Posted on 04/29/2008 10:20:32 AM PDT by Hank Kerchief
So then, please expound upon how the current model is in error. Or is attacking me all you came to do?
==So then, please expound upon how the current model is in error. Or is attacking me all you came to do?
I extended the olive branch and you have refused it. If memory serves, I have already explained my position to you on numerous occasions. Indeed, you even remembered that I don’t suscribe to geocentrism.
So what is the harm in repeating yourself, if indeed you have been clear previously about your beliefs?
Please expound upon how the current astrological model is in error and how what you subscribe to is “like geocentricism”; I had in fact forgotten that you did not completely embrace geocentricism as you were probably as evasive about what you believe then as you are now.
Make that “Astronomical model”; as I am not interested in astrology. My mistake.
Well, unfortunately, I’m not the one who wrote the article, but I have my doubts that the author will be interested in, what I’m sure, she would consider a sophomoric debate about a subject that she has spent a large part of her professional life doing.
For my part, there is nothing to debate. Nothing can be called science about which every so-called science in the field has a different hypothesis, and which changes it’s direction as often as most of us change our underwear.
In fact, to debate an evolutionist grants them a kind of authenticity, implying there made up stories are really worth debating. They aren’t, so I doubt if there will be a debate.
Thanks for the good comment and confidence.
Hank
I look forward to it, yet am not as yet holding my breath. Her errors were manifold and fundamental and betrayed a lack of basic knowledge about the subject; how does one defend basic and fundamental errors?
She’s a nurse
There will be no debate because your hero is ill informed.
Nothing wrong with being a nurse. Plenty wrong with being wrong.
this is true. She is a misguided nurse. Nurse=good. Misguided=wrong
pure poetry
This is my response.
Just a test of you moral courage. Weatherwax has had her posting privelges removed, it says because she is a “troll.” If are truly honest men, you will write Admin Mod and ask that her previledges be restored—you know she is not a troll. Are you so afraid of the truth?
I know what you will do, or should I say, not do. Moral cowardice must be awful to live with.
Hank
Actually, in my view it's quit the other way around. But I will put that aside for the moment.
==Please expound upon how the current astrological model is in error and how what you subscribe to is “like geocentricism”
In “The Large Scale Structure of Space-Time,” Hawking and Ellis admit that a crucial component of their cosmological model is based on an “admixture of ideology,” which, as Dr. Humphreys points out, is another way of saying it “is not warranted by observations.” Hawking and Ellis call this ideology the Copernican principle, but in reality, it couldn't be further from what Copernicus actually believed. Copernicus did indeed posit that the earth was not the center of our solar system, but he also held that our solar system was either at or near the center of the universe. Hawking et al, on the other hand, put forward Bondi’s badly misnamed Copernican principle, which demotes our solar system (indeed our entire galaxy) to a position that is not “specially distinguished in any way”...and without a shred of evidence to back up such a momentous assumption. Thus, in the case of Big Bang cosmology, we find that Evo Big Bangers have inserted a principle that is based on their a priori faith commitments rather than empirical scientific observation. What Dr. Humphreys has done is turn the Copernican principle on its head based on biblical passages that suggest that God created the universe with a center. He then plugged this assumption into Einstein's theory of General Relativity, and found that gravitational time dilation allows for both extremely young and extremely old galaxies that owe their existence to the exact same creation event. Stephen Hawkings et al ASSUME that the universe has no center based on the observation that the universe appears spacially homogonous in every direction. But again, this is a massive assumption, for the universe would appear the exact same way if we occupied a spot at or near its center. I will leave which model makes superior predictions for another discussion.
Hank,
I must say, if indeed so, weatherwax is one of the most decent ‘trolls’ around here.
(More decent than some of the Evolutionists.)
And no, I don’t buy it, not for one nano-second.
Well perhaps it was her tendency to refer to herself in the third person that the admin mods found objectionable.
I have no objection to her continued posting, in fact I was eagerly awaiting her defense of her numerous errors, perhaps after that she could explain how up is down and blue is really purple.
What in the Bible makes you think that we necessitate a geographically central location in order to be first in God's heart?
Please refrain from asking deliberately misleading questions. In the meantime....Do you think the insertion of the Copernican principle into Big Bang cosmology was warranted by empirical observation?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.