If stars were created, cosmology is wrong

[Nakosis]

So show me support for the magic stars needed to produce the event according to their own theories? Or should we take it by faith only? Ha

No you shouldn't. You should and are expected to question it.
Unless you have enough background knowledge to support your questions, you may look a little silly to those who do but that is ok. that's the basis of learning.
The same skepticism of science tends to spill over onto theology/religion. You get into the habit of questioning everything. There is nothing particularly biased in questioning religion. It's how science deals with everything.

 

[McBell]

So you do not explain how we know a magic union of stars happened. Nor do you care that no evidence exists. Instead, we see some hate attitude for God?!

You are free to believe whatever nonsense you like.
Just as I am free to point out your nonsense.

if you want to believe my pointing out your nonsense is hating on your god, by all means, whatever makes you and your god happy.

 

[Regiomontanus]

There are many books on Buddhism, Hinduism, Shintoism, divining, witchcraft, and camping life also. Too bad none of these explain why so-called science stories can be offered as 'science' with no evidence!

Yes, if God created the earth and then the stars for us to mark time and etc here soon after, then there is a conflict with stellar evolution and the standard model.

I think it is unfortunate that you feel that way about science. I see no conflict between science and faith in God. But to each his own. Good luck.

 

[dad]

No you shouldn't. You should and are expected to question it.

Consider that done!

Unless you have enough background knowledge to support your questions, you may look a little silly to those who do but that is ok.

You insinuate you have some knowledge here. If anyone had knowledge they would realize that the cavalcade of reasons that they think they 'need' a few stars to have existed all are faith-based, period. Those who think that is knowledge are mistaken.

that's the basis of learning.

False. The basis of learning involves facts and actual knowledge, not just memorizing fables.

The same skepticism of science tends to spill over onto theology/religion. You get into the habit of questioning everything. There is nothing particularly biased in questioning religion. It's how science deals with everything.

OK

 

[Nakosis]

You insinuate you have some knowledge here. If anyone had knowledge they would realize that the cavalcade of reasons that they think they 'need' a few stars to have existed all are faith-based, period. Those who think that is knowledge are mistaken.

What I insinuated is that I have experience with both faith and science. Did I state something wrong?

False. The basis of learning involves facts and actual knowledge, not just memorizing fables.

You think you can learn without asking questions? At least to yourself. Well I suppose faith is your paradigm. My self, I had to ask questions until I understand. If you want to take the word of others, that fine. I've been there done that. It doesn't really work. It's not real knowledge.

 

[dad]

I think it is unfortunate that you feel that way about science. I see no conflict between science and faith in God. But to each his own. Good luck.

Me either. I do see a conflict with the so-called sciences that deal with beliefs and oppose creation.

 

[dad]

What I insinuated is that I have experience with both faith and science. Did I state something wrong?

Having experience with science does not mean you can produce the missing stars does it?

You think you can learn without asking questions? At least to yourself.

One of the first questions I ask is it something true and solidly founded?

Well I suppose faith is your paradigm. My self, I had to ask questions until I understand. If you want to take the word of others, that fine. I've been there done that. It doesn't really work. It's not real knowledge.

For cosmology and origin sciences what needs to be understood is that they are a crock, and a waste of time and not worth memorizing or taking seriously.

People who imbibe the faith-based fables do not arrive at understanding at all. They simply get so confused they think they understand.

 

[John53]

Your lack of understanding of the Almighty's creating process only makes it magic to you. Like a caveman might think a match was magic.

Ok, explain how the almighty created the stars, I can't wait.

I notice when two stars need to have come together to make a flash of light fit into the cosmological models, and there is no evidence offered at all, you do not call that magic! Hypocritical.

Maybe because I haven't mentioned two stars colliding. You're making stuff up again.

 

[John53]

After you reach a few billion years old let us see how good YOUR memory is....

I've forgotten what we were talking about...

 

[Twilight Hue]

So you do not explain how we know a magic union of stars happened. Nor do you care that no evidence exists. Instead, we see some hate attitude for God?!

I think the joke's on you.

There are actual images of stars merging including its afterglow.

Images obtained of two stars in the process of a merger

First Glimpse of Colliding Neutron Stars Yields Stunning Pics | Space

There's plenty of evidence out there and it's direct and biting you straight in the face.

In fact, you may actually see the results of two stars merging in your lifetime. Possibly in the year 2022.

 

[Regiomontanus]

I think the joke's on you.

There are actual images of stars merging including its afterglow.

Images obtained of two stars in the process of a merger

First Glimpse of Colliding Neutron Stars Yields Stunning Pics | Space

There's plenty of evidence out there and it's direct and biting you straight in the face.

In fact, you may actually see the results of two stars merging in your lifetime. Possibly in the year 2022.

Yeah, nothing magical about objects colliding. We see galaxies colliding too, for example. In fact our galaxy has cannibalized several small dwarf galaxies. As for new stars, we can now image new ones forming - even down to the level of detail showing the disks around the stars from which planets form.

Astronomers spot hundreds of baby stars and planet-forming disks | Space

Are there details of these processes we don't understand? Sure, but so what? Scientific knowledge progresses over time...

 

[dad]

Ok, explain how the almighty created the stars, I can't wait.

He spoke, and they came to exist. One day He will speak the universe out of existence and create a new one. He is the Great Unifying force that all other forces obey.

Maybe because I haven't mentioned two stars colliding. You're making stuff up again.

The article quoted in the OP does. Not sure what you think you are discussing. Do keep us posted.

 

[dad]

I think the joke's on you.

There are actual images of stars merging including its afterglow.

No, the joke is not on me at all. The only stars that matter here are the ones they claim came together to make this SN, or rather, golly gee just must have come together, because we need that to have happened for our belief set.

As for what you think are stars coming together (it may take millions of years to see that happen in your mind) well, forget about it. You don't even know what stars really are or how far any of them is or how big!

In fact, you may actually see the results of two stars merging in your lifetime. Possibly in the year 2022.

What would be happening is not what you think or why you think and does not involve the time you think, or etc.

 

[rational experiences]

A vibrating water droplet.....our star...the only star that life belongs to, the presence of water.

 

[John53]

He spoke, and they came to exist. One day He will speak the universe out of existence and create a new one. He is the Great Unifying force that all other forces obey.

What kind of energy is this speaking? You can't just post this nonsense without explaining it.

The article quoted in the OP does. Not sure what you think you are discussing. Do keep us posted.

I've been agreeing with you, your OP proves stars were not created by a god. I'll try and speak in more simple terms for you.

 

[oldbadger]

The examples are never-ending, here is a recent example of faith in action in cosmological claims.
.........................................

And so you believe that God created the Universe and all within, yes?

Let me get this right. Jesus is God, and it was Jesus who brought the Flood, created the Earth, Sun and stars, the galaxies and all, and Jesus who came to Earth 2000 years ago, just Earth. And it will be Jesus, God, who returns just to tiny little Earth eventually to rule..... just little tiny Earth?

What was the Universe and its billions of Galaxies for, then?

Oh dear............. *sighs*

 

[dad]

What kind of energy is this speaking? You can't just post this nonsense without explaining it.

The kind that science has no clue about. The kind that can raise the dead and recreate sick bodies. The kind that can stop time or make the universe go dark in a moment.

I've been agreeing with you, your OP proves stars were not created by a god. I'll try and speak in more simple terms for you.

So the stars were not created....because...? Speak.

 

[dad]

And so you believe that God created the Universe and all within, yes?

Yes.

Let me get this right. Jesus is God, and it was Jesus who brought the Flood, created the Earth, Sun and stars, the galaxies and all, and Jesus who came to Earth 2000 years ago, just Earth. And it will be Jesus, God, who returns just to tiny little Earth eventually to rule..... just little tiny Earth?

Yes. Right here on this little blue dot that has so much meaning, and that will be here when the stars go out.

What was the Universe and its billions of Galaxies for, then?

The ideas that science has of what this universe really is are not correct. Its origin and fate are very different. It's actual purposes and distances and time and space are misconceived by science.

 

[John53]

The kind that science has no clue about. The kind that can raise the dead and recreate sick bodies. The kind that can stop time or make the universe go dark in a moment.

The kind someone made up and you parrot back.

So the stars were not created....because...? Speak.

Your OP said they weren't... It's your post not mine

 

[rational experiences]

A scientist says that they infer to a formula which they claim owns the product of energy existing. So how much mass of energy belongs to that formula?

E = mc2. An equation derived by the twentieth-century physicist Albert Einstein, in which E represents units of energy, m represents units of mass, and c2 is the speed of light squared, or multiplied by itself. ( See relativity .)

If science said to self I just want to invent a little bit of energy, would that formula still apply to just the presence of a little bit of energy, as compared to what they claim energy is in its mass?