"Astronomers have pushed NASA's Hubble Space Telescope to its limits by finding what is likely to be the most distant object ever seen in the universe. The object's light traveled 13.2 billion years to reach Hubble, roughly 150 million years longer than the previous record holder. The age of the universe is approximately 13.7 billion years."
#20. To: Dead Culture Watch, GarySpFc, liberator (#5)
I've recently heard the new theory is that the universe has always existed, is eternal. Its the 'agreed' science of the day, lol.
"For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountain of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries."-- Robert Jastrow
"In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." (Genesis 1:1)
Bigger issues like whether the Sun still revolves around the Earth at the center of the sun-parrot universe?
Yeah the Greeks really got that wrong; and all those who bought into Greek philosophy syncretizing it with Christian theology. It was a medieval machination.
"In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." (Genesis 1:1)
You and I were not always "here." We can observe that. Everything in our universe decays, dies. It has an end. Procreation has a beginning. The universe tells us loud and clear something does not come from nothing.
Taking the "universe has no beginning and is eternal" is a theological statement. Not scientific.
"In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." (Genesis 1:1)
Meaning the actual creation of the matter, and conditions, to cause Big Bang is an inconvenient truth for him and others.
I think this is disingenuous to scientists. A true scientist actually has a craving for solving the riddles of nature. And while finding explanations and achieving understanding is itself a great reward, it would be disappointing for all mysteries to be solved as there would be no more searching or digging for more answers.
While theologians may be content to accept things on faith, a scientist, by definition, does not have that luxury. Even the bible says, in proverbs, that it is the glory of God to conceal a matter, but the glory of man to seek out a matter. I see no reason to denigrate the honest scientific profession, and while many or even most scientists may well have their own bias that can interfere with their work, that does not mean they are not consciously honest people.
A physical explanation for the Big Bang would doubtless involve alternate universes or dimensions, the discussion of which are very much mainstream in the scientific community. Such alternate universes may well be where spiritual faith and science converge. Time may tell.
"For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountain of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries."
Even if this were true, I would add to the analogy that it is the scientist that would have, because of his exhaustive research, a full understanding of where the mountain was. It is he who could point it out on a map. The theologians wouldn't have a clue.
#30. To: Pinguinite, GarySpFc, liberator, Vicomte13 (#27)
I think this is disingenuous to scientists. A true scientist actually has a craving for solving the riddles of nature. And while finding explanations and achieving understanding is itself a great reward, it would be disappointing for all mysteries to be solved as there would be no more searching or digging for more answers.
I understand the curiosity as it is human nature. It is just not scientific. They look 'odd' dousing Christians and philosophers with insults when they engage in the same exericise on origins. So when they step into this realm of being they should put on their armor.
that it is the glory of God to conceal a matter, but the glory of man to seek out a matter.
Can't argue with that. Solomon was wise to say so. We were created curious beings. Just as were the earlier Western scientists and philosophers. They all had one thing in common. What we observe is ordered and was created by a personal Creator. Curious they were that thanks to their humility and efforts we have modern science which has derived so many cures for sickness.
Where I take pause in our post-modern world is the arrogance of our scientists today. Most exclude even the very thought of an "unmoved Mover" in the origins of our existence. Akin to the short sighted Middle ages where anything science was considered heretical.
"In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." (Genesis 1:1)
Even if this were true, I would add to the analogy that it is the scientist that would have, because of his exhaustive research, a full understanding of where the mountain was. It is he who could point it out on a map. The theologians wouldn't have a clue.
It was meant to be a bit of humor as I see it written.
The theologians wouldn't have a clue.
By the quote they (the theologians) were on top first:) Perhaps they 'hired' a guide who showed them.
"In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." (Genesis 1:1)
I would add to the analogy that it is the scientist that would have, because of his exhaustive research, a full understanding of where the mountain was. It is he who could point it out on a map. The theologians wouldn't have a clue.
In the purest sense, you're mostly likely correct.
However, I'm not sure the two are mutually or necessarily exclusive.
There seems to be a movement advancing the myth that those with faith in the Almighty and His nature and law are at odds with science. If you ask many scientists these days, they'll merely admit that life and nature's law reinforce their faith, as well as in their Creator-Designer, God.
Unless, did you take into account the expansion of Space itself - and with it the distances observed within?
Personally I don't see any conflict between the modern cosmological model and the assertion that God created the universe from nothing. They both say the same thing, one moment there was nothing, and the next, all the energy in the universe today existed. Let there be light! BANG!
The bump that gets the feathers of religiously petrified sun-parrots all ruffled is that light traveling 13+ billion years sort of contradicts their quaint notion that Creation is only a few thousand years old.
They're welcome to their opinion - but when they start asserting that I must accept of their cosmic calendar instead of believing what my own eyes see as a condition of my (or my children's) membership in "THEIR" body of Christ, well... then I start plucking Fallible and Uninspired plumage.
"Unless, did you take into account the expansion of Space itself - and with it the distances observed within?"
Well, I didn't want to get technical so I ignored that. My point was that the "Big Bang" occurred some 13-14 billion years ago, but not from a single point.
To me, that's more plausible than this "remote object" starting out right next to us 13.7 billion years ago (during the Big Bang) and ending up 13.2 billion light-years away during that time. It would have to be travelling near light speed all the way, and the red-shift would be extreme.
I believe space-time is expanding to accommodate our expanding universe. But I don't see how the expansion of space-time has any effect on the objects within our universe.
Well, I didn't want to get technical so I ignored that. My point was that the "Big Bang" occurred some 13-14 billion years ago, but not from a single point.
What you mean. Is someone told you that and you bought it hook line and hell.
"The bump that gets the feathers of religiously petrified sun-parrots all ruffled is that light traveling 13+ billion years sort of contradicts their quaint notion that Creation is only a few thousand years old."
That's based on their belief that God created everything in 6 days with each "day" being 24 hours.
But why would God use one revolution of a planet not yet created as his unit of measurement? If He did, maybe He was referring to one revolution of the planet Zorp which is 2 billion years. Meaning God took about 12+ billion years to create everything ... which is about right (given the uncertainties of Zorp).
The bump that gets the feathers of religiously petrified sun-parrots all ruffled is that light traveling 13+ billion years sort of contradicts their quaint notion that Creation is only a few thousand years old.
God created a finished work fool. Tell me why the creator would be forced for to wait for light to travel when he is the one who created it. Tell us fool why God would be unable to do that.
Because the earth was created by God as described in the Holy Bible.
Because skin doesn't evolve around a heart, lungs, veins etc. Because all these theories big bang, evolution, billions of years are circular reasoning.
"Admittedly, I have left much unsaid. Since my modest proposal appeals to a miracle, there may be no physical predictions and hence nothing that we can test."
Tell us sun-parrot why God would want to do that - other than to perform an act that's been defined for Him ala human religious dogma and the "created things" who'd impose that between the Creator and the free minds of individuals seeking Him.
Meanwhile the signals from Voyager are arriving on predictable schedule.
Nah. "C" just is. It's like Pi or Plank's Constant.
"The speed of light in vacuum, commonly denoted c, is a universal physical constant important in many areas of physics. Its value is exactly 299792458 metres per second," www.google.com/search?q=s...f+light&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8
Even if this were true, I would add to the analogy that it is the scientist that would have, because of his exhaustive research, a full understanding of where the mountain was. It is he who could point it out on a map. The theologians wouldn't have a clue.
And the voice of atheistic materialism rumbles and roars as it mocks theology.
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
The bump that gets the feathers of religiously petrified sun-parrots all ruffled is that light traveling 13+ billion years sort of contradicts their quaint notion that Creation is only a few thousand years old.
Did it ever occur to you that maybe light has not always traveled at 186,000 miles/sec?
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
And the voice of atheistic materialism rumbles and roars as it mocks theology.
I'm not sure of your exact meaning, but I'm certainly not mocking theology.
Theologians and scientists both have great potential to contribute to our understanding of the universe and our place in it. It is inappropriate for either side to mock the other, and certainly there are those on both sides who do so.
The truth stands on it's own, regardless of what errors, whether maliciously instigated or not, are projected by any person.
