Skip to comments.
History Channel - "How The Earth Was Made" dosumentary raises many questions in my mind
http://www.history.com/ ^
Posted on 12/31/2007 5:40:23 PM PST by SilvieWaldorfMD
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-94 next last
To: SilvieWaldorfMD
2
posted on
12/31/2007 5:41:31 PM PST
by
xcamel
(FDT/2008)
To: SilvieWaldorfMD
Yeah I’ve watched it twice and liked it.
I don’t have any conflicts over religious belief or scientific belief. Sure God created it all, by what process is a whole different question.
Lets not forget that the genesis of the whole big bang theory was a Catholic priest and scientist.
3
posted on
12/31/2007 5:43:52 PM PST
by
cripplecreek
(Only one consistent conservative in this race and his name is Hunter.)
To: SilvieWaldorfMD
>couldn’t explain how water got to Earth
That is a joke. I hope.
Water did not “get” here, it was formed here.
4
posted on
12/31/2007 5:44:29 PM PST
by
bill1952
(The right to buy weapons is the right to be free)
To: xcamel
This is about 12 billion years after the "big bang" ("In the beginning" part of the Bible), and about 4 billion years after this solar system coalesced.
So, with a solar system filled to the brim with comets made up mostly of water ice, if someone tells you meteorites brought in the water, I'd suggest he or she hadn't thought about it too much.
No doubt God created this part of the Multiverse.
5
posted on
12/31/2007 5:44:49 PM PST
by
muawiyah
To: bill1952
Well, yes, I know, but the way that these scientists were explaining it — it appears that water got here through an alien source - asteroids.
I don’t buy it.
6
posted on
12/31/2007 5:46:24 PM PST
by
SilvieWaldorfMD
(Hard lesson learned in the 1980's: "Never perm and dye your hair at the same time")
To: SilvieWaldorfMD
I dont buy it.
I never did either. Some scientists are not smart.
Happy New Year, BTW. - Bill
7
posted on
12/31/2007 5:55:46 PM PST
by
bill1952
(The right to buy weapons is the right to be free)
To: muawiyah
I solved the Hawking paradox at the same time. It was easy...once you realize if space-time “works in forward”, it can “work in reverse.”
8
posted on
12/31/2007 5:58:20 PM PST
by
xcamel
(FDT/2008)
To: cripplecreek
[I dont have any conflicts over religious belief or scientific belief. Sure God created it all, by what process is a whole different question.]
I am a degreed physicist and I, too, have no trouble with anyone’s God belief and science. Afterall, no one was here to winess and I can accept what I see. Any rational (read RATIONAL) discussion within scientific boundaries is fine with me.
9
posted on
12/31/2007 6:00:14 PM PST
by
dbacks
(Taglines for sale or rent.)
To: SilvieWaldorfMD
10
posted on
12/31/2007 6:04:20 PM PST
by
LiteKeeper
(Beware the secularization of America; the Islamization of Eurabia)
To: dbacks
You are aware, of course, that the fuzzy wuzzies and the mullahs don’t want you asking “how” either.
11
posted on
12/31/2007 6:04:37 PM PST
by
muawiyah
To: dbacks
One thing I liked about the show was the fact that they didn’t seem to state that it was all fact. A very large portion of science is theoretical and a good scientist can admit that.
Stating theory as fact is one of the things that concern me about manmade global warming hysteria. I fear that it gives all science a bad name in the eyes of the public.
12
posted on
12/31/2007 6:20:05 PM PST
by
cripplecreek
(Only one consistent conservative in this race and his name is Hunter.)
To: SilvieWaldorfMD
You can not have it both ways.
The Bible can not be partially correct, for how do you decide what is correct in the Bible, that which you like, that which fits the way you wish to live?
Science has been slowly creating a false front of long and slow to make God and obsolete, since the 1700's.
The Bible is literal and should be taken as such, if you try to fit man's belief of misinterpretation and misrepresentation of the physical evidence that cries out of a supernatural creator, then you may as well put down your Bible and take up Buddhism.
13
posted on
12/31/2007 6:23:29 PM PST
by
Creationist
( Evolution is a faith based science with no proof. Scientist are the prophets, teachers the preacher)
To: SilvieWaldorfMD
I have seen this documentary and simply rejoiced in their choice of words for the title:
How the earth was made!
Having a fairly competent grasp of English, I couldn't believe it when I first saw it.
14
posted on
12/31/2007 6:38:56 PM PST
by
Publius6961
(MSM: Israelis are killed by rockets; Lebanese are killed by Israelis.)
To: Creationist
The Bible is literal and should be taken as such, if you try to fit man's belief of misinterpretation and misrepresentation of the physical evidence that cries out of a supernatural creator, then you may as well put down your Bible and take up Buddhism.Why not take up thinking, instead?
To: xcamel
two words...
Big BangThe funniest words for those Einsteins who insist on making a adversary controversy out of the discussion:
"First there was nothing...
...and then it exploded."
16
posted on
12/31/2007 6:41:27 PM PST
by
Publius6961
(MSM: Israelis are killed by rockets; Lebanese are killed by Israelis.)
To: Publius6961
Ah.. but there was something...
17
posted on
12/31/2007 6:44:09 PM PST
by
xcamel
(FDT/2008)
To: Misterioso
How witty.
Thinking is what I do. I believe the Holy Bible to be true, and that the visible evidence of the physical world can be best explained by a global flood around 4500 years ago, and the the universe and everything in it was created by God in six literal twenty-four hour days.
The physical evidence in the universe and this world all point to young, not long and slow.
Evolution is not real it does not happen it is a fable in the minds of those who believe they are god's of their own world.
18
posted on
12/31/2007 7:00:30 PM PST
by
Creationist
( Evolution is a faith based science with no proof. Scientist are the prophets, teachers the preacher)
To: Creationist
To: xcamel
One of the three fundamental flaws to all the ‘theories’ you have just pointed out.
1) There had to be something there to explode.
2) The laws of physics have to be suspended for the explosion to occur. There is this little thing called an event horizon that has to be surpassed before matter could actually get out of the pull of the supermass. Otherwise, you have the ‘Big Puff’ not the ‘Big Bang’. However, all the scientific ‘evidence’ to the length of this time of no laws/reverse laws is still not long enough before the event horizon to kick in and suck everything back in.
3) The original poster’s comment about water is part three of the three flaws. The spinning velocity needed for the Earth to form from gas is too fast for water to have remained on the exterior of the surface, and not instead be trapped in the interior.
20
posted on
12/31/2007 7:57:46 PM PST
by
Lightfinger
(Those that are ignorant of the past are doomed to repeat it. Progressive = National Socialist.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-94 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson