stuhasic.wordpress.com — March 9, 2004: NASA releases a single image taken by the Hubble Space telescope that proves a fatal blow to the concept of God, but despite the compelling evidence, many simply don?t comprehend the significance of the image.
Nov 11, 2006 View in Crawl 4
hodedofomeNov 12, 2006
This article assumes that light always travels at the same speed. It doesn't. Look at <a class="user" href="http://partners.nytimes.com/library/national/science/053000sci-physics-light.html">http://partners.nytimes.com/library/national/science/053000sci-physics-light.html</a> one experiment sped up light 300 times the normal speed. Also look at this article <a class="user" href="http://www.rochester.edu/news/show.php?id=2544">http://www.rochester.edu/news/show.php?id=2544</a> - light can do some funky things. Scientists have sped up and slowed down light, even made it move backwards. No this does not mean the universe is 6000 years old, nor does it mean it's billions of years old either. Basing an argument on the age of the universe by using the normal speed of light as 186,000 miles per second doesn't quite reveal all of the facts, because scientists have shown that the speed of light CAN change under certain conditions.
wratherinNov 13, 2006
Since when is the speed of light a constant? Some harvard students actually stopped light in place and then released it again. In another harvard study they made light go three hundred times the normal speed. We also know it can be effected by gravity.So why is it that there being stars "billions of light years away" disproves God. How we find these distances is also somewhat flawed. Go do the research on how they find these distances. It's almost laughable were it not that people believe it.
zadadkaNov 13, 2006
First, those that beleive in a God...no matter the name given... believe in their God, and that's that.From their beleifs, they gain strength, confidence, conciousness and greater respect for the world (and beyond).It doesn't make them either foolish or irrational in their thought processes.It doesn't make them wrong about everything else just because this argument ensues.They are just like anyone else with an imaginary friend...their qualities of reality and interpretation are flawed...that's all...
oldschoolhackNov 17, 2006
I like the fact we are finding new things about the world around us. Doing so with the sole purpose to disprove ones religious belief is a bit childish. People do not like to be fed unwillingly information they do not believe, whether scientific or religious. I am sure the scientist working on the projects intentions were not thus, however the article writer gets a thumbs down for issuing this discovery in such a mannor. *happy to be a buddhist, and enjoy both benefits of science and religion*Dugg for content, boo'd for presentation.
essteeNov 22, 2006
@kozie While I am certainly not as versed or reputable as university professors I would like to address the notion why some people believe the time periods are literal and why they may be mislead into doing so.Concluding the review of accomplishments on each of the six days of creative activity is the statement, “And there came to be evening and there came to be morning,” a first, second, third day, and so forth. (Ge 1:5, 8, 13, 19, 23, 31) Since the length of each creative day exceeded 24 hours (as will be shown later), this expression does not apply to literal night and day but is figurative. During the evening period things would be indistinct; but in the morning they would become clearly discernible. During the “evening,” or beginning, of each creative period, or “day,” God’s purpose for that day, though fully known to him, would be indistinct to any angelic observers. However, when the “morning” arrived there would be full light as to what God had purposed for that day, it having been accomplished by that time.—Compare Pr 4:18.The Bible does not specify the length of each of the creative periods. Yet all six of them have ended, it being said with respect to the sixth day (as in the case of each of the preceding five days): “And there came to be evening and there came to be morning, a sixth day.” (Ge 1:31) However, this statement is not made regarding the seventh day, on which God proceeded to rest, indicating that it continued. (Ge 2:1-3) Also, more than 4,000 years after the seventh day, or God’s rest day, commenced, Paul indicated that it was still in progress. At Hebrews 4:1-11 he referred to the earlier words of David (Ps 95:7, 8, 11) and to Genesis 2:2 and urged: “Let us therefore do our utmost to enter into that rest.” By the apostle’s time, the seventh day had been continuing for thousands of years and had not yet ended. The Thousand Year Reign of Jesus Christ, who is Scripturally identified as “Lord of the sabbath” (Mt 12:8), is evidently part of the great sabbath, God’s rest day. (Re 20:1-6) This would indicate the passing of thousands of years from the commencement of God’s rest day to its end. The week of days set forth at Genesis 1:3 to 2:3, the last of which is a sabbath, seems to parallel the week into which the Israelites divided their time, observing a sabbath on the seventh day thereof, in keeping with the divine will. (Ex 20:8-11) And, since the seventh day has been continuing for thousands of years, it may reasonably be concluded that each of the six creative periods, or days, was at least thousands of years in length.That a day can be longer than 24 hours is indicated by Genesis 2:4, which speaks of all the creative periods as one “day.” Also indicative of this is Peter’s inspired observation that “one day is with God as a thousand years and a thousand years as one day.” (2Pe 3:8) Ascribing not just 24 hours but a longer period of time, thousands of years, to each of the creative days better harmonizes with the evidence found in the earth itself.The Hebrews began their day in the evening, after sunset, and ended it the next day at sunset. The day, therefore, ran from evening to evening. “From evening to evening you should observe your sabbath.” (Le 23:32) This follows the pattern of Gods creative days, as indicated at Genesis 1:5: “There came to be evening and there came to be morning, a first day.”—Compare Da 8:14.
Closed AccountNov 25, 2006
its the way god wanted it to be
cugarFeb 9, 2007
anyone else feel like were gonna keep zooming out farther and farther and one day we'll find out we are actually just "atoms" (the earth and everything else in our "universe" included) composing another life form or entity?maybe were just particles in somethings big toe and then that something is just a particle composing something else and so on and so on, owe my brain
dude199Feb 18, 2007
God doesnt have to be killed.How do you kill something that doesnt exist?
yallwaysMar 19, 2007
And if any single person in this discussion knew anything at all about light refraction and it's correlation with non-atmospheric conditions, you would know that this and most Hubble telescope’s images are obvious fakes in order to deter the common non-scientific concepts of biblical majorities. But I couldn't possibly expect a bunch of Atheists to have the slightest bit of intelligence on anything in particular. After all... that's why they don’t believe anything. They are too lazy and incompetent to take a minute or two out of their lives and learn something.And now for the blah blah hooplah garbage that most pathetic Atheists say to a response like this because of their lack of intelligence to make a concrete statement or logical point. C'mon. Let's hear your garbage. Show your ignorance.
ninjachris789May 14, 2007
I suppose I'll give it then: I work for NASA on the Hubble Project and to put it simply, you do not seem to have a darn clue what you are referring to...light refraction is commonly thought to be a process of our atmosphere's effect on light ray warping (hence the blue color)-in reality, the atmosphere is only a slight contributer: solar flares and radiation bursts from various stars are also capable of not only bending, but completely altering the pattern of emitted light rays: Hubble therefore is capable of producing clearer pictures the closer the object is-it also is limited in pixilation, so deeper images are generally more blurry in order to hide the pixalation resulting from telescopic strain (telescopes generally do not attempt deep space photos or viewing, thus presenting the chief reason why images 'seem' to appear less pixilated than most by Hubble-the point of the project was for deep space viewing, however, the technology has become outdated and a replacement shall be necessary soon) Personally, I am agnostic meaning that I believe in some form of higher being or entity, however, am unsure of what that reality truly is...despite this belief, I find it highly immature for some of you to flat out refute one side or the other-we honestly do not know. There are incomprehensible amounts of information within our grasp, more or less within the remainder of the multiverse (see Stephen Hawkings' work)....do you honestly feel that it is possible to render one side or the other moot? There are those who believe strongly in the biblical passages, however, those passages are supposedly written by the apostles or prophets of various faiths...Man interprets every action differently: Even the most blatant and well-known action has questionable subtleties...so why is it that we feel that the scriptures are accurate? For me, I find that the only true means of being able to comprehend these mysteries is to experience them for myself, experience is the only method by which I am content to lead...ignorance is bliss, but knowledge is not necessarily a burden either...
kilroy238Mar 8, 2008
Sorry this has nothing to do with God only with religion. I still believe God created everything. For all we know the Big Bang was god snapping his fingers. Billions of years to God may be nothing we have only our 1 concept of time and space. Science in it's quest for knowledge is so willing to discount anything we can't explain. We are intellectual babies who have not learned to live in peace or how not to destroy our own planet yet we think we know it all. Everyday we think we know it all and every tomorrow we learn something new that should tell us how little we really know.