Evidence for God from Science

truthman wrote:

zoegirl wrote:With regards to those who, today, hold to geocentrism, the issue becomes one of deliberate ignorance. It's not as if they are saying, as you are, "oh, relativity allows perspective to justify geocentrism"...they are rejecting some pretty basic observational data. It's not that they are embracing relativity with respect to Scripture, they are rejecting any observations. Now maybe this is wrong, but I would be willing to bet that they aren't even interested in what relativity states. And without relativity, *their* view holds that, whatever basic observations says, it's wrong.

It is not deliberate ignorance, it is a deliberate faith (be it right or wrong). Faith is not ignorance.
It is a statement of faith in God and His word as the ultimate and final authority, which is commendable. Granted, they should be more thorough in their study and exegesis of Scripture regarding passages implying geocentricity, and yes, they should even study science and be open to studying how the 2 work together, but that can also be said of the vast majority of people, the vast majority of Christians, and a lot of guys posting here. What disturbs me is the apparent ignorance of some who post here while blasting people of faith as ignorant.

Let's take a step back here and redefine some terms in our discussion.

Can a person have faith and still be ignorant? Can they be deliberately ignorant? Sure! Is their faith commendable? Yes.

I have never attacked their faith. I can admire them for their willingness trust in what they think the Word says. BUt in doing so, they are rejecting basic observations. We are not even talking about building philosophies based on data as some evolutionists do.

Does God want this blind adherence? Can we be faithful and yet investigate?

The logical conclusion of this idea of faith leads to throwing one's hands up in the air in investigating His creation. Why figure things out? Why question? It reduces any investigation to bordering on rejecting scripture. And it breeds fear of examining things.

RickD wrote:

***What is geocentricity?***

Simply put, geocentricity says the earth is the center of the universe,not the sun. The sun revolves around the earth, not the earth around thesun.

I got this quote from a geocentricity website. Who actually believes the Sun is the center of the universe? Is this what Geocentricity is? The sun revolves around the earth? Doesn't the object with a greater mass(sun) have the stronger pull on an object with the lesser mass(earth).

THis is where one would have to examine their beliefs more fully.

With respect to relativity, we may be able to view the center of the universe from earth.

However, this ISN't what they are holding to. They are holding to an erroneous mathematical and observational model of the universe. In the geocentric model that *they are holding to*, even relativity doesn't match to the model's predictions.

They are NOT calling for a new model, in fact, based on Rick's information from the website, they are calling for a rejection of everything in the last three centuries! with respect to astronomy. And yes, this is deliberate ignorance. If they were calling for a new paradigm of viewing the universe using relativity, that would be one thing, but they are calling for us to use a model can't even be used with relativity...(in geocentric models, all of the planets, the sun, and stars revolve around us, which, even with relativity, would not be true.)

It generalizes Galileo's principle of relativity—that all uniform motion is relative, and that there is no absolute and well-defined state of rest (no privileged reference frames)—from mechanics to all the laws of physics, including both the laws of mechanics and of electrodynamics, whatever they may be.

-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_relativity

Truthman,

I don't know how else to say it.

It doesn't matter if WE can look at relativity and say "huh, look at that, the earth can be viewed as the center". What matters is that they are in a state of denial as to the reality of the universe. They don't even want to examine relativity with regards to astronomy. It's pretty clear that from their view, what matters is that we cannot contradict, AT ALL, what they view scripture to say. THEY DON"T CARE!

Let's view it from a simple analogy: In your interpretation of scripture. you think the scripture says the sky is red. Along comes a myriad of sources, data, methods that show that the sky is blue. In THEIR worldview, in their limited view of scripture, the sky better be red. They are not interested at all in anything anybody says, they think the Bible says red, therefore it is red.

What I am most concerned with is not whether someone comes along and says "well, gee, if you consider refraction, reflection, the amount of dust particles, etc, sometimes you can consider the sky is red".

At the heart of the discussion, we have a group of individuals who have essentially declared all investigation CLOSED. THey don't care one iota about relativity. It's pretty clear from their statment of faith and their assertions that they haven't examined anything beyond the Ptolemaic model of fixed earth and everything revolving around the earth.

Just look at their first paragraph

The Biblical Astronomer was originally founded in 1971 as the Tychonian Society, on the premise that the only absolutely trustworthy information about the origin and purpose of all that exists and happens is given by God, our Creator and Redeemer, in his infallible, preserved word, the Holy Bible, commonly called the King James Bible. All scientific endeavor which does not accept this revelation from on high without any reservations, literary, philosophical or whatever, we reject as already condemned in its unfounded first assumptions.

Pretty hefty rigidity.


1) Whether or not the earth is viewed as the center does not negate the fact that the earth revolves around the sun. Even if the earth was the center, we would still be going around the sun. This is far different than the Ptolemaic model, even considering the earth as the center.

2) The use of special relativity does not negate the REASON for the orbits around the sun, ie the pull of the planets by the sun. Simply saying special relativity does not absolve this group of rejecting science, nor does it excuse them from deliberate ignorance.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_geo ... nt_of_view

HOwever, all that being said, the MAIN issue is that they are not interesting in discussing this at all. You and I can have a rather stimulating conversation about this and how this can illuminate the scripture and how it is cool and all sorts of wonderful connections between scripture and relativity. I don't even deny that relativity makes for some very interesting applications towards scripture. What it cannot do is validate Ptolemy's model, which is what they want to go back to.

I can commend their faith at the same time I can deplore their position!

The scientific community must change as soon as possible its space- time conceptions,
otherwise it will continue to roam in the relativistic quagmire and, instead of coming
to see how MAMIN COLIU produces energy from nothing, it covers my theory and
experiments with silence and disdain.
I came, however, to the conviction that the relativists are unable to change their
conceptions. As relativity is already 80 years old, one can say that all living relativists
were born blind. And it is impossible to explain to a blind man how beautiful is the
world: he simply cannot understand your descriptions as born blind, he has lived his
whole life in darkness. Thus I think we have to leave all living relativists to die in
peace and to stop discussion with them. As now the whole energetic structure of the
world must be transferred to “free energy,” we have to solve many different technical
and social problems which will appear. These problems we shall solve with the young
people who are born now and whose eyes are still “seeing.” I am addressing these
young men and women.

http://www.geocentricity.com/ba1/no055/marinov.pdf

FROM THEIR OWN SITE THEY REJECT RELATIVITY...

There's a lot of information there. It might take a couple of read-throughs to absorb it all.

Well, you talked me into actually going and checking out the geocentricity site. I wasn't able to download the pdf though.
The site is rather interesting. They are actually far more science based than I could have guessed.
The founder Gerardus D. Bouw, Ph.D is actually an astronomer. I was shocked. Definitely not a stupid, ignorant sort.

Considering that you have been waxing poetic about relativity and the site denies it...I am surprised at this.

How could we be at the center of the universe if we are not even in the center of our own galaxy?

Gman wrote:How could we be at the center of the universe if we are not even in the center of our own galaxy?

And since when did being the center of universe - physically that is - mean anything? It is in the spiritual sense that we, humans as the adopted children of God, are the center of the universe that may mean something.

Byblos wrote:And since when did being the center of universe - physically that is - mean anything? It is in the spiritual sense that we, humans as the adopted children of God, are the center of the universe that may mean something.

I think that deserves a hand..

Gman wrote:How could we be at the center of the universe if we are not even in the center of our own galaxy?

Gman, with the risk of playing devil's advocate, I don't believe the Earth would necessarily have to be located in the center of the Milky Way, to be in the center of the universe. The geographical center of America is in Lebanon, Kansas. But, Lebanon is not in the center of Kansas.

Good point. The center of the universe could be anywhere and its location in the galaxy would not change that.
Personally, since all physical reference points are equally valid, I agree that it is irrelevant, really. It is the spiritual centre that is relevant. Not much more to say on the subject.

Good conversation all! It's great to see something like this worked through and I appreciate the tone and respect shown by all in looking at all the different aspects.

RickD wrote: Gman, with the risk of playing devil's advocate, I don't believe the Earth would necessarily have to be located in the center of the Milky Way, to be in the center of the universe. The geographical center of America is in Lebanon, Kansas. But, Lebanon is not in the center of Kansas.

Well... If we are on a spiral arm of our galaxy, that moves, then the point is rather moot where the center actually is. It's not like the Lebanon, Kansas could suddenly grow legs and move to another area of the world. It wouldn't be static, just as any other star or planet in the universe.