• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Search results

  1. Astrophile

    God's Creation, and Some Misconceptions

    Thank-you for this information.
  2. Astrophile

    Let's not talk about the Big Bang

    That's difficult, and I don't really know. I think that the present idea is that as the universe expands, the contribution of dark energy to the universe's mass-energy content will increase, but I don't know whether the density of dark energy will decrease or remain constant. See Dark energy -...
  3. Astrophile

    About fossils -- would you say this is true?

    As one of the Popes said, 'Know then thyself, presume not God to scan.' I am content to know a little about the world, not to claim equality with any god.
  4. Astrophile

    About fossils -- would you say this is true?

    Always glad to oblige. Probably because its gravity is too weak and because it is in the stronger gravitational field of the Earth. The Earth is not bilobar because its gravitational field is strong enough to force it into a spherical shape. The Moon was probably ejected from the proto-Earth...
  5. Astrophile

    About fossils -- would you say this is true?

    I didn't say that the photographs don't prove anything. On the contrary, they show that there are asteroids and cometary nuclei that have a bilobar shape that requires an explanation.
  6. Astrophile

    God's Creation, and Some Misconceptions

    I think that you mean a galaxy rather than a universe. Can you give me a link for this discovery?
  7. Astrophile

    Let's not talk about the Big Bang

    It would be better to say 'a galaxy' or 'galaxies' rather than 'a star' or 'stars'. The stars in our own Galaxy are not receding from us as a result of the expansion of the Universe.
  8. Astrophile

    About fossils -- would you say this is true?

    Also, in this context survival means the survival of a lineage, not of individuals.
  9. Astrophile

    About fossils -- would you say this is true?

    Anything could have been made by God, but that hypothesis doesn't explain the unusual shape of Arrokoth. The collision+fusion hypothesis offers a possible explanation, but, in my opinion, the data are insufficient to make this any more than a hypothesis.
  10. Astrophile

    Isn't this cute?

    I was following Wildswanderer's argument, where he said, and was trying to understand what he meant by saying 'when one kind of living thing is changed into another kind'. Since he appeared to regard the ~400,000 species of beetles as a single kind, I proposed that the 6.400 species of mammals...
  11. Astrophile

    About fossils -- would you say this is true?

    That is a picture of the trans-Neptunian object 486958 Arrokoth; it was imaged by the New Horizons probe on 1st January 2019. See 486958 Arrokoth - Wikipedia for more information.
  12. Astrophile

    Isn't this cute?

    So do all the 400,000 species of beetles belong to the same kind? And if so, do all the 6,400 species of mammals belong to the same kind? In our evolution over the last 65 million years, we have remained mammals and primates, so there has been no vertical change, that is no change of kind.
  13. Astrophile

    Isn't this cute?

    Charles Darwin was a keen hunter and shooter during his teenage years, and look what happened to him.
  14. Astrophile

    Let's not talk about the Big Bang

    I don't know. Lawrence Krauss, in A Universe from Nothing, suggested that 'nothing' is unstable, but that is only one hypothesis. Stay around for a few years, and we may have an answer. About 13.8 billion years ago. These questions are probably meaningless. If they have any meaning, I don't...
  15. Astrophile

    About fossils -- would you say this is true?

    No, it means a lot more than that. With the theory of evolution it means knowing a great deal about all aspects of biology (of living organisms, not just fossils), much more than I know, and, I suspect, much more than you know. With the theory of the formation of planets and stars, it needs...
  16. Astrophile

    About fossils -- would you say this is true?

    According to Scientific theory - Wikipedia , 'A scientific theory is an explanation of an aspect of the natural world and universe that has been repeatedly tested and corroborated in accordance with the scientific method, using accepted protocols of observation, measurement, and evaluation of...
  17. Astrophile

    Let's not talk about the Big Bang

    The 13+-billion year age comes from measurement of the Hubble constant (the ratio of the recession velocity of the galaxies to their distance) and from analysis of the anisotropy of the cosmic microwave background. If you want to learn more, I can recommend John Gribbin's books 13.8: the quest...
  18. Astrophile

    About fossils -- would you say this is true?

    It is theory based on physics, not guesswork. There is a difference.
  19. Astrophile

    About fossils -- would you say this is true?

    Did they know of the existence of binary stars, some of which eclipse each other? Did they know about pulsating stars? Did they know that some that stars have magnetic fields much stronger than the Earth's? Did they even know how far away the stars are?
  20. Astrophile

    About fossils -- would you say this is true?

    Yes, of course you are right.
Top