New Info On Formation Of Moon

[danielwoods]

Yep; and it turned out to be a not very good theory when repeated testing disproved it.

 

Now all you have to do is disprove the theory of Abiogenesis.

 

It took a hundred years for the failed theory to be discredited. 

 

There isn't much to disprove with abiogenesis since it doesn't rest on observational data. 

 

Even though the phlogiston theory of fire was discredited, some refused to acknowledge it's error. Such is the way with man.

[thesometimesaint]

 

It took a hundred years for the failed theory to be discredited. 

 

There isn't much to disprove with abiogenesis since it doesn't rest on observational data. 

 

Even though the phlogiston theory of fire was discredited, some refused to acknowledge it's error. Such is the way with man.

 

So? It took longer to disprove a geocentric solar system. Do you still believe it is geocentric?

 

Then it should be very easy for you to disprove it. Go for it, and good luck, you'll need it.

 

Some people, about 1/4 adult Americans, still believe the sun revolves around the earth because, according to them, it says so in the Bible.

Bible definitively states that the Earth is at rest and unmoving. Psalm 93:1 ...

[danielwoods]

So? It took longer to disprove a geocentric solar system. Do you still believe it is geocentric?

 

Then it should be very easy for you to disprove it. Go for it, and good luck, you'll need it.

 

Some people, about 1/4 adult Americans, still believe the sun revolves around the earth because, according to them, it says so in the Bible.

Bible definitively states that the Earth is at rest and unmoving. Psalm 93:1 ...

No luck needed. There's nothing to disprove. However, people will still believe it.

As for Psalm 93:1 certainly doesn't say that the sun revolves around the earth.

"the world also is established, that it cannot be moved."

The statement doesn't indicate anything other than man can't move it.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Life on its own is chemistry. IE; Take out the chemical carbon and life as we know it ceases to exist.

 

Abiogenesis is the explanation of the process.

And that explanation is bunk. Evolution sure I can see that. Abiogensis not so much.

[thesometimesaint]

No luck needed. There's nothing to disprove. However, people will still believe it.

As for Psalm 93:1 certainly doesn't say that the sun revolves around the earth.

"the world also is established, that it cannot be moved."

The statement doesn't indicate anything other than man can't move it.

That is a summation of your beliefs.  Now disprove the theory of Abiogenesis.

 

I didn't say that. I said some people believe that.

SEE http://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=11&article=1151

[thesometimesaint]

And that explanation is bunk. Evolution sure I can see that. Abiogensis not so much.

 

Now just disprove it. It should be real simple.

[USU78]

So? It took longer to disprove a geocentric solar system. Do you still believe it is geocentric?

 

Then it should be very easy for you to disprove it. Go for it, and good luck, you'll need it.

 

Some people, about 1/4 adult Americans, still believe the sun revolves around the earth because, according to them, it says so in the Bible.

Bible definitively states that the Earth is at rest and unmoving. Psalm 93:1 ...

 

I question your conclusions (I do not question the poll results).

 

Why?  That ca 25% figure is awfully close to the ca 23% "functionally illiterate" figure referenced here:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literacy_in_the_United_States

 

In other words:  were they capable of answering the question as posed?  It's not as straight-forward as one might think, being a compound question.

 

Were they, because of their illiteracy, sufficiently educated in science (which relies upon a whole lot of reading) to understand what was being asked, even if they did have the verbal skills to process the question?

 

I think you do damage to Bible-believing people when you throw around such things.

[Rob Osborn]

We pretty much have every evidence that disproves abiogenesis. Test after test continues to verify that life only comes from life.

[Rob Osborn]

How does one disprove something that doesnt exist? How would I disprove the flying spaghetti monster?

[changed]

How does one disprove something that doesnt exist? How would I disprove the flying spaghetti monster?

According to the multiverse theory, everything exists, including flying spaghetti monsters.... and not just from the multiverse, just simple laws of thermo - youdon't get something from nothing, therefore something has always existed - so there is an infinite existence, infinite time, therefore everything exists, because given enough time...

[thesometimesaint]

 

I question your conclusions (I do not question the poll results).

 

Why?  That ca 25% figure is awfully close to the ca 23% "functionally illiterate" figure referenced here:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literacy_in_the_United_States

 

In other words:  were they capable of answering the question as posed?  It's not as straight-forward as one might think, being a compound question.

 

Were they, because of their illiteracy, sufficiently educated in science (which relies upon a whole lot of reading) to understand what was being asked, even if they did have the verbal skills to process the question?

 

I think you do damage to Bible-believing people when you throw around such things.

 

The idea that the sun revolves around the earth far older than America, and was promoted by highly literate people from Ptolemy to John Calvin. They just had different Gods in mind.

 

Functional literacy has little to do with it. It is often defined as not able to read and understand the newspaper (They're written at the 4th grade level ). Most people know the earth revolves around the sun before they ever enter formal schooling, or soon there after. The real problem is general lack of scientific understanding of how our world really works. So to make the world seem emotionally safe they cling to what some religious leader tells them. I'm not blaming them. It is a natural human desire for answers in a scary world that doesn't have a whole lot of them. IE; Sputnik scared a lot of Americans out of their complacency about science. So launched the most successful drive to teach their children the world has ever seen. That change was dramatic and almost overnight. We seem to be falling back into that complacency. It doesn't bode well of our country.

[thesometimesaint]

We pretty much have every evidence that disproves abiogenesis. Test after test continues to verify that life only comes from life.

 

Incorrect.

[thesometimesaint]

How does one disprove something that doesnt exist? How would I disprove the flying spaghetti monster?

 

Technically you can't. But don't get too hung up on that idea. We haven't a clue as to what gravity actually is. But I don't recommend jumping out of an air plane in flight, sans parachute, to disprove it.

[USU78]

The idea that the sun revolves around the earth far older than America, and was promoted by highly literate people from Ptolemy to John Calvin. They just had different Gods in mind.

 

Functional literacy has little to do with it. It is often defined as not able to read and understand the newspaper (They're written at the 4th grade level ). Most people know the earth revolves around the sun before they ever enter formal schooling, or soon there after. The real problem is general lack of scientific understanding of how our world really works. So to make the world seem emotionally safe they cling to what some religious leader tells them. I'm not blaming them. It is a natural human desire for answers in a scary world that doesn't have a whole lot of them. IE; Sputnik scared a lot of Americans out of their complacency about science. So launched the most successful drive to teach their children the world has ever seen. That change was dramatic and almost overnight. We seem to be falling back into that complacency. It doesn't bode well of our country.

 

You propose no evidence here to justify the conclusion that ~25% ignorance of the Sun's primacy in the solar system as a function of religious, specifically evangelical, fundamentalism.

 

You blithely pronounce such things because they please your political sensibilities.  I point out a possible problem:  ca 23% functional illiteracy, and you don't even consider why the two things should be connected.  Think it through.  How does one become functionally illiterate when there is compulsory education through about 10th grade throughout the country?  Social issues and learning disabilities surely have a lot to do with it.  What social issues?  Let's start with anti-education amongst urban blacks and hispanics generally.  If one rejects education, and all that that entails, one suffers a good chance of missing out on a fundamental understanding of where our little planet sits in relation to the stuff we see in the sky.  Hence, an inability to identify whether the sun goes around the earth or vice versa.

 

Consider your biases here:  you want part of the Republican base, evangelicals, to be ignorant, brutal, racist and supersticious. It makes you feel superior.

 

I don't have particularly an ax to grind in defense of fundamentalism, but fair's fair.  And only a fully committed bigot would insist that ignorance of the "underclass" is religion-based . . . at least without better evidence than the conclusions you keep jumping to.

[Walden]

And of course it was all random chance, right?

A little nudge here, a DNA tweak there, and here comes Adam.

And maybe they'll find those Quakers living on the moon any second now

[danielwoods]

That is a summation of your beliefs.  Now disprove the theory of Abiogenesis.

 

I didn't say that. I said some people believe that.

SEE http://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=11&article=1151

 

Kind of difficult to disprove something that only exists in the minds of believers. 

[mfbukowski]

Kind of difficult to disprove something that only exists in the minds of believers.

Sounds like you've been looking in the mirror again.

[mfbukowski]

And maybe they'll find those Quakers living on the moon any second now

.... the philosophy is kindness. ~Dalai Lama

Ain't hypocrisy fun?

I guess you never noticed that this is the essence of Mormonism

 

Our own brain, our own heart is our temple; the philosophy is kindness. ~Dalai Lama

 

The temple is our heart and brain.  A=A

Edited April 5, 2014 by mfbukowski

[MiserereNobis]

The temple is our heart and brain.  A=A

 

Oh dear, next you'll be quoting the Gospel of Thomas!

[thesometimesaint]

You propose no evidence here to justify the conclusion that ~25% ignorance of the Sun's primacy in the solar system as a function of religious, specifically evangelical, fundamentalism.

 

You blithely pronounce such things because they please your political sensibilities.  I point out a possible problem:  ca 23% functional illiteracy, and you don't even consider why the two things should be connected.  Think it through.  How does one become functionally illiterate when there is compulsory education through about 10th grade throughout the country?  Social issues and learning disabilities surely have a lot to do with it.  What social issues?  Let's start with anti-education amongst urban blacks and hispanics generally.  If one rejects education, and all that that entails, one suffers a good chance of missing out on a fundamental understanding of where our little planet sits in relation to the stuff we see in the sky.  Hence, an inability to identify whether the sun goes around the earth or vice versa.

 

Consider your biases here:  you want part of the Republican base, evangelicals, to be ignorant, brutal, racist and supersticious. It makes you feel superior.

 

I don't have particularly an ax to grind in defense of fundamentalism, but fair's fair.  And only a fully committed bigot would insist that ignorance of the "underclass" is religion-based . . . at least without better evidence than the conclusions you keep jumping to.

 

1. Survey after survey has established that about 1/4 of adult Americans subscribe to the idea that the sun revolves around the earth.

 

2. Highly literate people for millennia has used some sacred text as justification for that belief.

 

3. My politics has nothing to do with the two. Though it obviously does to yours.

 

4. Functional illiteracy in the US is generally understood as the inability to read and understand a newspaper. Which BTW are written at the 4th grade level.

 

4. Where did I say anything about republicans, evangelicals, blacks, or Hispanics? You my friend seem to feel it your responsibility to make my politics the issue. They are not. Though I guaranty I can if you want me to.

[mfbukowski]

Oh dear, next you'll be quoting the Gospel of Thomas!

Not a bad idea, but  nah, just plain old Paul- nothing fancy. 

1 Corinthians 6:19-20 King James Version (KJV)

19What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?

20For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's.

Of course if the Dali Lama says it, it is much cooler than the silly old Bible.

 

And if Jesus says to love your neighbor, it's uncool but if the Dali Lama says "The philosophy is kindness" now THAT is cool!

And there have been many parallels discussed on this board about the Fall for example being a personal fall from innocence and the way in which cathedrals are symbolize the cross and relate to the Body of Christ.

I am as much into Art history as I am philosophy- and I love this blog

 

Before reading this article, I already was familiar with how the floor plan of a basilica can mimic the form of the cross, or even the body of Christ. The allegorist William Durandus (also sometimes written Guillaume Durandi or William Durand) said as much in the 13th century. Fingesten asserts this point, and even references Vitruvius and the Renaissance artist Pietro Cataneo’s “Vitruvian Figure”(1554, see above), which is depicted within the basilica floor plan. But Fingesten takes things further: he discusses how the ribbed vaults of cathedrals mimic the spinal cord and ribs of a human figure. He believes that the Lincoln Cathedral interior (shown at the beginning of this post) is the best expression of this anatomical imagery. Fingesten also believes that the stained glass windows represent the translucent skin of the human body.

Using biblical references, Fingesten argues that the cathedral interior was originally intended to symbolize the body of Christ (who is recorded in the New Testament to have compared his own body to a temple). With the increase of devotion to the Virgin Mary in the twelfth century and afterward, the cathedral also came to symbolize her body. Mary’s body (and womb) traditionally have been compared to a “temple of God,” so I think that this later reinterpretation of the cathedral (really, a merger of male and female allegories) makes sense. I was especially intrigued by Fingesten’s descriptions about how “the pointed ribbed vault system suggests the rib-cage of a gigantic mother bending over her son” and how “cathedrals increased in size until they bulged like a woman high with child.”2

http://albertis-window.com/category/architecture/

 

So there are many many levels in which the body is a temple and the temple is a body.

 

Couple this with the Mormon concept that God has a human- divine nature (not two natures- one nature because humans are divine) so it becomes literally true, symbolically true, figuratively true and spiritually true all at once.

 

If you really get this, it is one of the most profound insights anyone can receive.  The kingdom of God is within, the temple is his body and the body is a temple.

 

There is much more to this.  Put it on the list for our discussion on a cloud some day