Jump to content
IGNORED

Distant black hole holds surprises about the early universe


MorningGlory

Recommended Posts


  • Group:  Graduated to Heaven
  • Followers:  7
  • Topic Count:  51
  • Topics Per Day:  0.02
  • Content Count:  220
  • Content Per Day:  0.09
  • Reputation:   215
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  06/04/2017
  • Status:  Offline

7 hours ago, MorningGlory said:

Of course I agree with that.  But the black holes can give us glimpses of the universe before God filled it up.

GENESIS 1 And God said, “Let there be lights in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark sacred times, and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth.” And it was so. 16 God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17 God set them in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day.

MG: There was NOTHING in the universe before God created it. So much for black holes.

Edited by Steve_K
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  0
  • Topic Count:  1,022
  • Topics Per Day:  0.16
  • Content Count:  39,193
  • Content Per Day:  6.14
  • Reputation:   9,977
  • Days Won:  78
  • Joined:  10/01/2006
  • Status:  Offline

5 hours ago, Steve_K said:

GENESIS 1 And God said, “Let there be lights in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark sacred times, and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth.” And it was so. 16 God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17 God set them in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day.

MG: There was NOTHING in the universe before God created it. So much for black holes.

We don't really know that for sure, Steve. God created everything and He put it all in something.  That doesn't contradict Scripture at all.  He laid down the laws that govern everything in existance but He is not bound by them.  The purpose of the 'black holes' is known only to Him and there's no way to say they're not there because they are.  The universe is vast but, again for all we know, God might keep it in His pocket.  We will find out when we enter the Kingdom.

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  0
  • Topic Count:  1,022
  • Topics Per Day:  0.16
  • Content Count:  39,193
  • Content Per Day:  6.14
  • Reputation:   9,977
  • Days Won:  78
  • Joined:  10/01/2006
  • Status:  Offline

1 hour ago, HAZARD said:

I can believe it, because he is;  "Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of truth." (2 Tim 3:7).  :laugh:  :laugh:

Black holes can be terrifying, One never knows what's inside them.

Z 97..jpg

Looks like there might be blackberrlies in there to me!:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  11
  • Topic Count:  19
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  3,396
  • Content Per Day:  0.91
  • Reputation:   730
  • Days Won:  4
  • Joined:  12/21/2013
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  12/26/1963

On 1/11/2018 at 3:20 PM, MorningGlory said:

This is not a court of law and we are not attornies. 

Hence the word "Tantamount". :rolleyes:  It's called an "Analogy", and it's "Right On Point".

 

Quote

The above makes no sense.

Really?? Now, you have to SUPPORT your charge...   

So post the Syllogism then INVALIDATE it...?  If not, then your charge has as much veracity as your 'black hole' appeal.

 

Quote

 Would you like to comment on the TOPIC of this thread

I did, multiple times.  There's only so many ways I can Illustrate that 'black holes' are Fairytales. 

 

Quote

Truth is what it is; you DO post the same things over and over again.

Your appeal here is tantamount to a Defense Attorney appealing to the Jury by saying, "The Prosecutor just keeps on repeating the same things over and over again: Fingerprints on The Murder Weapon, DNA of the perpetrator (my client) underneath the victims fingernails, CCT capturing my client in the very act of murder...but, since the Prosecutor hasn't revealed anything NEW; Therefore, my client is INNOCENT !!!" 

Try posting different arguments and you'll get different answers. :brightidea:

 

regards

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Seeker
  • Followers:  3
  • Topic Count:  3
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  21
  • Content Per Day:  0.01
  • Reputation:   20
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  12/12/2017
  • Status:  Offline

On 1/12/2018 at 5:55 PM, Enoch2021 said:

I did, multiple times.  There's only so many ways I can Illustrate that 'black holes' are Fairytales. 

 

I'm late to the party here, but it's hardly plausible that black holes are fairy tales. They were predicted long before they were observed. While it's true that whatever celestial phenomena that are being called "black holes" may turn out to be something else, it is reasonable to assume that they are what they appear to be.

Fairy tales are made up stories. Like Hansel and Gretel. No one says that Hansel and Gretel were real historical figures, do they? No. We experience them wholly through written stories and oral traditions. Black holes are different. Astronomers have made observations of phenomena in the night sky which suggests that they have a tangible existence.

BTW, astronomy is science. Galileo used astronomical observations to prove the heliocentric model. Please tell me that you accept that the earth revolves around the sun. I assume you think it does. But in admitting the truth of this, you also have to admit that astronomical observations have much to teach us about the universe. If you think astronomical observations can teach us nothing, then why do you accept that the earth revolves around the sun?

 

Edit: NM. No need to respond there, buddy. I'll just be on my way.

Edited by VulcanLogician
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  6
  • Topic Count:  29
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  5,240
  • Content Per Day:  2.13
  • Reputation:   1,356
  • Days Won:  4
  • Joined:  07/03/2017
  • Status:  Offline

1 hour ago, VulcanLogician said:

BTW, astronomy is science. Galileo used astronomical observations to prove the heliocentric model. Please tell me that you accept that the earth revolves around the sun. I assume you think it does. But in admitting the truth of this, you also have to admit that astronomical observations have much to teach us about the universe. If you think astronomical observations can teach us nothing, then why do you accept that the earth revolves around the sun?

VulcanLogician, Enoch2021 will post a LOT of material that he uses to "KNOW" the earth is flat, doesn't move, is covered by a solid dome that contains the sun, moon, and starts, and probably a few other things that you might find bizarre. It may be a bit of a shock, but probably best that you be forewarned by me before you experience the shock of a flat earth post when it inevitably comes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Seeker
  • Followers:  3
  • Topic Count:  3
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  21
  • Content Per Day:  0.01
  • Reputation:   20
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  12/12/2017
  • Status:  Offline

51 minutes ago, one.opinion said:

VulcanLogician, Enoch2021 will post a LOT of material that he uses to "KNOW" the earth is flat, doesn't move, is covered by a solid dome that contains the sun, moon, and starts, and probably a few other things that you might find bizarre. It may be a bit of a shock, but probably best that you be forewarned by me before you experience the shock of a flat earth post when it inevitably comes.

Sorry, I thought he was a garden variety YEC. Thanks for the heads up. 

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  11
  • Topic Count:  19
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  3,396
  • Content Per Day:  0.91
  • Reputation:   730
  • Days Won:  4
  • Joined:  12/21/2013
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  12/26/1963

6 hours ago, VulcanLogician said:

I'm late to the party here, but it's hardly plausible that black holes are fairy tales.

Really?  Well go back to the beginning and refute my arguments.

 

Quote

They were predicted long before they were observed.

:huh:  Ahh, that's not a "Scientific Prediction".

Ya see, "Scientific Predictions" are the result of Independent Variables affecting Dependent Variables in Scientific Hypotheses.

Scientific Hypothesis - a special kind of PREDICTION that forecasts how the "Independent Variable" will affect the Dependent Variable.
http://www.csef.colostate.edu/resources/vocabulary.pdf

Before you have Scientific Hypotheses (Step 3 of The Scientific Method), you kinda gotta have OBSERVING Phenomena (Step 1 of The Scientific Method).

What you're talking about are: Jeanne Dixon, Edgar Cayce, Jimmy The Greek, Nostradamus, and Carnival Tent "Predictions":rolleyes:

ps.  Nobody has Observed 'black holes'..."Still".

 

Quote

While it's true that whatever celestial phenomena that are being called "black holes" may turn out to be something else, it is reasonable to assume that they are what they appear to be.

So it's reasonable to assume a Fairytale even though the Fairytale may turn out to be a Fairytale?

 

Quote

Fairy tales are made up stories. Like Hansel and Gretel. No one says that Hansel and Gretel were real historical figures, do they? No.

Correct, it's a Fairytale.  The Same "Method" was used to Conjure "black holes"...Imagination.

 

Quote

Astronomers have made observations of phenomena in the night sky which suggests that they have a tangible existence.

Observing Phenomena is merely the First Step in The Scientific Method; So your appeal needs some work.

 

Quote

BTW, astronomy is science.

Yes and dark matter is created from nothing by luminescent gerbils.

Astronomy isn't Science:

The sine qua non of "Science" is The Scientific Method
The sine qua non of The Scientific Method is "Experiments" (Hypothesis Tests).
The sine qua non of Experiments is "Hypothesis".

Post ONE Formal Scientific Hypothesis in the History of astronomy...?  OR
Show how you can have "Science" without Scientific Hypotheses...?

"If it doesn't agree with EXPERIMENT, it's WRONG. In that simple statement is the KEY to SCIENCE".
Richard Feynman (Nobel Prize, Physics); The Essence Of Science In 60 Seconds.

"The scientific method REQUIRES that an hypothesis be ruled out or modified if its predictions are clearly and repeatedly incompatible with EXPERIMENTAL TESTS. Further, no matter how elegant a theory is, its predictions must agree with EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS if we are to believe that it is a VALID description of nature. In physics, as in every experimental science, "EXPERIMENT is Supreme" and EXPERIMENTAL VERIFICATION of hypothetical predictions is ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY."
http://teacher.nsrl.rochester.edu/phy_labs/appendixe/appendixe.html

Uh Ohh...

"Unlike the other sciences, astronomy is ENTIRELY OBSERVATIONAL. You CANNOT run EXPERIMENTS on things. You cannot manipulate the objects to see how they work."
http://www.astronomynotes.com/starprop/s2.htm

Crocheting is more "Scientific" than astronomy. <_<

By the mere fact that I had to explain this to you, is a Screaming Testimony that you wouldn't know what ACTUAL "Science" was if it landed on your head, spun around, and whistled dixie.

 

Quote

Galileo used astronomical observations to prove the heliocentric model.

1.  Begging The Question (Fallacy).  Scientifically Validate...

a.  What Phenomenon was Observed...?
b.  Post the Formal Scientific Hypothesis then EXPERIMENT that validates your claim...?
c.  Highlight the "Independent Variable" that was used in the TEST...?
d.  Post the Null Hypothesis that was Rejected/Falsified...?

2.  'models' are demonstrable Pseudo-Science...

Please show "models" in the Scientific Method...? (and not "Ball-Stick" Airplane 'Models' Either !!! lol)...?

"A model is used for situations when it is known that the hypothesis has a LIMITATION ON IT'S VALIDITY." 
https://www.thoughtco.com/hypothesis-model-theory-and-law-2699066

Allow me to translate: "Pseudo-Science" ...There is no such animal as a Scientific Hypothesis with 'limited validity' it's tantamount to a woman being 'A LITTLE' PREGNANT !! 
REAL Scientific Hypotheses are either CONFIRMED or  INVALIDATED, PERIOD...End of Story!! 
Furthermore, Scientific Hypotheses do not exist in PERPETUITY or wait for more DATA !!! 'Data' comes FROM Experiments (Hypothesis TESTS).
A "Model" is conjured when the 'alleged' Hypothesis is UN-TESTABLE!!! That means, there never was an 'ACTUAL' Scientific Hypothesis to begin with !!
 

Quote

Please tell me that you accept that the earth revolves around the sun.

We don't "ACCEPT" claims in Science, we Hypothesis TEST.  "Accepting" is for: Propaganda States, Political science, 2nd Grade Story Time, and Religions.

Scientifically Validate that the Earth revolves around the Sun...

a.  What Phenomenon was Observed...?
b.  Post the Formal Scientific Hypothesis then EXPERIMENT that validates your claim...?
c.  Highlight the "Independent Variable" that was used in the TEST...?
d.  Post the Null Hypothesis that was Rejected/Falsified...?

 

Quote

Edit: NM. No need to respond there, buddy. I'll just be on my way.

Wise Move; However, it's a 'little late' for that buddy.

 

regards

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  11
  • Topic Count:  19
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  3,396
  • Content Per Day:  0.91
  • Reputation:   730
  • Days Won:  4
  • Joined:  12/21/2013
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  12/26/1963

4 hours ago, one.opinion said:

VulcanLogician, Enoch2021 will post a LOT of material that he uses to "KNOW" the earth is flat, doesn't move, is covered by a solid dome that contains the sun, moon, and starts, and probably a few other things that you might find bizarre. It may be a bit of a shock, but probably best that you be forewarned by me before you experience the shock of a flat earth post when it inevitably comes.

Feeble attempt at Poisoning The Well (Fallacy).

What's truly shocking and bizarre is your 'belief' in a Whirling Spinning-Ball hurling through a Fairytale Vacuum of Space at 1,907,600 mph in several different directions simultaneously without a Planck Length Sliver of Proof. 

 

regards

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  11
  • Topic Count:  19
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  3,396
  • Content Per Day:  0.91
  • Reputation:   730
  • Days Won:  4
  • Joined:  12/21/2013
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  12/26/1963

4 hours ago, VulcanLogician said:

Sorry, I thought he was a garden variety YEC. Thanks for the heads up. 

What's a "Garden Variety" :rolleyes: Young Earth Creationist, pray tell...?

 

regards

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...