The stars in the heavens - God promise to Abraham

On Aug 3, 3:40*pm, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Sun, 3 Aug 2008 20:54:59 +1000, SolomonW
wrote:

There is little evidence for a black hole. Yet most scientist believe
it.

There are many different observations that provide evidence for black
holes. We directly observe gravitational effects and we directly observe
the radiation produced by accreting matter.

There are so many similar dark or black things now that it is almost a
joke ,the first line in the following 'topic' mimics your statement
even though it is entirely meant to convey an opposite thing -

"In physics and cosmology, dark matter is matter that does not
interact with the electromagnetic force, but whose presence can be
inferred from gravitational effects on visible matter."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter

Maybe try Sam's Dark energy thread,another sort of anti-astronomical
point of view where the focus is on what is not there than what
actually is.Everybody seems happy to along with this type of junk
dumped into the celestial arena but it is producing the inability to
reason properly as is displayed by the definition of a planet
incident,in other words,things we can see.

Looking for a fresh astronomical start may almost be impossible but
there is an opportunity there to stabilise the situation and I would
be good for everyone to see it happen,it needs a central authority
though !.






In addition, well developed
theories which are supported by many other observations (and are
therefore well accepted) require black holes, and those theories predict
just the sort of observations we actually make. Black holes are a
wonderful example of _good_ science.








*What technology has ever been developed based on reading
the Bible? *

Actually there is some. I know a wheel structure used by NASA was
developed from an engineers reading of a biblical quote.

A reference would be nice. But even so, a description of ancient
technology is not science.
_________________________________________________

Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatoryhttp://www.cloudbait.com

On Aug 3, 3:54*pm, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Sun, 3 Aug 2008 20:33:11 +1000, SolomonW
wrote:

But there is some that you may want to checkout here.
http://bibleprobe.com/pi.htm

So? No science there. Just an observation (maybe) that a circle's
circumference is about three times its diameter. I'm sure that's been
known for a very long time.

Similarly, there is no evidence
of any cosmological knowledge deeper than that which can be observed
with the senses alone.

Which would be true of most science till modern times.

There was no science until modern times. That's the point. The first
documented use of a scientific method I'm aware of was by Greeks about
2400 years ago, and that wasn't applied systematically. The method then
seems to disappear for another thousand years, and only becomes
systematically applied from the 1500s on.

For example Tycho de Brahe and Johannes Kepler did science and they only
used their senses. Galileo's mechanics were done without a clock.

Nonsense. Tycho developed precise astronomical measuring instruments and
used them for his observations. Kepler used those same observations.
Galileo did many experiments using instruments. He certainly used clocks
for his work with pendulums.
_________________________________________________

Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatoryhttp://www.cloudbait.com

Pendulum clocks were the first devices that we now know as clocks and
the first real device can be attributed to Huygens who built the first
accurate one about 15 years after Galileo died -

http://cnx.org/content/m11929/latest/

Many here spend much of their time ignoring the calibration of
pendulum clocks by way of the natural noon 'Equation of Time'
correction which reduces the natural inequalities to an 24 average -

http://www.xs4all.nl/~adcs/Huygens/06/kort-E.html

These people visiting from the biblical forums hardly know that you
can't even reason out how clocks are related to terrestrial longitude
and the daily cycle in terms of 24 hours/360 degrees but forge a phony
value to axial rotation as 23 hours 56 minutes 04 seconds/360 degrees
-

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...3%A9reo.en.png

When Huygens tells you that the natural noon cycles are unequal yet
you believe them to be equal via the 'sidereal time' justification for
the motions of the Earth then you have truly arrived at a level of the
creaionists -

"Here take notice, that the Sun or the Earth passeth the 12. Signes,
or makes an entire revolution in the Ecliptick in 365 days, 5 hours 49
min. or there about, and that those days, reckon'd from noon to noon,
are of different lenghts; as is known to all that are vers'd in
Astronomy"

http://www.xs4all.nl/~adcs/Huygens/06/kort-E.html

These people are wondering about the 'honesty' of scientists but I
asure you it may come down to a question of the sanity of
scientists ,at least in astonomical matters.

On Sun, 3 Aug 2008 07:32:46 -0700 (PDT), oriel36
wrote:

Pendulum clocks were the first devices that we now know as clocks and
the first real device can be attributed to Huygens who built the first
accurate one about 15 years after Galileo died -

Sundials, water clocks, candle clocks, hour glasses... these are all
clocks, and all were used centuries before mechanical pendulum clocks
were invented. Some of these were capable of remarkable short term
accuracy. Galileo utilized several mechanical devices to measure time
while he was investigating pendulums and falling objects.
_________________________________________________

Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com

On Aug 3, 4:59*pm, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Sun, 3 Aug 2008 07:32:46 -0700 (PDT), oriel36

wrote:
Pendulum clocks were the first devices that we now know as clocks and
the first real device can be attributed to Huygens who built the first
accurate one about 15 years after Galileo died -

Sundials, water clocks, candle clocks, hour glasses... these are all
clocks, and all were used centuries before mechanical pendulum clocks
were invented. Some of these were capable of remarkable short term
accuracy. Galileo utilized several mechanical devices to measure time
while he was investigating pendulums and falling objects.
_________________________________________________

Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatoryhttp://www.cloudbait.com

To create an accurate clock,that reflects constant hours minutes and
seconds,as Huygens did, you need to know how to calibrate it by using
natural noon as a determination,you also need to know that these noon
cycles are unequal -

"...and that those days, reckon'd from noon to noon, are of different
lenghts; as is known to all that are vers'd in Astronomy. Now between
the longest and the shortest of those days, a day may be taken of such
a length, as 365 such days, 5. hours &c. (the same numbers as before)
make up, or are equall to that revolution: And this is call'd the
Equal or Mean day, according to which the Watches are to be set; and
therefore the Hour or Minute shew'd by the Watches, though they be
perfectly Iust and equal, must needs differ almost continually from
those that are shew'd by the Sun, or are reckon'd according to its
Motion. But this Difference is regular, and is otherwise call'd the
Aequation, and here you have a Table, that shows it"

http://www.xs4all.nl/~adcs/Huygens/06/kort-E.html

Perhaps you can explain to the Biblical forum why you think the
Earth's axial rotation is 23 hours 56 minutes 04 seconds by believing
that the natural noon cycles are 24 hours exactly even though it is
known since antiquity that the noon cycles vary -

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...3%A9reo.en.png

The 'sidereal time' justification for the Earth's motions is just one
of those things where if you disturb the 3 minute 56 difference
between 24 hours and 23 hours 56 minutes 04 seconds in terms of the
motions of the Earth,the whole thing falls asunder and indeed it does
when the natural noon cycles are observed to vary .I have requested
some action be taken to move in the direction away from tying axial
rotaion directly to the value of 23 hours 56 minutes 04 seconds but as
it is crucial to Newton's empirical agenda ,that action is presently
unlikely.

So here we are,you believe in 'sidereal time' reasoning that should
make a reasonable person blush while I lack the ability to appeal to
an authority to handle this crisis ,if you don't consider the wrong
attributed time value for the most basic known motion of the Earth a
crisis,then you will hardly be aware of the horror of its
consequences.Maybe the whole thing is so unstable that nothing can be
done but I would like to think otherwise.

As you well know,the process that transfers the average 24 hour day to
axial rotation as a constant where 4 minutes equals 1 degree of
geographical seperation and 24 hours/360 degrees depends on
recognition of the noon cycle and that there is no external reference
for axial rotation and especially by using the 24 hour clock but these
are the points that belong for a genuine group of people who can see
the flaw in tying axial rotation directly to the return of a star to a
meridian.

On Sun, 3 Aug 2008 09:57:22 -0700 (PDT), oriel36
wrote:

To create an accurate clock,that reflects constant hours minutes and
seconds,as Huygens did...

A clock can serve many purposes, and need not be calibrated to any of
the above units in order to be useful.
_________________________________________________

Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com

Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Sun, 3 Aug 2008 09:57:22 -0700 (PDT), oriel36
wrote:

To create an accurate clock,that reflects constant hours minutes and
seconds,as Huygens did...

A clock can serve many purposes, and need not be calibrated to any of
the above units in order to be useful.

Arguing semantics with a well-known nutcase--you must be more bored than
even I am!

--
Greg Crinklaw
Astronomical Software Developer
Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)

SkyTools: http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html
Observing: http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html
Comets: http://comets.skyhound.com

To reply take out your eye

On Aug 4, 2:53*am, Greg Crinklaw wrote:
Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Sun, 3 Aug 2008 09:57:22 -0700 (PDT), oriel36
wrote:

To create an accurate clock,that *reflects constant hours minutes and
seconds,as Huygens did...

A clock can serve many purposes, and need not be calibrated to any of
the above units in order to be useful.

Arguing semantics with a well-known nutcase--you must be more bored than
even I am!

--
Greg Crinklaw
Astronomical Software Developer
Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)

SkyTools: *http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html
Observing:http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html
Comets: * *http://comets.skyhound.com

To reply take out your eye

Call me what you will,the wonderful means by which timekeeping
astronomers transfered the average 24 hour day to terrestrial
longitudes and the 1 hour equivalency to 15 degrees of longitudinal
and geographical seperation making 24 hours/360 degrees still stands
as a supreme human achievement.

The fact that you have a meridian rotate through 360 degrees in 23
hours 56 minutes 04 seconds,( can't tell you what value it is for 15
degrees of longitudinal seperation) is among many things that are
simply astonishing in all the wrong sorts of ways but you can make up
whatever story you want to suit the 'sidereal time' explanation and I
cannot or would not compete with that.

I like you Greg,you show no prejudice by being cantankerous to
everyone but ultimately it is not about personal opinions or attacks
but the technical details dictated by the motions of the Earth.On your
side,the dictates of the few rely on the slavish subservience of the
many,this being the basis of all holocausts,in the matter of
Pluto,probably a few felt a twinge of regret but they will ultimately
support the dismal dictates and that leaves sci.astro.amateur a
colorless place.

As you can see,there is much to do in clearing up mistakes made long
ago and moving on to something productive,the first mistake is to make
amends for attempting to demote Pluto through bad thinking and bad
decisions.

On Sun, 03 Aug 2008 01:12:29 -0600, Greg Crinklaw
spake thusly:


Chris L Peterson wrote:

The idea that the bible and evolution are the opposite of each other is
simply bizarre.

Quite right.

Quite wrong.


The Bible and Evolution are like Hockey and Calzone. They really don't
have anything to do with one another.

The lie you tell yourself, because you're a coward.

--

"Wisdom is in the sight of him who has understanding,
but the eyes of a fool are on the ends of the earth."
- Proverbs 17:24

** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

On Sat, 02 Aug 2008 23:59:30 -0600, Greg Crinklaw
spake thusly:


Pastor Dave wrote:

I am well acquainted with the various sciences involved
and you son, are just another moron trying to play the
game you were taught to play, thinking that your time
spent seeing how to fool most people, equates to real
and actual research!

I, "father", am the guy who just won this argument. The evidence? You
responded with irrationality and personal insults. Apparently that's
the best you can do.

No real surprise there.

I'm sorry that I had to expose you as a liar.
But that's what happens when you lie.

--

By allowing science to say that it has completely
drawn a line around what thngs are and to say we
know what things are, it's in this box, that's it,
we've limited ourselves. That's losing, not gaining
and to say that the scientific method is the only
method of perception is in and of itself unscientific.
Science must acknowledge that there are many different
ways of perceiving things. Scientists in some branches
are bringing things back and saying "Okay, we didn't
have the whole picture".

** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

On Sun, 03 Aug 2008 07:54:39 -0600, Chris L Peterson
spake thusly:


Which would be true of most science till modern times.

There was no science until modern times.

That's not true, but most major branches of what
you call science were invented by Bible believing
Creationists.

--

"The greatest and noblest pleasure which men can have
in this world is to discover new truths; and the next
is to shake off old prejudices. -Frederick The Great

** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **