Re: The Current Universe Being Observed Is No Longer There
- From: Primary AL <aavery6801@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 01:29:58 -0800 (PST)
On Dec 30 2007, 3:03 am, "David Hare-Scott" <comp...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
"PrimaryAL" <aavery6...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:25028940-af91-43c3-bede-2b523f5ba756@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cummon, The study of a star a billion light years from us is only
revealed to for it's observation as what it was a billion years ago. I
have no problem with Mars or Pluto or the sun. Light travels at
186,000 miles per second. A light year is how long the light travels
in a year. The light you see coming from a star one light year away
has traveled for 1 year for one year to you. You do not see the star
in its current form. A star a billion light years away is just now
reaching you. You can only observe this star from the state it was in
a billion years ago. Likewise with most of the universe. What you see
is not there. What is there is not visible. of course a universe is
there by rational assumptions.
The sun is some 8 light minutes away. The light that I see reflected off a
cow standing in a field that I see through my window took some time to reach
my eye and by that time the cow may have moved a ltttle or even mysteriously
vanished. Is the sun "not there", what about the cow? Where do you draw the
line? It looks to me that you have no reason to decide that the cow is there
and the star a billion light years off is not. If you have a reason please
tell us what it is and how you worked out the maximum distance that things are
still there.
But this level of rationality is no more sound than the assumption of
intelligent design. ---Not the hokey "god" creation stuff you love to
knock down, like an inflatable pop up dummy.
My idea of ID has more to due with atomic and quantum structure and
bias which we can rationally conclude is worthy of study in the form
of search for connections between sub DNA materials and atomic
characteristics which most certainly have relationships with the
supposed random activity which Evolutionists proclaim generated the
intelligent platforms necessary to generate the brilliance by which
cells evolve.
Where is your evidence of "connections between sub DNA materials and atomic
characteristics"? What do these connections look like? What do they do?
........... What makes you think that they are "there"?
It seems that you have faith and hope that they are not there.......
Yet it is a logical assumption that as one uncovers hundreds of
levels of design inside design, i.e (animal to organs cell to DNA to
enzymes etc.) to each more intricate level supporting the design which
covered it (figure of speech), that the next level down would support,
and be deemed necessary for the existence of its larger counterpart in
the same way as all the other levels did......Duh. yet this is where
Evolution stops and other sciences begin, curiously, with no
relationship or support for each other.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: The Current Universe Being Observed Is No Longer There
- From: AC
- Re: The Current Universe Being Observed Is No Longer There
- From: Robert Carnegie
- Re: The Current Universe Being Observed Is No Longer There
- From: Kermit
- Re: The Current Universe Being Observed Is No Longer There
- From: wf3h
- Re: The Current Universe Being Observed Is No Longer There
- Prev by Date: Re: Fine-grained Mudstones and Current Deposition
- Next by Date: Re: The Current Universe Being Observed Is No Longer There
- Previous by thread: Re: The Current Universe Being Observed Is No Longer There
- Next by thread: Re: The Current Universe Being Observed Is No Longer There
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|