Biblical Astronomy - Fine tuning during creation of earth and environment -

newtonian · Jul 28, 2004

Please stay on the thread theme. This is a supplement to other Biblical astronomy threads, including the old one which was lost in early July due to........ at SDC. There is another thread on Genesis 1:1 which is full of tangents, so there is no need to fill this thread with tangents. Genesis 1:1 deals with the creation of heaven and earth. but this thread will zero in on the creation of earth. The starting Biblical statement is a question, hence it belongs on Ask the Astronomer: : "Where did you happen to be when I founded the earth? . . . Who set its measurements, in case you know?" (Job 38:4, 5) [EDITED: In other words: What are the measurements, and how unique are they in the solar system and galaxy and universe - is it more likely (e.g. math probability) that these measurements were set or fine tuned? ] I will first post a quote stating simply a few examples. Then, depending on your responses, I will zero in on specific measurements (currently the distance of Venus’ orbit vs. Earth’s orbit is being discussed on a Venus thread): “No planet like earth has been found elsewhere in the universe. True, some scientists point to indirect evidence that certain stars have orbiting them objects that are hundreds of times larger than the earth. Our earth, though, is just the right size for our existence. In what sense? If earth were slightly larger, its gravity would be stronger and hydrogen, a light gas, would collect, being unable to escape the earth's gravity. Thus, the atmosphere would be inhospitable to life. On the other hand, if our earth were slightly smaller, life-sustaining oxygen would escape and surface water would evaporate. In either case, we could not live. The earth is also at an ideal distance from the sun, a factor vital for life to thrive. Astronomer John Barrow and mathematician Frank Tipler studied "the ratio of the Earth's radius and distance from the Sun." They

newtonian · Jul 28, 2004

crazyeddie - Hi! Define proselytizing, or explain why you said that please. Well, do you remember the old SDC Biblical astronomy thread? It was very active indeed! BTW - where is ricimer? And, can you remember your posts that were lost on this subject? On thread theme please.

kmarinas86 · Jul 28, 2004

I think you're importance here is to inform people about Creationism to the best of your ability rather than solely aiming to convince others (which is proselytizing). The point is not to argue, but to inform and articulate your ideas. I'm believing that you are not expecting everybody to agree with you. However, to speak more free, it would be good to read more about creationism and know more about it.... because the more you know, the more power you have. And the more ways you can help others learn the better. a very good site about creationism and such is a www.harunyahya.com they have very impressive videos concerning Yahweh's creation and clear message. christians can learn from creationist evidence from here as well. its so easy to play the videos full screen and watch back and relax like i do with a television set.

mooware · Jul 29, 2004

You're watchtower article means what? You're basically saying that we are in an "ideal" location for life to form. Ok.. And? Are you saying that out of 400 billion stars in our Galaxy alone, there 0 chance for life. Well, albeit for our little ball of mud. Then, of course we have billions upon billions of Galaxies in the universe, each containing billions of stars. Are you saying that it's mathematically impossible for life to be anywhere, except here?

mooware · Jul 29, 2004

Yep, i meant it for Newt. Sorry about that eddie..

newtonian · Jul 29, 2004

crazyeddie - First, let me acknowledge you have a point, and I intend to revise my initial post to make it less like that. Kmarinas also has a point, and he is not of my religion. I am NOT trying to make converts - that is not something we do. By that definition I was not proselytizing - you would be more accurate if you had said witnessing. We witness (as per our name), or give testimony, in various ways to various people - and they then learn some good news like that we have a purpose for being here rather than just blind chance. The first step on the path to become one of Jehovah's Witnesses would be a free home Bible study. I am not conducting a Bible study with anyone on this forum. Not that I would refuse to do so, if that was permitted - but it would not be normal proceedure for us nor would it be normal proceedure for space.com. However, many are not aware of the scientific evidence for creation, and I am posting some evidence - now you could call that witnessing or giving testimony in defense. (Like a witness in a court of law.) Surely you realize that if I convince someone we do have a Creator who Cares for us, it would not necessarily follow that they would accept a Bible Study and then decide to come to our meetings and then decide to dedicate their lives to love and serve God (Jehovah). They may simply become a scientist who believes in creation - many scientists believe there is evidence for intelligent design but are not members of any organized religion. So, no - I am not posting to make converts. I am posting on this thread to give testimony that our earth was fine tuned during creation to make life happy and comfortable for us humans. And to listen to those who disagree, and examine whatever evidence they post. And, also, to note that our Creator wants us to preserve earth's beautiful environment and help others to enjoy it, according to written Biblical s

kmarinas86 · Jul 29, 2004

In the beginning Elohim created the heaven and the earth. Genesis 1: 1. “Elohim”, translated without justification in some Bibles by the word “God” means in Hebrew “those who came from the sky” and furthermore the word is a plural. It means that the scientists from our world searched for a planet that was suitable to carry out their projects. They “created”, or in reality discovered the Earth, and realized it contained all the necessary elements for the creation of artificial life, even if its atmosphere was not quite the same as our own. And the spirit of Elohim moved across the waters. Genesis 1: 2. This means the scientists made reconnaissance flights and what you might call artificial satellites were placed around the Earth to study its constitution and atmosphere. The Elohim saw that the light was good. Genesis 1: 4. To create life on Earth it was important to know whether the sun was sending harmful rays to the Earth’s surface and this question was fully researched. It turned out that the sun was heating the Earth correctly without sending out harmful rays. In other words the “light was good”. There was a night and there was a morning, the first day. Genesis 1: 5. This research took quite some time. The “day” mentioned here corresponds to the period in which your sun rises under the same sign on the day of the vernal equinox, in other words, about 2,000 years on Earth. He divided the waters under the heavens from the waters above the firmament. Genesis I: 7. After studying the cosmic rays above the clouds the scientists descended below the clouds but stayed above the waters. That means they were between the clouds, “the waters above the firmament”, and the ocean covering the whole planet, “the waters under the heavens”. Let there be lights in the heavens to separate the day from the night and let them be used as signs for the seaso

newtonian · Jul 29, 2004

mooware - I duplicate posted, now edited out and this post is to all: You all, here is the start of a numerical list of fine tuned factors for our earth for easy reference: The quote noted the following measurements (which I will now add to, and more so in future posts ) 1. Earth is the right size. Slightly larger and hydrogen would have collected rather than escaping to space. Slightly smaller and oxygen would escape and water would evaporate. 2. Earth is the right distance from the sun. 5% closer and earth would have had a runaway greenhouse effect 4 billion years ago - compare Venus. 1% further and earth would have had runaway glaciation 2 billion years ago. 3. Earth’s rotation speed just right: 12 hour day, 12 hour night (at the equanoxes) Much longer (compare Venus’ rotation speed - 243 days!) and life could not survive. In fact, 48 hour rotation would be very extreme, especially in continental climates - and talk about sea breeze boundaries yielding violent thunderstorms in Florida.....! 4. Earth’s orbit relatively circular. Highly elliptical would cause disastrous temperature changes. Closer to sun in Northern Winter which moderates the Northern seasons which have the largest continents, and continental climates and therefore the most extremes. Further from the sun in Southern winter, which would make the seasons more extreme in the southern hemisphere were it not for the larger amount of water (oceans) in southern hemisphere which moderates the southern winter - except, of course, in interior Antarctica. 5. Location of solar system in Milky Way. Much closer to core area and the closer proximity passing stars would distort earth’s orbit - ruin the stability. Much further from core and the beautiful night sky would lack the many stars that awe us amateur naked eye astronomers. Also, the chemical elements necessary to form our type of solar system would not be a

newtonian · Jul 29, 2004

mooware - good questions. Yes, earth’s properties and environment are ideal for human life, and were ideal for the creation and sustaining of many forms of life. The forming of life - how? In what environment - the two environments (creation vs spontaneous generation) are not the same, btw. [E.g. Oxygen in atmosphere vs. anoxic] Would you like to start another thread, on origin of life in early earth’s environment: creation vs. spontaneous generation? Now, the math probability was discussed on another thread in the old SDC where I asked for critique on My Theory for upper limits in our universe since our universe began. Would you like me to repost some of it? I backed some of it up. Or, would you agree that the upper limit of chemical reaction products formed in our universe since our universe began is less than 10^122? And, would you agree that the probability of the chance formation of a statistical (not informational) protein is 10^113? If not, I should address that on the other thread so we can calculate what is and is not likely in our universe. O (zero) probability? Of course not! One must do the math!

mkofron · Jul 29, 2004

<blockquote>In reply to:<hr />I am NOT trying to make converts - that is not something we do. ...... We witness (as per our name), or give testimony, in various ways to various people - and they then learn some good news like that we have a purpose for being here rather than just blind chance. The first step on the path to become one of Jehovah's Witnesses would be a free home Bible study.<hr /></blockquote> Aren't these two statements contradictory? <blockquote>In reply to:<hr /> I would like you to post evidence for your thoughts on whether our earth is fine tuned for human life, or not - etc. <hr /></blockquote> I would say that life is fine tuned for survival on Earth. Conditions on the Earth change over time. Life adapts to those changes.

newtonian · Jul 29, 2004

kmarinas86 - that would be better on the Genesis 1:1 thread! For now - interesting interpretation - original? Or from where did you get it? For now on this thread I will point out that Elohim is used in the plural of excellence for the one God, Jehovah - albeit God was not alone when he created, and He (they) certainly did use the laws of science such as physics and chemistry in creating life. I.e. - you need to study the Bible further, and be careful about reading in between the lines! May I respond in depth on the other thread so we can zero in on science here?

newtonian · Jul 29, 2004

mkofron - No, the two statements are not contradictory. Giving testimony as a witness is not the same as trying to make converts. Didn't you realize that? [Also, you took my statements out of the context and this is misleading - consider the entire context please.] Good point on adaptation and change. You do realize there are limits - for example: extinctions? Or do you think life is likely on Venus or Mars etc.? OK, early earth was not fine tuned for human life yet - it was a process that took a very long time. And the sequence of changes were fine tuned or human life could not exist. Also, fine tuning was necessary for earlier forms of life. Try addressing the actual 6 properties I listed, or list some yourself! For example, here is #7: 7. Oxygen - carbon dioxide balance. Earth had a vast amount of CO2 but now has only a trace by comparison. How is it that the cycles (there are many) stabilized just in time to preserve plant life? How is it that animal life arrived at just the right time to contribute to a stable O2 - CO2 balance and stable ecology? Have you tried to actually consider this mathematically? Math is absolutely necessary to determine the degree of fine tuning involved. Note that intelligent man is ruining our earth and its ecology and making far more life forms extinct than would happen in nature. Is this not evidence that nature has more intelligence than man? Or than nature instinctively follows our Creator's purpose while man independently goes against our Creator's purpose? I know I am oversimplifying, but hopefully you get the point.

jitte · Jul 29, 2004

Newtonian, while channelsurfing I happened upon the John Ankerberg Show, a religious program, where they were discussing astrophysics and how it related to the Bible. Much they same things you're pointing out. It was really pretty interesting, but they wanted over $100 for the package they offered about it. It's still available on their site, if you haven't already seen it. The name of the offer is "Why is the Big Bang Evidence That God Created the Universe" if you're interested. http://www.ankerberg.com/

newtonian · Jul 29, 2004

Jitte - The problem is that Jesus said "You received free, give free." - Matthew 10:8 Clearly, Ankerberg is out to collect money, and I want no part of that in view of what Jesus said and how he lived. We share things with our neighbors free of charge - the profit incentive has proven to be quite a corrupting influence in this world. Care to share a couple of points with us? Meanwhile, compare our non-profit site article on Earth's properties: http://www.watchtower.org/library/g/2000/10/8/article_03.htm Note that we do not ask for money anywhere on our site.

jitte · Jul 29, 2004

Ankerberg presented the debate, but the offer was for a book written by an astrophysicist named Hugh Ross and included a videotape/DVD of the discussion. It was interesting and I would have liked to have it myself, but not enough to spend $100 on it.

newtonian · Jul 29, 2004

jitte - Note my edit above after your post - there are other articles available free of charge from our site - you could try searching under "universe," for example. The book I quoted from above is also available free of charge from any one of us who calls at your home (or wherever). They may have to get it for you, we don't always carry it with us.

bowlofpetunias · Jul 30, 2004

"the profit incentive has proven to be quite a corrupting influence in this world. " That's very funny, it may be to the sheep of the witness world but what about the wolves. How many of those watchtower mags go out worldwide each month, what's the system, who pays what, where and when. Where does the money go. Big place in Brooklyn. Have they paid taxes yet.

mkofron · Jul 30, 2004

<blockquote>In reply to:<hr />You do realize there are limits - for example: extinctions? Or do you think life is likely on Venus or Mars etc.?<hr /></blockquote> Likely? I can't say that, but possible. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3746583.stm http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/astrobio_venus_030211.html <blockquote>In reply to:<hr />Have you tried to actually consider this mathematically? Math is absolutely necessary to determine the degree of fine tuning involved.<hr /></blockquote> Take it to a universal scale. With the number of stars and planets possible in the universe, the odds greatly get better for life. <blockquote>In reply to:<hr />Is this not evidence that nature has more intelligence than man?<hr /></blockquote> No, unless your a pagan, why would you believe that "nature" has any intelligence whatsoever? What is demonstrated is that humanity as a whole is ignorant and shows a total disregard to it's environment and the life of other plants and animals. <blockquote>In reply to:<hr />Or than nature instinctively follows our Creator's purpose while man independently goes against our Creator's purpose?<hr /></blockquote> Again, it would be wrong to say that this isn't possible. But just because it's possible doesn't make it so.

mkofron · Jul 30, 2004

<blockquote>In reply to:<hr />3. Earth’s rotation speed just right: 12 hour day, 12 hour night (at the equanoxes) Much longer (compare Venus’ rotation speed - 243 days!) and life could not survive. In fact, 48 hour rotation would be very extreme, especially in continental climates - and talk about sea breeze boundaries yielding violent thunderstorms in Florida.....! 4. Earth’s orbit relatively circular. Highly elliptical would cause disastrous temperature changes.<hr /></blockquote> Are you not aware of the extremes life has been found in? Just because these conditions wouldn't be favorable for life such as mammals does not mean other forms of life couldn't have survived and flourished. We wouldn't be here, but that doesn't mean life wouldn't be here.

kmarinas86 · Aug 2, 2004

Newtonian, We must always rationally asssess our own beliefs - and justify them. Our belief must stand up to the laws of reality. If we know our beliefs to be true, then that means we should be able to prove them. If we can't, than that means we should take our belief as a hypothesis (and a educated guess at best). Since we are not perfect, some of our beliefs are wrong or half-true. Our subconciousness should not lie to our conciousness. We must always seperate (and discern between) our hypotheses from the facts. And to go further, we must test these hypotheses to no end, until there is enough (or infinite) proof for or against it.

CalliArcale · Aug 3, 2004

<blockquote>In reply to:<hr />Are you not aware of the extremes life has been found in? Just because these conditions wouldn't be favorable for life such as mammals does not mean other forms of life couldn't have survived and flourished. We wouldn't be here, but that doesn't mean life wouldn't be here.<hr /></blockquote> Very good point. I've always felt it to be a bit of circular logic to say that the Earth is just right for us, therefore there must be some mythical significance to Earth, or to say that life can only thrive on Earth and we're fantastically lucky that it happens to have all the right parameters for our survival. After all, we evolved on Earth -- we have evolved to suit the environment. Regardless of whether one believes this happened through chance or at the behest of an intelligent creator, it is clear that luck did not enter into it, apart from the fact that life exists at all. Earth wasn't created to suit our physiognomy. Rather, we were created to live on Earth, regardless of whether that happened through evolution or through divine intervention. (Note: don't take that to mean I don't think we should leave the Earth. Earth is our cradle, and although this is where we flourish best, we need to go forth into the universe, be fruitful and multiply, whether we do that to please God or simply to ensure our species' survival into the future.) <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> "People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff." -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

tiza · Aug 9, 2004

To all, I can't believe how badly you're treating Newtonian just because he is a Jehovah's Witness. While I do not agree with him on many points, I don't feel that he's proselytizing at all but is stating things that he believes is trustworthy and scriptural. BTW, the name of this thread starts out "Biblical Astronomy....." Then read the rest of the name. It's about creation. Let me state that I am not a JW. And I've dealt with many JWs throughout the years since I've been studying the Scriptures. I've never had one moment of a Jehovah's Witness pushing me into anything whatsoever or trying to preach to me. When I open up the Scriptures and talk about Yahweh, they simply leave my house but tell me to have a good day. It's evident to them that I study the Scriptures. They are always kind to me and I to them. Yes, I do not agree with them going door to door because the Scriptures are clear that only Yahweh will personally send his prophets to do his will. I do not claim this authority. But I've had Baptists come to the door also. I once worked with a JW woman, and she was one of the kindest people that I've ever known. You could trust her with your life! She would never steal from you, always do what you asked her to do, talk to you and listen and was so kind-hearted. Then I just recently read a post that a lady wrote who has a best friend that is a Jehovah's Witness. She told us that her best friend's husband had died, and right after that her house burnt down. She lost everything in the fire. You know what happened? Her congregation got together and built her a brand new home in just a few days, no charge! Not many people would do this sort of thing. What if all people did this kind of thing for each other? So before you keep trying to put everyone into a little group who is a JW and label them as such and such, ask yourself why you are scared of them, why are you afraid of the Scriptures and

dan9678 · Aug 10, 2004

I couldn't have said it better... That was a crappy thing to do. -Dan-

mooware · Aug 10, 2004

"I can't believe how badly you're treating Newtonian " Countering or disagreeing with Newtonians idealisms is not treating him badly. I dissagree with Newtonian completely but i don't treat him badly. "I've dealt with many JWs throughout the years since I've been studying the Scriptures. I've never had one moment of a Jehovah's Witness pushing me into anything whatsoever or trying to preach to me" I've dealt with JW's too. Some push some don't. Just because the ones you've met haven't pushed doesn't mean they all don't push. "Yes, I do not agree with them going door to door because the Scriptures are clear that only Yahweh will personally send his prophets to do his will. I do not claim this authority. But I've had Baptists come to the door also" Scriptures aren't clear on anything. That's why we have so many religions and factions of religions. "I once worked with a JW woman, and she was one of the kindest people that I've ever known. You could trust her with your life! She would never steal from you, always do what you asked her to do, talk to you and listen and was so kind-hearted" I know an atheist who is the kindest man you'd ever want to meet, and would bend over backwards to help someone. People are people no matter what they are, some are honest others are not. Irregardless of if they are religious or not. "Not many people would do this sort of thing. What if all people did this kind of thing for each other? " Members of social groups or close neighbors often help each other in crisis. What has this to do with religion specifically? "So before you keep trying to put everyone into a little group who is a JW and label them as such and suc

dan9678 · Aug 10, 2004

...Eppur Si Muove...

Biblical Astronomy - Fine tuning during creation of earth and environment -

newtonian

Guest

newtonian

Guest

kmarinas86

Guest

mooware

Guest

mooware

Guest

newtonian

Guest

kmarinas86

Guest

newtonian

Guest

newtonian

Guest

mkofron

Guest

newtonian

Guest

newtonian

Guest

jitte

Guest

newtonian

Guest

jitte

Guest

newtonian

Guest

bowlofpetunias

Guest

mkofron

Guest

mkofron

Guest

kmarinas86

Guest

CalliArcale

Guest

tiza

Guest

dan9678

Guest

mooware

Guest

dan9678

Guest

Similar threads

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page