspot that was large, and it was seen for 8 days.[40] The records in this period stated that Mercury caused this spot. Since Mercury is the closest planet to the Sun, its location was unclear, and many argued that Mars could be anywhere. In earlier writings, Ptolemy discussions on sunspots referred to the transit movement of Mercury and Venus. in the twelfth century, Muslim philosopher Averroes's interpretation also discussed the transit of Mercury and Venus. In De constitutione mundi, Giovanni described a similar phenomenon that his father saw, but it may have been possible that he was describing Averroes's observations.[40]

Only with the invention of the telescope was it possible for sunspots to be systematically observed. Many who had never seen them found the idea of them morally and philosophically repugnant.[41] Those who could see them, like Scheiner, wanted to find an explanation for them within the Aristotelian system. Galileo's arguments in Letters on Sunspots were intended to demonstrate these claims as false; and if they were false, Aristotelian assumptions about the universe could not be true.

Source: Letters on Sunspots - Wikipedia

 

[Kylie]

The one in the demo looks pretty good, but maybe this one is better since there's less stray light around:

Also bear in mind that since the camera in the demo is proportionately much closer to the moon model than the Earth is to the real moon, part of the model may be hidden which is visible in the real thing.

 

[46AND2]

The word of God says:
Genesis 1:16: And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.

Falsely so called science says:
The moon does not have light. The sun's light is reflected off the moon surface.


So which do creationists believe? Are you really going to "adapt" God's word to aethiest science unscientific explanations? No man has gone past the firmament (they tried to in Genesis and God confounded them).

Sorry if this has been brought up....but, how does this verse in Genesis make any sense in light of the fact (see what I did there...heh) that the moon spends half its time up in the day? Half the time, there is no light to govern the night. Half the time, the night governing light is trying to usurp the sun's job.

 

[Nithavela]

Sorry if this has been brought up....but, how does this verse in Genesis make any sense in light of the fact (see what I did there...heh) that the moon spends half its time up in the day? Half the time, there is no light to govern the night. Half the time, the night governing light is trying to usurp the sun's job.

The answer I've seen to this is that "the fall" has changed the way the moon moves.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

Sorry if this has been brought up....but, how does this verse in Genesis make any sense in light of the fact (see what I did there...heh) that the moon spends half its time up in the day? Half the time, there is no light to govern the night. Half the time, the night governing light is trying to usurp the sun's job.

Indeed. We had an annular solar eclipse yesterday. The moon certainly doesn't appear to be radiating any form of light.

 

[46AND2]

The answer I've seen to this is that "the fall" has changed the way the moon moves.

Figured the explanation had to be some sort of magic.

 

[Kylie]

Sorry if this has been brought up....but, how does this verse in Genesis make any sense in light of the fact (see what I did there...heh) that the moon spends half its time up in the day? Half the time, there is no light to govern the night. Half the time, the night governing light is trying to usurp the sun's job.

That's why you don't get your science from the Bible.

 

[d taylor]

Sorry if this has been brought up....but, how does this verse in Genesis make any sense in light of the fact (see what I did there...heh) that the moon spends half its time up in the day? Half the time, there is no light to govern the night. Half the time, the night governing light is trying to usurp the sun's job.

Does this verse say that the moon will rule every single night. The moon is a created light that serves as a light source at night when the moon is present. God purpose for the moon is more than just light at night. If God wanted the moon to be present every night. Then God would have Given it the same movement as the sun and to be present every night and to not go through phases etc.. That is if God just wanted a light for the night but the moon is created for more than just light.

 

[A_Thinker]

Does this verse say that the moon will rule every single night. The moon is a created light that serves as a light source at night when the moon is present. God purpose for the moon is more than just light at night. If God wanted the moon to be present every night. Then God would have Given it the same movement as the sun and to be present every night and to not go through phases etc.. That is if God just wanted a light for the night but the moon is created for more than just light.

Good answer ...

 

[46AND2]

Does this verse say that the moon will rule every single night.

Implicitly, yes. It does.

The moon is a created light that serves as a light source at night when the moon is present. God purpose for the moon is more than just light at night.

Which is? Verse?

If God wanted the moon to be present every night. Then God would have Given it the same movement as the sun and to be present every night and to not go through phases etc..

Why are there phases of the moon, according to your model, anyway?

That is if God just wanted a light for the night but the moon is created for more than just light.

Is the sun just for light, since it explicitly says in the Bible that it divides night and day? No other purpose, then?

 

[Bungle_Bear]

Does this verse say that the moon will rule every single night.

Yes, it does in the same way the sun rules every single day. So it's your choice - either the sun doesn't rule every day, or the moon was created to rule every night.

 

[A_Thinker]

Does this verse say that the moon will rule every single night.

Implicitly, yes. It does.

No, it doesn't ...

The moon is a created light that serves as a light source at night when the moon is present. God purpose for the moon is more than just light at night.

Genesis 1:14

14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the expanse of the sky to distinguish between the day and the night, and let them be signs to mark the seasons and days and years.

 

[A_Thinker]

Yes, it does in the same way the sun rules every single day. So it's your choice - either the sun doesn't rule every day, or the moon was created to rule every night.

The sun doesn't rule everyday. Sometimes it's overcast ...

 

[46AND2]

No, it doesn't ...

Genesis 1:14

14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the expanse of the sky to distinguish between the day and the night, and let them be signs to mark the seasons and days and years.

No, it doesn't ...

Genesis 1:14

14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the expanse of the sky to distinguish between the day and the night, and let them be signs to mark the seasons and days and years.

That verse only strengthens my point. There are lights in the sky that distinguish when it is night, and verse 16 says that the moon is the ruler of night. Therefore, according to Genesis, the moon should not be visible during the day.

 

[A_Thinker]

That verse only strengthens my point. There are lights in the sky that distinguish when it is night, and verse 16 says that the moon is the ruler of night. Therefore, according to Genesis, the moon should not be visible during the day.

You're trying to make an argument from silence ...

 

[46AND2]

You're trying to make an argument from silence ...

No. I'm drawing logical conclusions based on what is written. I don't think you understand that particular fallacy.

An argument from silence would be like dismissing Matthew's nativity narrative because Luke didn't mention Herod killing the infants.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

The sun doesn't rule everyday. Sometimes it's overcast ...

How do you get sunburnt on an overcast day if the sun isn't ruling?