Can you answer my post?About the milky galaxy?

[ratiocinator]

The only place we have experienced time is here on earth and the solar system area. Period. You do not know what time is like beyond that, so you may not invoke millions of our 'years' out there! Get it?

The problem is, dad, that you are arguing from a position of total ignorance and, as far as I can see, a complete lack of thought and willingness to learn. You're just spamming everyone with blind faith, bluster, hot air, and baseless assertions.

Just like there are many different ways of measuring things on Earth that we wouldn't expect to match unless physics had operating working the same in the past, there are many different things we can deduce from the evidence from far out in space that we wouldn't expect to form a coherent picture if things weren't the same out there.

 

[gnostic]

They are what God called the groups of stars.

You mean constellations?

Sorry, but you just reveal more of your ignorance, dad.

Constellations aren’t real. Constellations are merely groups of stars of how people view them as if they were images, and such imageries are abstract.

Don’t get me wrong, dad. They are useful, because the constellations allowed astronomers and marine navigation to map out the sky, so they find particular stars or galaxies, without starting from scratch.

For instance, to find Andromeda Galaxy (M31), it would be easier to locate near the V Andromeda star (Andromeda’s hip or leg) on the Andromeda constellation. If you have a decent telescope, you would also spot other galaxies near Andromeda Galaxy (eg M32 galaxy & M110 galaxy).

Constellations are man-made imageries, and are only valid to observer from Earth.

If you were observer on another planet of different star system, on a different galaxy, eg Andromeda Galaxy, then without telescope, you would see none of the stars that we can see on Earth. That being the case, you would have to completely map out the sky with different new constellations, with stars that are visible to this different planet. You won’t find Aries, Taurus, Sagittarius, Orion, etc, on this new planet in the Andromeda Galaxy. Stars like Polaris, Sirius, Aldebaran, Betelgeuse, etc, won’t be visible on this planet.

My point is that any planet of distant star system, will have different stars visible to that planet, therefore would require different mapping of the night sky.

 

[dad]

You mean constellations?

Sorry, but you just reveal more of your ignorance, dad.

Constellations aren’t real. Constellations are merely groups of stars of how people view them as if they were images, and such imageries are abstract.

The spiritual aspects of the stars is way way way above the paygrade of science. You may not wave it away. Even ancient pagans knew that much.

Don’t get me wrong, dad. They are useful, because the constellations allowed astronomers and marine navigation to map out the sky, so they find particular stars or galaxies, without starting from scratch.

And some worshiped gods they thought lived in certain stars or areas up there. The tower of Babel was thought to have a connection in this regards also. But yes, of course man used God's created stars for direction.

Constellations are man-made imageries, and are only valid to observer from Earth.

You are not qualified to make that statement. You were not there when the first star gazers were! You don't know what they had learned in the way of spiritual connections with stars! You just wave it all away and make a statement based on ignorance that it was all invented. Prove it.

If you were observer on another planet of different star system, on a different galaxy, eg Andromeda Galaxy, then without telescope, you would see none of the stars that we can see on Earth

You may not speak to what we would observe out there either! You have only one point of observation in this universe.

It is from this point of observation (fishbowl) that you use the space here and time here to base models of the universe on! If space and/or time were not the same out there all your concepts crumble into laughable meaninglessness.

Seems to me that stars were create after the earth was, and were made for us to see, and to influence us here!

 

[ratiocinator]

You are not qualified to make that statement.

 

[dad]

 

[gnostic]

The spiritual aspects of the stars is way way way above the paygrade of science. You may not wave it away. Even ancient pagans knew that much.

And some worshiped gods they thought lived in certain stars or areas up there. The tower of Babel was thought to have a connection in this regards also. But yes, of course man used God's created stars for direction.

You are not qualified to make that statement. You were not there when the first star gazers were! You don't know what they had learned in the way of spiritual connections with stars! You just wave it all away and make a statement based on ignorance that it was all invented. Prove it.

The early star gazers didn’t know what they were seeing, dad.

They don’t know what the stars, the sun...which is another star, moon and planets were.

The “spiritual aspects” you’ve called it, are nothing than myths.

And the OT Bible, being written during the period of very late 7th century and 5th century BCE only contained nothing of values regarding to the stars (including the sun) and constellations, because they were known to older Babylonian and Egyptian stargazers of the 2nd millennium BCE.

The Torah or the Christian Pentateuch, the books ascribed to Moses as author, fake authorship since the oldest evident of OT is only dated to the time of King Josiah’s reign, make no mention of any constellations. So the oldest mentions of any star or constellations come from the book of Job, written either during the 6th century BCE, or as late as the 4th century BCE. Based on what it say

9 who made the Bear and Orion, the Pleiades and the chambers of the south;

31 “Can you bind the chains of the Pleiades, or loose the cords of Orion?
32 Can you lead forth the Mazzaroth in their season, or can you guide the Bear with its children?

Note that the KJV translated 9:9 and 38:32 into the star Arcturus instead of the Bear constellation.

Based on what little it (Job) have to say about Orion, the Pleiades and the Bear (Ursa Major), I am going to say that the author to Job was aware of Greek myths, since the Greek myth mention of cord or chain to the Orion and Pleiades myth.

The myth related to the giant hunter Orion chased the 7 nymphs, and the gods saved them from being raped by turning them into stars. Orion himself became the constellation at his death, at the hand of either Artemis or that of the gigantic scorpion (constellation Scorpio).

Such myths existed as earlier as Homer (8th century BCE) and Hesiod (7th century BCE), and this myth expanded in the centuries since them.

The Sumerians and Babylonians known about these constellations, but have different names as well as different myths were attached to these grouping of stars.

That you think God created these constellations for the benefits of man, just showed how ignorant you really are regarding to the history of myths of these constellations, predating Job’s mentions.

And while I loved myths, as stories of ancient cultures and civilizations, they are all myths, based on superstitions and lack of real understanding of astronomy.

That you think god have anything to do with these constellations and that these stars have “spiritual aspects”, just showed that you are still living in the Dark Ages.

 

[dad]

The early star gazers didn’t know what they were seeing, dad.

Says you. What, you have a time machine and talked to them?

They don’t know what the stars, the sun...which is another star, moon and planets were.

I suggest you don't.

The “spiritual aspects” you’ve called it, are nothing than myths.

Proof? What you can't detect spiritual elements in far space so there must be none!? Ha.

And the OT Bible, being written during the period of very late 7th century and 5th century BCE only contained nothing of values regarding to the stars (including the sun) and constellations, because they were known to older Babylonian and Egyptian stargazers of the 2nd millennium BCE.

Of course the nose on their faces and the stars were known to ancient people! They could look up too one suspects.

The Torah or the Christian Pentateuch, the books ascribed to Moses as author, fake authorship since the oldest evident of OT is only dated to the time of King Josiah’s reign,

Hmm, fake authorship, or fake dating, which is the culprit? Ha.

So the oldest mentions of any star or constellations come from the book of Job, written either during the 6th century BCE, or as late as the 4th century BCE. Based on what it say

The Almighty spoke directly in Job and was quoted speaking from heaven. Therefore any dates you ascribe lose all meaning, He is eternal.

Note that the KJV translated 9:9 and 38:32 into the star Arcturus instead of the Bear constellation.

So?

Based on what little it (Job) have to say about Orion, the Pleiades and the Bear (Ursa Major), I am going to say that the author to Job was aware of Greek myths, since the Greek myth mention of cord or chain to the Orion and Pleiades myth.

Or that the Greeks had some knowledge at one time of the spiritual element of stars! Not like you could have an informed opinion on the issue. Correct?

The myth related to the giant hunter Orion chased the 7 nymphs, and the gods saved them from being raped by turning them into stars. Orion himself became the constellation at his death, at the hand of either Artemis or that of the gigantic scorpion (constellation Scorpio).

I do not decipher meanings of pagan stories. However, one suspects that the hunter and women could have some remote connection to some spirits or spiritual reality. Nimrod was called a great hunter I think. The connection there was that he hunted men, or influenced many people if I recall. So, if some spirit influenced (hunted) a lot of folks somewhere back in ancient times, (and a story resulted that was embellished) well, who would we be to question it?

The Sumerians and Babylonians known about these constellations, but have different names as well as different myths were attached to these grouping of stars.

The Greeks and Romans and Babylonians may have had different names for the same spirits! Ha.

That you think God created these constellations for the benefits of man, just showed how ignorant you really are regarding to the history of myths of these constellations, predating Job’s mentions.

That you don't shows that you lack depth.

And while I loved myths, as stories of ancient cultures and civilizations, they are all myths, based on superstitions and lack of real understanding of astronomy.

Objection: opinion.

That you think god have anything to do with these constellations and that these stars have “spiritual aspects”, just showed that you are still living in the Dark Ages.

The bible removes any doubt there is a strong spiritual connection with space and the stars. Your unsupported incredulity changes nothing.

 

[gnostic]

The Almighty spoke directly in Job and was quoted speaking from heaven.

Job is a made up story, not written by Job, because Job certainly didn’t exist.

The author have no understanding of astronomy, Earth science, meteorology, biology, etc, and if Job 38 to 41 amounted to God’s knowledge on these subjects, then he was dim-witted village idiot.

We have far better understanding what caused snow and hail (38:22), rain (38:34, 37), thunder (38:25) and lightning (38:25, 35) than God’s idiotic replies to Job . We have understanding what can cause earthquakes than Job’s moronic “God did it”.

And stars don’t sing (38:7); the notion that stars can sing, is based on the faulty assumptions that stars were “angels”, because that what Jewish and Christian stargazers thought stars were.

Both Christians and Jews though stars can literally fall, not understanding that what they were actually seeing were really meteorites and comets. If stars could literally fall on earth, then it would have obliterated the Earth.

 

[dad]

Job is a made up story, not written by Job, because Job certainly didn’t exist.

The author have no understanding of astronomy, Earth science, meteorology, biology, etc, and if Job 38 to 41 amounted to God’s knowledge on these subjects, then he was dim-witted village idiot.

Trying to judge wisdom of the ancients and God by your own little religion of so called science is not a sound proposition.

We have far better understanding what caused snow and hail (38:22), rain (38:34, 37), thunder (38:25) and lightning (38:25, 35) than God’s idiotic replies to Job . We have understanding what can cause earthquakes than Job’s moronic “God did it”.

Really? Predict the next quake then?

"22 Hast thou entered into the treasures of the snow? or hast thou seen the treasures of the hail, 23 Which I have reserved against the time of trouble, against the day of battle and war?

If you knew bible prophesy you might have clued in that the day of trouble likely refers to the end period of history and the events associated with that.

And stars don’t sing (38:7)

Says you. Ever been in the far universe listening?

; the notion that stars can sing, is based on the faulty assumptions that stars were “angels”, because that what Jewish and Christian stargazers thought stars were.

Your assumptions about the stars and origin and destiny of stars is comically wrong.

Both Christians and Jews though stars can literally fall, not understanding that what they were actually seeing were really meteorites and comets. If stars could literally fall on earth, then it would have obliterated the Earth.

The stars will fall to earth, you simply do not have a good concept of what this universe really is like.

 

[paarsurrey]

Trying to judge wisdom of the ancients and God by your own little religion of so called science is not a sound proposition.

Really? Predict the next quake then?

"22 Hast thou entered into the treasures of the snow? or hast thou seen the treasures of the hail, 23 Which I have reserved against the time of trouble, against the day of battle and war?

If you knew bible prophesy you might have clued in that the day of trouble likely refers to the end period of history and the events associated with that.


Says you. Ever been in the far universe listening?



Your assumptions about the stars and origin and destiny of stars is comically wrong.
The stars will fall to earth, you simply do not have a good concept of what this universe really is like.

"Trying to judge wisdom of the ancients and God by your own little religion of so called science is not a sound proposition."

I agree with what I have colored in magenta above. For some people Science is like a Religion or even more, it is as if they revere and adore it. Right, please?

Regards

Regards

 

[dad]

"Trying to judge wisdom of the ancients and God by your own little religion of so called science is not a sound proposition."

I agree with what I have colored in magenta above. For some people Science is like a Religion or even more, it is as if they revere and adore it. Right, please?

Regards

Regards

Right, especially if it is placed above God.

 

[David J]

How do young universe creationists explain being able to see galaxies millions of light years away?

 

[dad]

How do young universe creationists explain being able to see galaxies millions of light years away?

One way is to is to think of the possibility that time does not even exist out there as we know it here. That could mean that no millions of years of our time could be involved!

 

[paarsurrey]

One way is to is to think of the possibility that time does not even exist out there as we know it here. That could mean that no millions of years of our time could be involved!

It is a good point.

Regards

 

[David J]

It is a good point.

Regards

Should we get it peer reviewed?

 

[gnostic]

For some people Science is like a Religion or even more, it is as if they revere and adore it.

That’s basically a silly assertion, which some religious people may say, who have not studied much of Natural Science.

Earlier you have stated that science and religion are not the same things, but now you have taken two steps backwards with the above claims. This is something that only science-illiterate theists would say.

Natural science is about what can be explained, and if the explanation can be tested or not.

Natural Science (which can be broadly divided into Physical Science and Life Science) is based on evidence, that are verifiable, testable and empirical, not based on belief/faith and worship (which encompassed both “faith” and “reverence”).

Science isn’t about personal preference or like or dislike.

Like dad, here, you are blurring the terms “religion”, “faith”, “worship”, etc, to meet your religious agenda, to fit in your narrow pigeon holes. Just because people disagree with you in regarding to science and religion, doesn’t mean those people worship science.

I don’t worship science, but I do try to understand it, and believe me, that there are many branches and field (and their respective sub-branches and sub-fields) that I don’t understand.

Take the most obvious objection to science, Evolutionary Biology, that some theists and all creationists disagree with. Most of them, never study biology before, or those that have studied little of it, but due to their religious upbringings, tends to object to evolution because they don’t understand science behind it.

Not all theists would agree with you, paarsurrey. People like @shunyadragon, @Dan From Smithville, @Jayhawker Soule, etc, who are religious, and yet well educated in their respective fields in science, definitely wouldn’t agree with your categorizing science with religion.

More recently, I have been learning more about Particle Physics and nucleosynthesis, because I want to understand the origins of matters, simply because I am curious. Particle Physics and Stellar Nucleosynthesis aren’t something that I have studied when I was at unis during the mid-80s and again in late 90s.

Just because I understand some of the mechanisms behind it and have accepted Particle Physics as science, doesn’t mean I worship Particle Physics.

Claiming people worship science, is simply a very ignorant and biased thing to say.

 

[shunyadragon]

One way is to is to think of the possibility that time does not even exist out there as we know it here. That could mean that no millions of years of our time could be involved!

The problem with this hypothetical conjecture is that there is overwhelming evidence that time exists throughout the history of our universe, and absolutely no evidence of the alternative.

Tracing the course of the recently discovered extrastellar object 2I/Borisov clearly demonstrates a time frame in terms of light years beyond our solar system to the probable stars of origin.

 

[shunyadragon]

Over qualified, clueless and under delusions of self-imposed ignorance.

 

[dad]

The problem with this hypothetical conjecture is that there is overwhelming evidence that time exists throughout the history of our universe, and absolutely no evidence of the alternative.

Except, that is totally ridiculous and false. No one has determined what time is like in the far universe, of course. Man has been nowhere but here and experienced our time and space here.

Tracing the course of the recently discovered extrastellar object 2I/Borisov clearly demonstrates a time frame in terms of light years beyond our solar system to the probable stars of origin.

I dare you to try and show how!

 

[dad]

Over qualified, clueless and under delusions of self-imposed ignorance.

I know you are, but what am I?