Moon was Created

[dad]

Still no evidence! Hehe!



He describes a feeling, here.



Do you have any idea what they mean by this? Tell me what you think they mean.

It all goes towards showing spiritual things are afoot here.

I know literature can't be a literalists forté, but you should at least be able to recognise metaphor and simile when you see it.

Since it fits with 'the earth is my footstool' that neuters your point.

Great. You've proved nothing except what we already knew.

I knew that.

Again, it is you who are in over your head! Of course their lives were changed; they went to the bleedin' moon.

Like you know that does something to one??

Fine, there's no objective way of telling - it's just as bad.

Then you better focus on objects, and solid things. Why do a running commentary on spooks, when you have no idea what you are talking about? Keep to your areas of strength.

It's nothing to do with definition - if we don't need to use the supernatural, we shouldn't. Ockham's razor is wonderful.

So, that imaginary razor means that there is no supernatural now, as well? My.

Yes, that would probably put one in the dark ages.

But embracing your unsupportable same state past mythology, and having the universe able to fit in a test tube is all good. I see.

You clearly don't understand the different meanings of the word spiritual.

I happen to believe in the spiritual, that focuses the mind on what it is or is not.

But it might not be. And, since there's a perfectly good alternative explanation, I'm not going with your craziness.

OK, go with your own, to each his own.

You've got no proof that there are no invisible elephants in your wardrobe, I guess there's no need to explain my proof that there are no spirits under mountains.

Those sorts of things need or can have no proofs, no. So?

What thing is not natural here? You don't have anything that is anything but physical - you have physical men who had felt something in there physical body, and then went out and decided to do physical things in the physical world.

Living for Jesus, and doing stuff for the Great Spirit is not natural.

And I'll leave you to grapple with the rest of physics. You can't prove that anything was the same in the past - as you've just demonstrated. You have to assume it. And you assume it just like us.

No, reasonable real evidences and observations are good enough for me.

Nature can be incredibly spiritual.

Explain?

It's a good thing that the Earth and Theia were planets, then, and not vehicles. Planets are very big and made of rock. When they smash into each other they melt and spit bits of rock into space, they don't dent.

How nice, is Theia the name of the imaginary planet that poofed up the moon, with a nifty stunt graze crash with earth???

 

[dad]

As the challenge was thrown out for any to defend the newest moon creation story, here is a bit about it.

"The giant impact hypothesis (sometimes referred to as the big whack,.."

The name of Theia (IPA: /ˈθiːə/) is derived from Greek mythology, as Theia was the Titan who gave birth to the Moon goddess Selene.

The hypothesis was first proposed at a conference on satellites in 1974 and then published in Icarus in 1975 by Drs. William K. Hartmann
(Dr. Hartmann was a member of the 1966-1968 University of Colorado UFO Project, informally known as the Condon Committee, a controversial public study of UFOs sponsored by the U.S. Air Force. He primarily investigated photographic evidence, rejected most, but felt two cases were unexplained and particularly noteworthy as probative evidence. -wiki)


[2] When the protoplanet Theia had grown to about the size of Mars, it became too massive to reside stably in a Trojan orbit. As a result, its angular distance from Earth fluctuated, with the fluctuations growing larger until it hit the Earth.

[ edit remember, this is all dreamed up!]

This is calculated to have occurred 4.533 billion years ago (4.533 Ga);

[a pile of assumptions, conjured up on a computer, all based on imaginary years dependent on some same state past universe that is myth!]

Theia is thought to have struck the Earth at an oblique angle, destroying Theia and ejecting most of Theia's mantle and a significant portion of the Earth's mantle into space, while Theia's core sank into Earth's core.
[what a load]

Current estimates based on computer simulations of such an event suggest ....
[ha! I told you so!]

some two percent of the original mass of Theia ended up as an orbiting ring of debris, about half of which coalesced into the Moon between one and 100 years after the impact.



Indirect evidence for this impact scenario comes from rocks collected during the Apollo Moon landings, which show oxygen isotope compositions that are nearly the same as the Earth.

[same past state myth based. Also, as if atomic ages, so called mean some imaginary planets whacked us. Unbelievable.]


Even the dominant lunar origin theory has some difficulties which have yet to be explained. These difficulties include:

• Ratios of the Moon's volatile elements are not consistent with the giant impact hypothesis.[6]
• There is no evidence that the Earth ever had a magma ocean (an implied result of the giant impact hypothesis), and some material was found which may never have been in a magma ocean. [6]
• Iron oxide (FeO) content of 13% of the bulk Moon properties rule out the derivation of the proto-lunar material from any but a small fraction of Earth's mantle.[7]
• If the bulk of the proto-lunar material had come from the impactor, the Moon should be enriched in siderophilic elements, when it is actually deficient of those.[8]
• Certain simulations of the formation of the Moon require about twice the amount of angular momentum that the Earth-Moon system has now. However, these simulations do not take into consideration Earth's rotation before impact. Some researchers consider this as insufficient evidence for disregarding the giant impactor theory.[9][10]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giant_impact_hypothesis


A pitiful PO grasping at straws indeed.

 

[dad]

I am not concerned in the least, I just thought you or other Christians might be,
after all, to let them see what they themselves might turn out to be, might be slightly off putting.

Thanks for the take from the outside. Relax. Not all Christians, even young ones are as stupid as some seem to think.

My own sanity thankfully is not in question here, I do not see or imagine things in my head as do you,

Then, consider it questioned! Ha.

my feet are firmly on the ground, not up in space looking for imaginary Gods and spirits to worship,

Right, and are you firmly on board with the big whack??

and I am happy in my ignorance of all that your God has to offer me, thank you.

Then, by all means, enjoy your ignorance, as you describe it. Not a party pooper, I.

 

[dad]

I am not the one making wild clams here.

Yes you are.

Ah the no True Scotsman fallacy again. I suppose it comfort to you to think that a reason that people don't share you beliefs is that they are "anti-Christ". Not true.

I never suggested that silliness. You have demonstrated a bible opposing viewpoint on pretty well every topic it comes up, no?

The reason that people don't share you belief in a young earth and global flood is that this specific intepretation of scripture is both unnecessary to Christianity and falsified by science.

False, you like to call your silly myth science. No science has addressed, let alone falsified any state of the past or future universe. That happens to be, by the by, when creation took place. Face it.

The reason that no one accepts the other nonsense you throw out such as spirits living in the moon and no gravity before the flood is that your split/merge beliefs are totally wacko.

Your beliefs are your own, Frumy, now go see if you can grow some science for them.

Ah the fishbowl again. Another favorite bit of nonsense. You can try to live in a different universe that exists only in your mind if you want to.

No thanks for asking. I like this temporary physical universe just fine, thank you very much. Now, why don't you live here as well, rather than fantasizing about infinity and beyond, where you would like your little limited temporary state universe to apply? Either that, or grow some science to show it did apply.

Don't expect others to share your delusion.
In other words you can't tell fantasy from reality. In other words you can't tell fantasy from reality.

Guess we all ought to simply check in with you for that? Tell us about the myth again, will you, storyteller? Did the sun and stars really fit in a teaspoon of soup? Did mommy and all creatures really come from a thermal vent? Did the moon really come from a cosmic crash up, and should we really throw out the bible as lies?? Tell us again, uncle.

I am not the one making these accusations. You are.
WRONG. It is your interpetation of scripture that makes God out to be an evil monster.

Nope. he is the essence of love. The fact you miss that, tells us that you do not know the Author.

I don't see drowing the world with a flood or ordering the anhilation of men, women children, infants and animals or any of the other Biblical atrocities as things done in love

I do. So??? If not for that, you would not be here now, nor billions of others. Use your second chance wisely. Time is short.

but I don't think they happened at all. The Hebrews committed genocide and then said "God made me do it".

Ah, more outright denial, and disbelief. OK. So??

In other words he realized that He had blundered. Thanks
And yet he created them didn't He. In your interpretation He blundered. You make God out to be a blunderer as well as an evil monster. And then you have the nerve to claim that people who don't believe your intepretation and don't believe God is an evil blundering monster are "anti-God".

You have the nerve to call God names, as in this very quote, and accuse others of somehow being false in pointing out that is not pro God??? Get a grip, man. Your inability to see the spirit of Love behind the dead letter edition of the bible simply tells us of you, not Him.

Gee that's not what AV told us. He directly attributed lots of evil to the offspring of the sons of God and the daughters of men.

He was taught that. He is wrong.

Maybe you two should get together and get your stories straight.

No need, the things we agree on are enough, and the rest, well, there is an eternity to straighten out.

Yeah AV says the same thing but why weren't they called angels?

Sons of god does the trick.

Why were the called the sons of God if they were not the sons of God? So why is the verse lying to us?

Do I question that? Ask someone that does.

The "split" is your unique fantasy. It exists only in your head and nowhere else.

Hey, copyright people, are you getting this? Not that it was a secret, but, remember me when the royalties roll in.

So you think heaven was so close to earth that they could have actually built a tower up to it?

A part of the spiritual places that could be called heaven had to be close. They did try to build a tower to it, as much of the world knows.

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

The dreaded double post.

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

Yes you are.

The claims of mainstream science are not "wild claims". Wild claims are things like spirits living in the moon, no gravity before the flood and time running backwards.

I never suggested that silliness.

I guess you failed to read your previous post.

You have demonstrated a bible opposing viewpoint on pretty well every topic it comes up, no?

There is much of the Old Testament that I do not consider literally true and that does extend beyond Genesis. I am not the one who thinks that God ordered the massacre of the women, children and infants of Amalek. I consider that an excuse for the behavior of a war-like ancient people.

False, you like to call your silly myth science. No science has addressed, let alone falsified any state of the past or future universe. That happens to be, by the by, when creation took place. Face it.

You can spout this nonsense all you like. Don't expect anyone to take it seriously.

Your beliefs are your own, Frumy,

My beliefs about science are accepted by the vast majority of scientists in the world and my beliefs about the Bible are much more in the main stream of religion that yours. Your" different past" delusion seems to be yours and yours alone.

now go see if you can grow some science for them.

Been there, done that, posted the results. Your rejection of science doesn't mean a thing. There is no use going over discussion from the past that have shown that you have no ability to deal with the science presented. All you do is google up random quotes and post silly pictures. You were quite comical but enough is enough.

No thanks for asking. I like this temporary physical universe just fine, thank you very much. Now, why don't you live here as well, rather than fantasizing about infinity and beyond, where you would like your little limited temporary state universe to apply? Either that, or grow some science to show it did apply.

So grow some science is your new catch phrase. I won't suggest what you need to grow.

Guess we all ought to simply check in with you for that? Tell us about the myth again, will you, storyteller? Did the sun and stars really fit in a teaspoon of soup?

What are you talking about?

Did mommy and all creatures really come from a thermal vent?

I don't know where life first formed. Did I ever say I did.

Did the moon really come from a cosmic crash up,

Maybe.

and should we really throw out the bible as lies??

No we should throw out your interpertation of scripture and of course most of your wackier ideas were never "in" so there is no need to throw them out.

Nope. he is the essence of love. The fact you miss that, tells us that you do not know the Author.

God is the essence of love. It is only your false interpretation of scripture that makes him out to be a vicious bungling monster.


Posted by FB:I don't see drowing the world with a flood or ordering the anhilation of men, women children, infants and animals or any of the other Biblical atrocities as things done in love

I do. So???

Apparently you do. You claim these things literally happened and claim that God is the essence of love.

If not for that, you would not be here now, nor billions of others. Use your second chance wisely. Time is short.

According to you mythology none of us would be here if Satan hadn't tempeted Eve to eat the forbidden fruit. Hmm. I don't think that Satan had anything to do with my being here but in your delusion Satan plays a pretty important role in your presence on earth. That has some interesting implications if you really think about it.

Ah, more outright denial, and disbelief. OK. So??

I don't believe that God ordered the Hebrews to commit genocide. You do. Who has a higher opinion of God here?

You have the nerve to call God names, as in this very quote, and accuse others of somehow being false in pointing out that is not pro God??? Get a grip, man. Your inability to see the spirit of Love behind the dead letter edition of the bible simply tells us of you, not Him.

I am not the one accusing God of drowning the world or ordering the Hebrews to commit genocide. You are. I am not calling God names. I am merely pointing the logical consquence of your ultra-literal interpretation of the Old Testament.

He was taught that. He is wrong.

OK. AV is wrong. I think AV is wrong about this and a lot of other things and wrong for different reasons than you think but that is another story. You can't both be right but you can both be wrong.

Sons of god does the trick.

So they were the Sons of God.

A part of the spiritual places that could be called heaven had to be close. They did try to build a tower to it, as much of the world knows.

Did they? Or is this just a myth to try to explain why people all supposedly descended from one family speak so many different languages? And even if they did try to build a tower to heaven this does not mean that heaven was close. In fact the whole idea is nonsense unless you also think they tried to build the tower on top of the highest mountain on earth since no tower that people could build could on the planes could possibly reach the altitude of even a small mountain.

 

[FishFace]

It all goes towards showing spiritual things are afoot here.

Yes, but not in the way you think.

Since it fits with 'the earth is my footstool' that neuters your point.

No argument here - no need to defend myself. You haven't understand the man.

Like you know that does something to one??

You don't think going to the moon would be an amazing experience, spirits or no spirits?

Then you better focus on objects, and solid things. Why do a running commentary on spooks, when you have no idea what you are talking about? Keep to your areas of strength.

No evidence? No chance.

So, that imaginary razor means that there is no supernatural now, as well? My.

Ockham's razor is far from imaginary, my boy. It means that the supernatural is very unlikely - unless you can provide some evidence that you can't explain without it.

But embracing your unsupportable same state past mythology, and having the universe able to fit in a test tube is all good. I see.

It works - deal with it. (for reference: http://xkcd.com/54/)

I happen to believe in the spiritual, that focuses the mind on what it is or is not.

I repeat: you don't understand the different meanings of the word spiritual

Those sorts of things need or can have no proofs, no. So?

Exactly. You need no proof to say that there is no invisible elephant in your wardrobe. I need no proof to say there is no invisible spirit under a mountain. Or in the moon.

Living for Jesus, and doing stuff for the Great Spirit is not natural.

What, living his physical life, saying things with his physical mouth, doing things with his physical hands - that's not physical?

No, reasonable real evidences and observations are good enough for me.

But you've not got any real evidence that gravity was the same in the past - it could easily have been different. People didn't write about gravity constantly from the beginning of time till the present day.
What's your evidence that, on the 12th March, 1803, that gravity worked just the same as it does today?

Explain?

Have you never looked up at the stars on a clear night? Never been inspired by beautiful scenery? I thought you were supposed to have a more full life as a Christian. Sounds like you can't appreciate the amazing things that lie before your very nose while you're so busy rubbing your hands about your city of transparent Gold and whoever you'll be boinking.

How nice, is Theia the name of the imaginary planet that poofed up the moon, with a nifty stunt graze crash with earth???

No.

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

In case there are people here are new and not familiar with dad and haven't yet realized that rational discourse with him is impossible I thought I would provide some links to some of dad's greatest hits.

Earth Never Revolved.

Space was Warm

Why is the center of the earth hot.

Sun stood still

Time running backwards

Christmas Star

Water on mars proof of flood and merge

Flood waters on mars

No Gravity before flood.

Spiritual Light

Of course dad posted many comedic gems on other threads and started a lot of other classic comedy threads but I consider the ones above some of his best comedy.

 

[AV1611VET]

In case there are people here are new and not familiar with dad and haven't yet realized that rational discourse with him is impossible I thought I would provide some links to some of dad's greatest hits.

Earth Never Revolved.

Space was Warm

Why is the center of the earth hot.

Sun stood still

Time running backwards

Christmas Star

Water on mars proof of flood and merge

Flood waters on mars

No Gravity before flood.

Spiritual Light

Of course dad posted many comedic gems on other threads and started a lot of other classic comedy threads but I consider the ones above some of his best comedy.

WTG, Dad! You've got an admirer! I've got a couple myself!

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

WTG, Dad! You've got an admirer! I've got a couple myself!

Yes we are glad to see dad back. You were filling his role as board comedian fairly well but there is only one dad. Who could match flood waters on mars or earth didn't rotate before the split? I guess dancing Greenland was right up there but he is long gone.

 

[AirPo]

In case there are people here are new and not familiar with dad and haven't yet realized that rational discourse with him is impossible I thought I would provide some links to some of dad's greatest hits.

Earth Never Revolved.

Space was Warm

Why is the center of the earth hot.

Sun stood still

Time running backwards

Christmas Star

Water on mars proof of flood and merge

Flood waters on mars

No Gravity before flood.

Spiritual Light

Of course dad posted many comedic gems on other threads and started a lot of other classic comedy threads but I consider the ones above some of his best comedy.

Personally, I think he peaked with "No Gravity."

 

[thaumaturgy]

WTG, Dad! You've got an admirer! I've got a couple myself!

Just because people talk about you doesn't mean they admire you.

Just so ya know.

 

[thaumaturgy]

Yes we are glad to see dad back. You were filling his role as board comedian fairly well but there is only one dad. Who could match flood waters on mars or earth didn't rotate before the split? I guess dancing Greenland was right up there but he is long gone.

Ya know, Christmas has come and gone and the only thing the scientists on this board wanted for a present was a Creationist who bothered to understand science and logic.

Sadly we got chunks of coal in our stocking as usual. Dad being one of the most "bituminous" if you will.

(Note: I'm sorry to insult coal by comparing Dad to coal. I really like coal. Coal can actually tell us a lot about the history of the earth and can reveal information, and can actually literally shed light. Just a few things Dad can't do.)

 

[dad]

The claims of mainstream science are not "wild claims".

Not in your eyes, but in the eyes of many others, they are patently absurd. Especially the myths that deal in a fantasy state past. Even the name of the fantasy planet that was involved in the whacked out, big whack fable, is from mythology!!!

Wild claims are things like spirits living in the moon, no gravity before the flood and time running backwards.

The devil showed Jesus all the kingdoms, past and present and future, of this world, in a moment of time. Does that sound like the normal course of temporary universe time can't be disposed of?? As for spirits anywhere, under the earth, or on it, or in the moon, that again is way out of the depth of physical only science. You cannot comment on that, except from a standpoint of ignorance.

They are out if the depth of physical science, so those limited only to that are bound to think so. That is nothing more than an admission of being severely limited in scope.

I guess you failed to read your previous post. There is much of the Old Testament that I do not consider literally true and that does extend beyond Genesis.

So, how much of it do you consider to be true, then???? What, men should check in with you now, to see where God got it wrong???

I am not the one who thinks that God ordered the massacre of the women, children and infants of Amalek. I consider that an excuse for the behavior of a war-like ancient people.

So? Thanks for weighing in there. You think God doesn't really do things in love, knowing what man needs, in the big picture. You cannot draw God out of the bible picture.

My beliefs about science are accepted by the vast majority of scientists in the world

So are mine, so??? Science does not cover the universe state of the future and past, period. It is in no way anything more than assumption, not science. I agree with all science, just not the so called science that is pure myth based.

and my beliefs about the Bible are much more in the main stream of religion that yours.

In the sense that most don't really believe it either you may have something there. So?

Your" different past" delusion seems to be yours and yours alone.

Your same past claims are not science, whether they are yours, mine, or ours.

Been there, done that, posted the results. Your rejection of science doesn't mean a thing. There is no use going over discussion from the past that have shown that you have no ability to deal with the science presented. All you do is google up random quotes and post silly pictures. You were quite comical but enough is enough.
So grow some science is your new catch phrase. I won't suggest what you need to grow.

All your clocks are set to the present state universe. Correlations are therefore meaningless. Nothing you say can stand on it's own. You offer myth based pseudo science, and anti bible doubts that got dashed. Your moon story here is an example. You are all talk, no substance.

What are you talking about? I don't know where life first formed. Did I ever say I did. Maybe.

Science does make claims, in case you never noticed. Besides, where is not important, it is the concept of using the evolution we do know of, and attributing creation's creatures to it, in some misty mythical, make believe, magical, made up, machinations of Maker less mere men.

No we should throw out your interpertation of scripture and of course most of your wackier ideas were never "in" so there is no need to throw them out.

Funny, does anyone remember Frumy's great interpretation that we should keep here??

God is the essence of love. It is only your false interpretation of scripture that makes him out to be a vicious bungling monster.

So, if I read the bible, and say, believe in the flood, I do all that?? Seems to me you accused Him of that sort of thing not me.

Posted by FB:I don't see drowing the world with a flood or ordering the anhilation of men, women children, infants and animals or any of the other Biblical atrocities as things done in love
Apparently you do.

Yes, of course. If wicked man was not stopped, they, (mankind) could not have been saved. He had to limit the lifespans, and other things, and cull the demoniacs out, to save us all. Why? Because He loves man. Same with any instance of toughness with enemies of His in the past. Man's only hope was to have a people of God, so the Messiah could come.
That reminds me, the year, in the location I happen to be at the moment, is about to turn'

Happy New Year!

You claim these things literally happened and claim that God is the essence of love.According to you mythology none of us would be here if Satan hadn't tempeted Eve to eat the forbidden fruit. Hmm. I don't think that Satan had anything to do with my being here but in your delusion Satan plays a pretty important role in your presence on earth. That has some interesting implications if you really think about it.

We had the majestic choice, the old boy was the tester.

I don't believe that God ordered the Hebrews to commit genocide. You do. Who has a higher opinion of God here?

I do. I believe He can tell the truth in a book for man.

I am not the one accusing God of drowning the world or ordering the Hebrews to commit genocide. You are. I am not calling God names. I am merely pointing the logical consquence of your ultra-literal interpretation of the Old Testament.

He did all in love, the consequence is that we are here alive today, and can be saved.

OK. AV is wrong. I think AV is wrong about this and a lot of other things and wrong for different reasons than you think but that is another story. You can't both be right but you can both be wrong.

No need to be, that is not a major point.

So they were the Sons of God.

Why not?

Did they? Or is this just a myth to try to explain why people all supposedly descended from one family speak so many different languages?

I'd say they did. After all that was right at the split. A logical result of separating the spiritual, would be to have our brains process info different. For example, say, on the one side of the brain, or..whatever. That may have meant that people no longer understood each other, save groups that thought a lot alike after the change still.
That may be why we resorted to picture words in our earliest history!
To confirm the experiment, let's yest it. If we add the spiritual, what would happen??? Look at acts, where thousands all heard the preaching in their mother tongues!!! That all understood, reversing the effect for as long as the spirit bore down. Why not!

And even if they did try to build a tower to heaven this does not mean that heaven was close.

Why do the action, if there was not observations and knowledge at the time that it was close?

In fact the whole idea is nonsense unless you also think they tried to build the tower on top of the highest mountain on earth since no tower that people could build could on the planes could possibly reach the altitude of even a small mountain.

No, because, likely the heaven referred to was the bit that was near the plains. It does not say it covered the earth! It does not say it was all of heaven either. It was simply a spiritual city, or whatever we want to call it near there. Even New Jerusalem is only 1500 miles long.

 

[dad]

Yes, but not in the way you think.



No argument here - no need to defend myself. You haven't understand the man.



You don't think going to the moon would be an amazing experience, spirits or no spirits?



No evidence? No chance.

Why guess how we would be impacted on the moon??? That is about as useful as guessing what the future will be like. It depends on if there was a spiritual souce there, and it had great impact, or not. So far, the impacts seem to carry the day for evidence, there were lots of them.

Ockham's razor is far from imaginary, my boy. It means that the supernatural is very unlikely - unless you can provide some evidence that you can't explain without it.

No it means nothing of the sort. Let's see it?? Where is it, in your drawer? Of course it is imaginary, and it cannot cut spirits, I assure you.

It works - deal with it. (for reference: http://xkcd.com/54/)

It works on some things, so what? So does a butter knife!

I repeat: you don't understand the different meanings of the word spiritual

Says you, and refresh my memory, do you actually believe in the spiritual??

Exactly. You need no proof to say that there is no invisible elephant in your wardrobe. I need no proof to say there is no invisible spirit under a mountain. Or in the moon.

Great. So?

What, living his physical life, saying things with his physical mouth, doing things with his physical hands - that's not physical?

The result manifested in the physical. The spiritual source, you cannot see.

But you've not got any real evidence that gravity was the same in the past - it could easily have been different. People didn't write about gravity constantly from the beginning of time till the present day.
What's your evidence that, on the 12th March, 1803, that gravity worked just the same as it does today?

No, it couldn't be that much different. Lewis and Clark didn't fly off the planet.

Have you never looked up at the stars on a clear night? Never been inspired by beautiful scenery? I thought you were supposed to have a more full life as a Christian. Sounds like you can't appreciate the amazing things that lie before your very nose while you're so busy rubbing your hands about your city of transparent Gold and whoever you'll be boinking.

I never remotely mentioned any'boinking' in this thread, did I? Why are you so obsessed with that? Of course we look up, and see the heavens declare the glory of God. Yes, it is inspiring. Would I get a stronger charge on the moon? Seems like it impacted lives a lot. something must be doing the impacting, that you can't see.

 

[dad]

In case there are people here are new and not familiar with dad and haven't yet realized that rational discourse with him is impossible I thought I would provide some links to some of dad's greatest hits.

Since you took the trouble to mention conceptual snips, I will add a few words.

Earth Never Revolved. [That was thrown out, as a challenge, to see what evidence we had, if any to the contrary. A bit of fun, exploring how different a universe could be, under different laws]

Space was Warm [ As above. Who really knows?]

Why is the center of the earth hot. [That one was good, I am still amazed at the failure of anyone to be able to back up the wild claims of science. In fact, I definitely now lean toward no hot core]

Sun stood still [Yes it did, as I posited, a window on the eternal was opened, and man had a glimpse of how it could work]

Time running backwards [That is still an open question. I don't recall any reall overwhelming case being made either way]

Christmas Star [Yes, I have done that on another forum as well, and the more it is looked at, the more is really is the only answer that fits all the evidences and the bible]

Water on mars proof of flood and merge
[Craters on moon, and planets caused by flood ejecta, yes, why not!]

Flood waters on mars

No Gravity before flood.

[No one even came close to making any half decent case at all there]

Spiritual Light

[Yes, such as will be in heaven, and had to be here for Adam to see far stars.]



To be fair, you have many yourself, or at least the so called science myth does.

Universe in a speck mythology

All life started as pond scum, or rock crevice, or vent

The big Whack

'There are no spirits, because we can't touch and feel them'

The oceans came from snow balls over time

("When I stand on the edge of the ocean, or fly across the Pacific, it seems incredible that snowballs from space could have filled the oceans. Given several hundred million years, it works."
http://www.space.com/searchforlife/070627_seti_oceans.html )


Yes, you have some whoppers. Oh, and I like the horror stories you like to scare kids with as well.

The stars, the sun and the earth will die

( "If you wait long enough," Adams says, "all of the stars in the universe will eventually run out of fuel and burn out."
This era, 100 trillion trillion trillion years from now, marks the end of all planets. Protons, the subatomic particles at the center of the nuclei of atoms, will begin to decay. Without protons, matter evaporates into radiation. Carbon-based life is not possible, because carbon does not exist without protons.

And the universe is totally black.
"If you could transport yourself to the dark era, and look, the sky would be extremely dark," Laughlin says.


http://www.cnn.com/TECH/9701/15/end.universe/

 

[dad]

WTG, Dad! You've got an admirer! I've got a couple myself!

It's about time they started taking notes!

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

Not in your eyes, but in the eyes of many others, they are patently absurd. Especially the myths that deal in a fantasy state past. Even the name of the fantasy planet that was involved in the whacked out, big whack fable, is from mythology!!!

There is nothing absurb about it. It is only a hypothesis at this point and far from proven but unlike your fantasies there is evidence for it.

The devil showed Jesus all the kingdoms, past and present and future, of this world, in a moment of time. Does that sound like the normal course of temporary universe time can't be disposed of??

So this was before the split? Are you talking about when Satan showed Jesus the whole earth at once? Do you think the earth was flat before the split?

As for spirits anywhere, under the earth, or on it, or in the moon, that again is way out of the depth of physical only science. You cannot comment on that, except from a standpoint of ignorance.

Absurd is absurd and the idea of spirits living in the moon is absurd.

They are out if the depth of physical science, so those limited only to that are bound to think so. That is nothing more than an admission of being severely limited in scope.

We can't prove that magic invisible pink unicorns don't live on moon. That is outside the realm of physical science to prove but it is absurd as are your wild speculations.

So, how much of it do you consider to be true, then???? What, men should check in with you now, to see where God got it wrong???

God didn't get anything wrong. In case you haven't noticed the Bible is not God even if some people do worship a certain version as if it were a God.

So? Thanks for weighing in there. You think God doesn't really do things in love, knowing what man needs, in the big picture. You cannot draw God out of the bible picture.

No I think that your version of God is very distorted by your extreme Biblical literalism. You are the one who claims he ordered Genocide, not me.

So are mine, so??? Science does not cover the universe state of the future and past, period. It is in no way anything more than assumption, not science. I agree with all science,

Your same past claims are not science, whether they are yours, mine, or ours.

Nonsense.

All your clocks are set to the present state universe. Correlations are therefore meaningless. Nothing you say can stand on it's own. You offer myth based pseudo science, and anti bible doubts that got dashed. Your moon story here is an example. You are all talk, no substance.

Nonsense. I presented the data. You failed to refute it. Going on with your fantasy past nonsense won't cover your failures anywhere but in your own mind.

Science does make claims, in case you never noticed. Besides, where is not important, it is the concept of using the evolution we do know of, and attributing creation's creatures to it, in some misty mythical, make believe, magical, made up, machinations of Maker less mere men.

Nice alliteration but meanless babble as usual.

So, if I read the bible, and say, believe in the flood, I do all that??

If you believe God repented of his creation as the Bible say you believe he bungled whether you admit it or not. If you believe he killed every man, women, child, infant, unborn child and land aminal on earth, except for a handfull in a boat and later ordered his chosen people to massacre the men, women, children, infants and animals of Amalek you belive he is vicious and vindictive.

Seems to me you accused Him of that sort of thing not me.

The you haven't been paying attention.

Yes, of course. If wicked man was not stopped, they, (mankind) could not have been saved. He had to limit the lifespans, and other things, and cull the demoniacs out, to save us all. Why? Because He loves man.

So that is why he destroyed the world with a flood and later ordered genocide and is planning to burn most people in hell forever. Some love.

Happy New Year!

Happy New Year to you as well!

 

[dad]

There is nothing absurb about it. It is only a hypothesis at this point and far from proven but unlike your fantasies there is evidence for it.

It is absurd, because it is an attempt to run a computer simulation of how it could have formed with no God. It uses classic same past state myth basis, and, as always, with these fables, is riddled with problems. But it is embraced as the best the PO can cook up, -for the moment!

So this was before the split? Are you talking about when Satan showed Jesus the whole earth at once? Do you think the earth was flat before the split?

In time, the universe change was before Jesus, of course. But, like the battle where the sun stood still,, when the spiritual is locally interjected, normal temporary universe state realities cannot apply! A new norm exists locally.

Absurd is absurd and the idea of spirits living in the moon is absurd.

No more absurd than spirits living under the earth you must admit. But, please, do tell us, where could any spirit reside that you would consider anything but absurd!!!??

We can't prove that magic invisible pink unicorns don't live on moon. That is outside the realm of physical science to prove but it is absurd as are your wild speculations.

You are starting to get it, science is limited. There are unicorns, by the way. They are mentioned in the bible. There are also flying horses.

God didn't get anything wrong. In case you haven't noticed the Bible is not God even if some people do worship a certain version as if it were a God.

You have not been honest, and told us what you believe. It seems you rather make fun of what others believe. If you do believe in God, and, as you seem to indicate, He did not get anything wrong, why would that not include the holy bible?

No I think that your version of God is very distorted by your extreme Biblical literalism. You are the one who claims he ordered Genocide, not me.

Tell us how it should be interpreted. I did not claim anything of the sort. I simply noted that the seemingly horrid things done, were actually done in love.

Nonsense. I presented the data. You failed to refute it.

You have no data on any same state past. If you presented tree rings, for example, so do I present them! Anything you present I present too. I simply take away your belief based myth of the universe being some way you can't prove, as the starting assumption. The data then becomes MY data. Thanks for that.

If you believe God repented of his creation as the Bible say you believe he bungled whether you admit it or not. If you believe he killed every man, women, child, infant, unborn child and land aminal on earth, except for a handfull in a boat and later ordered his chosen people to massacre the men, women, children, infants and animals of Amalek you belive he is vicious and vindictive.
The you haven't been paying attention.

Yes, I have, and see how your carnal mind looks at the surface of things God did, and misses the love camel, for straining at the harsh nats, that were NEEDED.

So that is why he destroyed the world with a flood and later ordered genocide and is planning to burn most people in hell forever. Some love.

Who says many will burn???? Who says most will?? Don't try and lay that puppy at my feet.

Wasn't Jesus visiting many of those that were from the time of the flood? Why preach to them if there was no hope of moving on up??

Happy New Year to you as well!

Thanks.

 

[FishFace]

Why guess how we would be impacted on the moon???

Why didn't you answer the question? Clearly going to the moon would be an amazing experience - that's not guessing, it's obvious.

No it means nothing of the sort. Let's see it?? Where is it, in your drawer? Of course it is imaginary, and it cannot cut spirits, I assure you.

No, dad, it's real. But it's a concept, not an object. Not that I would expect you to understand non-literal language! It doesn't cut spirits - it just cuts them out - out of the equation of the rational person's mind.
If the only evidence you have for something you don't know exists already can be explained by something you do know exists already, then it's more sensible to go with what you know. Is it not?
Or, when I throw a ball into the air and it lands at your feet, would you accept my explanation that an invisible pink unicorn, not gravity, caused it to fall.

It works on some things, so what? So does a butter knife!

Can you tell me what it doesn't work on, and provide me with evidence that it doesn't? Of course not; all you can do is bluster about spirits. You have no evidence.

Says you, and refresh my memory, do you actually believe in the spiritual??

Way to prove my point! I didn't say anything about the spiritual. "Spiritual" is a word that denotes MORE THAN ONE THING! Only one meaning is "the" spiritual.

Great. So?

So if you want to believe in spirits under a mountain, give me some evidence. Have you forgotten where this started? You tried to tell me that spiritual feelings on top of mountains are caused by spirits in the mountain. I say, "poppycock - give me some evidence."

The result manifested in the physical. The spiritual source, you cannot see.

And there we have it. The admission. You haven't observed anything spiritual whatsoever - you've observed physical effects, explainable by physical things.

No, it couldn't be that much different. Lewis and Clark didn't fly off the planet.

How different did I say it was? Not very. The value of g was about 9.5 instead of the present day 9.8 or so.

I never remotely mentioned any'boinking' in this thread, did I? Why are you so obsessed with that?

Why, because it's so darned funny! You obviously don't appreciate what a source of entertainment you are, dad; don't put yourself down.

Of course we look up, and see the heavens declare the glory of God. Yes, it is inspiring. Would I get a stronger charge on the moon? Seems like it impacted lives a lot. something must be doing the impacting, that you can't see.

Not really. All that impacts me when I look up is the beauty of the stars and the sky. Why do you need anything other than beauty to give people the same feeling on the moon?