JUNK SCIENCE - CRITICAL DEBATE

[Dennis1209]

With the invention of the telescope and modern technology, we now know there are probably trillions of stars in our visible universe. Throughout history, man has always looked up to and recorded-observed the second heaven. No one has “ever” seen or recorded the birth and ignition of a new star, only the destruction of some.

Knowing what we know today about nuclear fusion-fission, half-life, power plants, nuclear equipment, etc. Given the amount of fuel and the burn rate of a star. That it can burn for millions and billions of years; where is the math to support such a bizarre claim?

In human observation, stars are diminishing, not stable or increasing. There has never been a replacement star: millions and millions of years. Slowly raise the water temperature of that frog in the cooking pot.

Critical debate on the status quo today has been stifled and ostracized in our educational system. Those taught in that system have replaced those of previous generations and are now in charge.

I was leading to a point, but just now with reflection on my summary, I decided to let the reader determine, if any, how it applies to this generation and future consequences.

How long do stars live? | Live Science

[Starise]

28 minutes ago, Dennis1209 said:

With the invention of the telescope and modern technology, we now know there are probably trillions of stars in our visible universe. Throughout history, man has always looked up to and recorded-observed the second heaven. No one has “ever” seen or recorded the birth and ignition of a new star, only the destruction of some.

Knowing what we know today about nuclear fusion-fission, half-life, power plants, nuclear equipment, etc. Given the amount of fuel and the burn rate of a star. That it can burn for millions and billions of years; where is the math to support such a bizarre claim?

In human observation, stars are diminishing, not stable or increasing. There has never been a replacement star: millions and millions of years. Slowly raise the water temperature of that frog in the cooking pot.

Critical debate on the status quo today has been stifled and ostracized in our educational system. Those taught in that system have replaced those of previous generations and are now in charge.

I was leading to a point, but just now with reflection on my summary, I decided to let the reader determine, if any, how it applies to this generation and future consequences.

How long do stars live? | Live Science

Due to the nature of innocent trust most children have  in adults, everything they are taught is taken as fact.

This is why Satan has his sights on the school systems. If I use the output of these types of teaching over say the last 20 years, I think we see a large number of graduates who, to this very day, still believe what they were told.

The impression science tries to convey is, " We know all that can be known so far about everything". They have the answers to counter those religious bigots who insist on creation as a viable model or are foolish enough to believe in God. They have the answers to sexuality and can talk many children into deciding on a sex that doesn't have anything to do with their plumbing.

In most cases, the true advocates these children will need are those who will point them to the truth  about these things.

I think all of it is part of the great deception which unfortunately will be highly successful. Not because those who did the persuading were so good, but because God will allow men's hearts to be blinded. 

Many of the results of this humanistic teaching are showing up now. No need to wait.

Edited October 17, 2022 by Starise

[Space_Karen]

9 hours ago, Dennis1209 said:

Knowing what we know today about nuclear fusion-fission, half-life, power plants, nuclear equipment, etc. Given the amount of fuel and the burn rate of a star. That it can burn for millions and billions of years; where is the math to support such a bizarre claim?

 

If I remember correctly the nearest star is millions of light years distance.

The starlight we see in the night sky. Took millions of years of travel to reach us.

We do not see the current appearance or position of stars. We see their appearance and position millions of years ago.

Efficiency defines the longevity of a function. The orbit of atoms and planets have an extremely high efficiency. They have no way to lose momentum energy, leaving energy to be conserved almost indefinitely. Suns and stars are also high efficiency processes as there is no way for them to lose heat energy. Gravity keeps everything contained.

Edited October 18, 2022 by Space_Karen

[Jedi4Yahweh]

1 hour ago, Space_Karen said:

If I remember correctly the nearest star is millions of light years distance.

The starlight we see in the night sky. Took millions of years of travel to reach us.

We do not see the current appearance or position of stars. We see their appearance and position millions of years ago.

Efficiency defines the longevity of a function. The orbit of atoms and planets have an extremely high efficiency. The orbit of electrons and planets have no way to lose momentum energy. And so they continue almost indefinitely. Suns and stars are also high efficiency processes as there is no way for them to lose heat energy. Gravity keeps everything contained.

According to science gravity is not what holds everything together.  Gravity calculations poses a huge problem with their past theories so they came up dark matter as what holds things together not gravity.  Gravity would cause our solar system to collapse on itself.  Earth is the densest object in our solar system.

The bibles does not say God created millions of Suns, Moons, and Planets.   It says he created one Sun and one Moon and stars to provide light to the earth and for signs and seasons.   

Edited October 18, 2022 by Jedi4Yahweh

[teddyv]

10 hours ago, Dennis1209 said:

With the invention of the telescope and modern technology, we now know there are probably trillions of stars in our visible universe. Throughout history, man has always looked up to and recorded-observed the second heaven. No one has “ever” seen or recorded the birth and ignition of a new star, only the destruction of some.

Knowing what we know today about nuclear fusion-fission, half-life, power plants, nuclear equipment, etc. Given the amount of fuel and the burn rate of a star. That it can burn for millions and billions of years; where is the math to support such a bizarre claim?

In human observation, stars are diminishing, not stable or increasing. There has never been a replacement star: millions and millions of years. Slowly raise the water temperature of that frog in the cooking pot.

Critical debate on the status quo today has been stifled and ostracized in our educational system. Those taught in that system have replaced those of previous generations and are now in charge.

I was leading to a point, but just now with reflection on my summary, I decided to let the reader determine, if any, how it applies to this generation and future consequences.

How long do stars live? | Live Science

As I recall, protostars have been observed in nebula. Whether we've seen one ignite? Not that I am aware of. But it's a big galaxy, let alone universe.

If you think the math has not been done I would find that rather odd. I don't have the calculations handy or anything but burn rates and energy output can be calculated.

[Dennis1209]

1 hour ago, Space_Karen said:

 

If I remember correctly the nearest star is millions of light years distance.

The starlight we see in the night sky. Took millions of years of travel to reach us.

We do not see the current appearance or position of stars. We see their appearance and position millions of years ago.

Efficiency defines the longevity of a function. The orbit of atoms and planets have an extremely high efficiency. They have no way to lose momentum energy, leaving energy to be conserved almost indefinitely. Suns and stars are also high efficiency processes as there is no way for them to lose heat energy. Gravity keeps everything contained.

This opens a whole array of things to discuss, well above my pay grade. Using the six-day creation account and Ussher Genealogy, everything was created in 4,004 B.C. Light would have to be made already en route. Or, the speed of light traveled much faster in the past. Or, my best answer, I don’t know. 😊

[teddyv]

1 hour ago, Space_Karen said:

 

If I remember correctly the nearest star is millions of light years distance.

The starlight we see in the night sky. Took millions of years of travel to reach us.

We do not see the current appearance or position of stars. We see their appearance and position millions of years ago.

Efficiency defines the longevity of a function. The orbit of atoms and planets have an extremely high efficiency. They have no way to lose momentum energy, leaving energy to be conserved almost indefinitely. Suns and stars are also high efficiency processes as there is no way for them to lose heat energy. Gravity keeps everything contained.

The nearest star is about 4 light years (Proxima Centauri). It is a small red dwarf. 

[Space_Karen]

35 minutes ago, Dennis1209 said:

This opens a whole array of things to discuss, well above my pay grade. Using the six-day creation account and Ussher Genealogy, everything was created in 4,004 B.C. Light would have to be made already en route. Or, the speed of light traveled much faster in the past. Or, my best answer, I don’t know. 😊

 

You should never think any topic is above your pay grade.

Stubbornness is a more useful survival trait than intelligence.

And people within the grand scheme of things are not that smart.

If you entered science or computing industries. You might expect to find smart people. But there is a good chance the experience would be a disappointing one.

Society desperately needs more christians in science and big brain fields.

Christians might have a special talent for success in those areas.

A christian in science might search for truth and God. 2 things most people try to avoid.

Edited October 18, 2022 by Space_Karen

[teddyv]

Just now, Space_Karen said:

Society desperately needs more christians in science and big brain fields.

Christians might have a special talent for success in those areas.

There are already many Christians in these fields. We can always use more. Evangelicalism seems to have developed a level of suspicion, to outright hostility, over the sciences that it's like they have completed abdicated that area of influence.

[Tristen]

1 hour ago, Dennis1209 said:

This opens a whole array of things to discuss, well above my pay grade. Using the six-day creation account and Ussher Genealogy, everything was created in 4,004 B.C. Light would have to be made already en route. Or, the speed of light traveled much faster in the past. Or, my best answer, I don’t know. 😊

 

Hi Dennis,

Regardless of who answers, or which model one prefers, “I don’t know” is the only intellectually honest conclusion. That includes the secular models – whose proponents like to falsely express their positions as truisms.

Nevertheless, it is permitted (and interesting) to discuss and debate the various proposed models. Young-earth creationists have several models available to us – some simple, and some more complex.

You alluded to some of the simple models – such as God creating a mature universe (with light “made already en route”), in the same manner that humans and vegetation were created in a mature state. Similarly, God could have made an immature universe and essentially ‘wound it forward’ during the creation event on the first day.

A more complex model (for example) might integrate Time Dilation, Einstein’s Relativity, and the Biblical claim that God “stretched out the heavens” (e.g. Isaiah 42:5, 45:12, Psalms 104:2, Jeremiah 10:12). Since both time and space are dimensions of the same substance (according to Relativity), when God stretch out the universe away from the earth, time increased (dilated) where the space increased. As stretched space increases size, stretched time increases age – such that the further away something has been stretched from the earth, the older it actually is - even though it was all created together.

As a matter of logic, all models about the origins of the universe require a significant amount of presupposition. Only once that fact is recognized, does it become possible rationally (and respectfully) consider the vast range of possibilities.