Why are most galaxies and solar systems 'flat'?

I tuned in late, but it's important to note that "creationist" spans a wide
range of different positions, some of them orthodox and some of them
freakishly weird.

Also that the "4004 B.C." creation date is not part of traditional
Christianity. (Augustine, for instance, thought it obvious that we don't
know the age of the universe, and he said some quite profound things about
cosmology back at the beginning of the Middle Ages.) 4004 B.C. was promoted
in the 19th century by various sects that were pushing new schemes for
interpreting Old Testament prophecies.

Is this anything like what you were being trolled for?

But it must not be beyond our capabilities, however tedious. All that
is required for these energetic freaks to prevail is for good people
to do nothing - and the current US administration is a ghastly example
of just that.

Compared to the extreme right religious, Daniel Min is harmless - he
has two specific aims, Moon landings and horror-scopes. These guys
have a pernicious goal - the replacement of rational thought by the
rigid imposition of their interpretation of an ancient book of
control.

Er... which side is being rigid and intolerant here?

Michael A. Covington
wrote:
Is this anything like what you were being trolled for?

No, Michael, this was one of the Young Earth Creationist lobby.

Best,
Stephen

Remove footfrommouth to reply

--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astro Books +
+ (N51.162 E0.995) | http://www.astunit.com +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

On Mon, 27 Oct 2003 00:22:11 +0000, Stephen Tonkin
inscribed in blood upon a parchment:

MDJ wrote:
I will (...) stick to the facts.

...and then attempted to pass off as his own:
[snip creationist trash copied verbatim, and without attribution, from
http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/3542.asp]

The sheer profundity of the ignorance in this creationist crock is
exemplified by:

the stellar grouping called Orion, also known as the Saucepan.

ROTFLMAO! If that is a fact, my nose is a haddock. The sad buffoons
can't even get something as simple as that right. As for the errors that
infest the rest of it, if anyone is interested in enumerating them, read
it in conjunction with a halfway decent descriptive astronomy text.

Best,
Stephen

Remove footfrommouth to reply

They are bigoted, lying, sacks of worm ****.

And if any cretinist on this group objects to that, I have this simple
message: "**** you. stop living in the 7th century you morons".

Harsh language, but would you (and I'm talking to all the reasonsible,
sensible people in the group now) want David Iriving teaching history
to your children?

See my supernovae, supernova remnants and young-earth creationism FAQ
(address in sig) for why they are scum.

Best,
Dave

On Mon, 27 Oct 2003 10:55:22 -0500, "Michael A. Covington"
inscribed in blood
upon a parchment:

But it must not be beyond our capabilities, however tedious. All that
is required for these energetic freaks to prevail is for good people
to do nothing - and the current US administration is a ghastly example
of just that.

Compared to the extreme right religious, Daniel Min is harmless - he
has two specific aims, Moon landings and horror-scopes. These guys
have a pernicious goal - the replacement of rational thought by the
rigid imposition of their interpretation of an ancient book of
control.

Er... which side is being rigid and intolerant here?



The cretinists. They are the same ****wits who have blamed September
11th on....wait for it.....biology teachers and the teaching of
evolution in schools....

Best,
Dave

"Michael A. Covington"
wrote:

But it must not be beyond our capabilities, however tedious. All that
is required for these energetic freaks to prevail is for good people
to do nothing - and the current US administration is a ghastly example
of just that.

Compared to the extreme right religious, Daniel Min is harmless - he
has two specific aims, Moon landings and horror-scopes. These guys
have a pernicious goal - the replacement of rational thought by the
rigid imposition of their interpretation of an ancient book of
control.

Er... which side is being rigid and intolerant here?

Those that shoot up abortion clinics, those that ban text books with
evolution, those that believe a book containing Deuteronomy is
literally true and to be enforced and obeyed to the letter?

Deut. 22
[23} If a damsel that is a virgin be betrothed unto an husband, and a
man find her in the city, and lie with her;

[24] Then ye shall bring them both out unto the gate of that city, and
ye shall stone them with stones that they die; the damsel, because she
cried not, being in the city; and the man, because he hath humbled his
neighbour's wife: so thou shalt put away evil from among you.

Deut 23
[1] He that is wounded in the stones, or hath his privy member cut
off, shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord.

[2] A ******* shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord; even
to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of
the Lord.

Wowee - take care on accusations of rigidity and intolerance.

None of this is to deny that the Bible contains beautiful passages and
profound wisdom and is one of the great books of the world.

The Almagest, for instance, is another great book, full of profound
wisdom and discovery but that is not to say that it contains much
truth. Thanks to the Almagest astronomy has developed and left the
Almagest behind.

So also societies have developed and it's time we left Deuteronomy and
the rest of it behind.

Cheers

Martin

--------------
Martin Frey
N 51 02 E 0 47
--------------

In message , MDJ
writes

Really, all this debate boils down to is, do you believe in the biblical
account of creation in 6 days?

NO. Next question? What makes you think that the translation of the
original Word into "days" in English is even remotely accurate?


What cannot be disputed is that the Bible is a real book and was written by
many different writers from 2000BC to 200AD. Now, if you can accept that,
then read the following extract from the book of Job, written in 1500BC.

And if you do believe this tosh then your God is a dodgy antique dealer
that made the universe in a week just over 6000 years ago and then
distressed it to look much older and more interesting. If you want to
hold such a crazy world outlook as YEC that is your problem. But don't
try converting others - especially not in a science group.

There is no end to the lies and half truths that Young Earth
Creationists will use to try and bend reality to match their weird
preconceptions of what the "Good Book" says about nature. Welcome to the
new dark ages.

BTW Localised development of order out of chaos is old hat. There are
several cute and relatively simple chemical reactions that can
demonstrate complex self organising structure in a school chemical
laboratory:

Potassium perbromate, malonic acid, dissolved in 1M sulphuric acid and a
trace of cerium sulphate (with ferroin as indicator) is very pretty. And
relatively safe chemistry. It is usually called the chemical clock or BZ
reaction and in a thin layer it forms beautiful self organised swirls.

Silver nitrate crystals dropped onto a gelatine plate containing sodium
chromate is another example (somewhat less user friendly - chromate
salts are nasty). Called Liesgang rings after their discoverer (an early
pioneer of photography).

Usual caveats about taking care when handling chemicals apply.

Regards,
--
Martin Brown

"MDJ" wrote
What cannot be disputed is that the Bible is a real book

So is "The Wind in the Willows".


--
Mike Collins
UK

Replace the seed by the tree to reply

In message , Michael A.
Covington writes
I tuned in late, but it's important to note that "creationist" spans a wide
range of different positions, some of them orthodox and some of them
freakishly weird.

Also that the "4004 B.C." creation date is not part of traditional
Christianity. (Augustine, for instance, thought it obvious that we don't
know the age of the universe, and he said some quite profound things about
cosmology back at the beginning of the Middle Ages.)

Did he really make that remark about creating a hell for people who ask
that sort of question ? (what was god doing before he created heaven and
earth)
IIRC, he had a lot to do with the Church's attitude to sex, so he has a
lot to answer for, but there's also a lot to admire.
--
Rabbit arithmetic - 1 plus 1 equals 10
Remove spam and invalid from address to reply.

On Sun, 26 Oct 2003 22:21:43 -0000, "MDJ"
wrote:

You sir, are a complete nutter. You expositions are an offense to the
memory of the thousands of scientists, astronomers, and other educated
people who dedicated their lives by working tirelessly to provide us
with the facts that all can now read in countless text books. Your
distortions of selected facts, cobbled together as a frail belief that
doesn't withstand a moment's logical thought may give an interesting
insight into your own deluded mentality, but this really isn't the
place to preach it. You will get no comfort here. Leave.

ChrisH



UK Astro Ads: http://www.UKAstroAds.co.uk