Total posts: 4,363
Posted in:
-->
@Benjamin
I will expand on the notion of expectation as another influence in addition to choice and experience.
What scientist ever climbed out of the swamp of questions about the natural world to which he/she could discover the ability to adapt to it by either avoiding its influence, or changing its influence by some adaptation of technology with that wonderful concept of expectation. Any scientific examination begins with "I wonder what will happen if..." Yeah, expectation usually begins with at least a theory of what will happen if... Sometimes, nothing. Sometimes, a small effect, measurable, but insignificant. And, sometimes, wahoo! Empiric evidence of a blockbuster discovery!~ Better yet that it is actually beneficial. Worse if it results in disaster. All the above has occurred, but even discovered failures teach us what not to do, and even that has value.
Created:
-->
@Reece101
Show me the oceans, lakes, rivers and wetlands on Venus, all of which function, among other benefits, as very effective CO2 sinks. And, so climatologists, those brilliant, age-old scientists [all of 200 years], are claiming the oceans are rising. Becoming greater, even more efficient CO2 sinks, yeah? https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/10/oceans-absorb-carbon-seas-climate-change-environment-water-co2/
Yes, as with any change effect of the environment, amassing CO2 in the oceans [and other water] has an effect on the eco-system, but, what cannot be immediately observed is the amazing capacity of life to adapt to changing condition. In fact, one paper, specifically directed to the study of climate change, and its effect on biodiversity, suggests that inspite of the claimed extinction increase specifically blamed on climate change, biodiversity [adaptation] is increasing. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/pala.12057
Created:
-->
@zedvictor4
Thanks. In fact, the ancient Greeks considered poetry psilos logos, or, naked language.
The form was actually developed prior to prose. Further, the poetry, unlike our stressed syllabic style today, such as with iambic pentameter, had syllabic accented pitch and duration prior to about the 7th or 8th century BCE, when iambic pentameter, and its associated stresses, were first developed. Finally, along with the celebrated Olympic games, poetry recitations and music performance were a awarded competitions. Sport and Grammys all in one.
Created:
-->
@HistoryBuff
trump somehow won the election despite losing by a fairly large margin?
Thank you for making my point. Since when was the popular vote the means by which a President is elected?
Real history, by no less authority and credibility than the Constitution says another body politick elects the President: the Electoral College. By that college, President Trump's victory was a landslide over Hillary Clinton, popular vote be damned. Like it or don't, ignore it, or don't, that is the law of the land and its consistent history since the first Presidential election of 1790. You might look it up sometime, Buff.
Created:
A certain sand pounder accuses circular reasoning, such as that I consider Jesus a liar, and that the Bible is a fraud. I invite the pounder to specifically cite my statements on this site to that effect. I want to see those specific phrases cited, using those specific, accused words from my keyboard. The sand pounder cannot, but he can, and will do be certain, try.
Created:
-->
@HistoryBuff
Life is so much simpler when you simply ignore anything you don't want to see isn't it?
You mean like ignoring real history?
Created:
So, now, Biden wants to have a face-to-face summit with Putin? https://www.wsj.com/articles/why-would-biden-want-a-summit-with-putin-whom-he-calls-a-killer-11618780332
I thought Biden said Putin was a killer. I thought Biden slammed Trump for summits with a killer.
Oh, but they happen to see eye-to-eye on climate, ,so, it's all good.
Maybe, but it's surely more of the same Biden vacillation.
Created:
-->
@FLRW
The 10 warmest years on record have all occurred since 2005, and 7 of the 10 have occurred just since 2014.
Since when recorded? If you're talking within my lifetime [72 years] you're looking at less than a blink in geologic time. So what?
We happen to still be in an ice age [the Quaternary] that is 2.6M years in the making, meaning that, if typical, in excess of 90M years remain before its end. And, yes, heat spells do occur within ice ages. Why are we in an ice age? Because there are still glaciers [ice, you know], even though some are melting. Others are growing. Depends on where on hte planet one happens to be. Everybody focuses on the areas of melt, ignoring the growth. There are both melt and growth just in Antarctica. And Greenland. But, these areas do not fit the agenda, so are ignored. Gee-whiz, some science!
Created:
-->
@oromagi
My Egyptian Grammar professor once told me [he being, effectively an historian, and knowing I was a published poet - so I know you understand the distinction], "A poet holds your head while you puke. A historian examines the remains." At times, exhaustively
Created:
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
100% in agreement.
Created:
-->
@FLRW
Increasing acidity interferes with the ability of marine life to extract calcium from the water to build their shells and skeletons.
You're looking at an incredibly narrow slice of time, and ignoring adaptation. De-frocking St. Darwin? Again?
Created:
-->
@Theweakeredge
Do you think we have a vacuum cleaner for our skies?
No, but that is the GND argument with carbon credit charges. Like I said, GND says we can clean the clouds with money. Read; 13th century indulgences. Not to worry, the devil made me do it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Benjamin
One can choose not to change one's future? No, one definitely can't.
As demonstrated merely by my choice to not change my habit of non-smoking, I change nothing about my future relative to avoiding the many maladies directly related to smoking, which has far more consequence3 to my eternity than moving my hand on a given impulse. Come on, we're talking economies of scale here, on which you argue an infinitesimal degree to which I say, simply, in a thousand years, let alone more, who the hell cares a tinker's-dam? Yeah, look it up; the significance of the dam is very small. Not worth the words I've already devoted to it.
Tell me which other thing than your choices and your experiences can affect your choice.
Expectation. The virtual opposite of experience because expectation always directs to a future not yet experienced. It is the seed material of goal-setting, else, why make them? Yes, P1 fails.
randomness, mind controll or divine intervention, the things that would prevent free will from existing.
How does randomness prevent free will? There are choices to be made that may not make significant effect on a future. We're back to the tinker and his dam. So what if I choose, at random, to wear red boxers or blue? Tomorrow, green or white? Repeat the next day, or choose black or yellow? Who's going to know, but me, but, further, who cares? God? Not in the slightest will he care even if he knows. What, he's going to send me a mind-message that on Wednesday, I'd better wear pink, because I'm going to visit my Mother, and if I don't...? Well, even God knows that a woman scorned.... As I said, the tinker and his dam in the eternal perspective. Yes, it is percentage points less than 100% unshakable. How many is of no consequence, but, it's more than 1%. Yes, P2 fails.
Whether or not you chose to smoke...
Yes, my current condition is due to experience and character, but that says nothing about my choice to change either or both, and that decision is difficult to prove was made by random selection and neither predestination, nor absolute free will based on any past behavior, character, or experience. Yes, C fails, but mostly because either one, or the other, or both have failed in addition to being a circular logic, which, by definition, because it leads to nothing but itself, isn't logic.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Sum1hugme
Your syllogism, on the other hand, has true propositions, and a correct conclusion. Well done.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Benjamin
Consider my syllogism:
- P1: Free will can only exist if my experience and choices affect the future state of myself
- P2: If choices and experiences affect the future, then every choice was affected by previous choices and experiences
- C: Free will can only exist if every choice was affected by previous choices and/or experience
P1 fails because one can choose to not change one's future, i.e., choose to not choose; to remain static.
P2 fails because one has an array of choices not necessarily ever embarked upon and experienced before. I have the choice to begin smoking; something I have never done before; totally lacking that choice and experience.
C: The conclusion of your syllogism, therefore, the entire syllogism, therefore, as most tend to do, fails.
P1: Bids fly
P2: Camels walk
C: Therefore, butterflies swim.
My classic failed syllogism. Syllogisms depend on each factor actually being true, but, obviously, just saying something does not make it true, even if both propositions are true, as in my P1 and P2. As demonstrated, your propositions cannot even get that far.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
HOW MANY BABIES DO YOU HAVE WHEN YOU'RE IN HEAVEN?
I don't know. Not there, yet.
HAVE YOU EVER CHANGED YOUR (ETERNAL) MIND?
In it's current, mortal 'containment" phase, when I am not yet aware of all things, of course I have. many times, in fact.
I'M NOT SURE "GENETIC INTENT" IS AN ACCURATE CHARACTERIZATION.
As defined by admittedly generational sequences of DNA in a single mortal human lifetime, yes, it is accurate enough, allowing for its potential to mutate [by gradual telomeric degradation, among other effects] with each cellular generation, which, according to some biologists, in the human species, are completely re-generated every 7 years. Whatever your mortal life duration will be, divided by seven, is the number of times you will have become a new person, biologically, long-term memory notwithstanding.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Ethica Ordine Geometrico Demonstrata
The Spinoza volume is in my library. I agree with his concept of human free will, even allowing us to be mistaken in order to maintain that free will.
Created:
-->
@oromagi
This demonstrates ignorance of elementary level meteorology and climatology. You are not up to speed on this subject. Read up.
I am an ASQ certified Six Sigma Black Belt, Reliability Engineer, & Quality Engineering Manager, retired, all of which include a mastery level of education in GR&R. You don't know to whom who you're talking. Measurement accuracy is vital in gage repeatability and reproducibility. Climatology, to date, is woefully inadequate. Lots of wiggle room in the citation of your points of what "could" and "may" occur when the raw data is so weakly gathered and assembled. And combine that with what biology can do with adaptability when stressed by apparent extremes [that may not be extreme], after all. look, climatology is, at best, a 200 year-old science, The core sciences, physics, geology, etc., are ten times as old, and more. Not to mention, as I said, that money seems to be the engine driving this bus. How does throwing money at the clouds [when most of it is being pocketed!] actually clean the clouds. We know so little about clouds, we can't accurately predict the local weather with any dependable accuracy. And you're quoting eons?
Somebody best take a step back to look at the whole picture. The last ice age???? We're in an ice age, now, called the Quaternary, beginning 2.6M years ago. But even ice ages have cycling hot and cold periods. Yes, yes, there is an anthropogenic factor. How significant it is... well, the jury's out, and needs better measurement data collection in any event.
Created:
-->
@zedvictor4
I know you're kidding. However,
And certain that salvation will come in the form of a Republican GOD.
Not in the slightest. By politics, I am a Sermonist. It's my Party and named it. To date, I think I am its only member. However, I firmly believe that is also God's party.
Created:
So how do you overcome the something from nothing principle?
nothing comes of nothing. See my debate on the subject. https://www.debateart.com/debates/2631-resolved-god-created-the-heaven-and-the-earth-with-existing-matter-and-energy-and-not-ex-nihilo
Created:
-->
@Theweakeredge
Coastlines. I think there is greater landmass in the interior of continents than coastlines. And I do not see the calamities predicted by AlGore to have occurred well before now, and we are still here. And what does the holy Green New Deal have to say about our adaptability? Absolutely nothing. Nada. Zip. Get it? Adaptability does not fit the agenda of paying carbon credits, which do nothing to clean the clouds. It lines some peoples' pockets, but as long as you're aware of that, I guess its fine. Well, on this Earth Day, as over the past 18 years I've inhabited this house I built, now equipped with solar panels, every light inside and outside is on, celebrating my right to do so, and I am producing every watt of it, so I'm causing no drain on any grid.
Created:
-->
@Nevets
But the main root source for the Adam and Eve story was the "Hebrew bible".?
Which include that which you continue to ignore: the included story of a higher law than the law of Noses: the promise of a Messiah, embodies by Jesus Christ.
As far as I am aware the Hebrew bible was written by mostly Judeans.
Your awareness needs enlightening:
1. Moses is the author of the pentateuch, Genesis through Deuteronomy [299 pages in my KJV] He is a Levite, not of Judah.
2. Joshua, the author of his self-named book [173 pgs[ Josh is of Ephraim, not Judah
3. Ruth, the next author [4 pgs] She is not of the House of Israel at all, but a Moabite.
4. Samuel, both books [86 pgs] is also a Levite, not of Judah.
5. Kings [2 books about David] [90 pgs], our first biblical Jew.
6. Chronicles [2 books about Jews, attributed to Ezra, a Jew [360 pgs] Ezra is of Judah, but he reviews for us the lineage of Jacob [Israel] and his 12 sons.
7. The balance are from Judah, with the exception of Malachi, a Levite. [15 pgs].
Virtually half of the O.T. [ 577 of 1184 pages] is written by, or attributed to authors who are not of the House of Judah.
If I can look this stuff up, so can you. Why don't you?
Created:
-->
@RationalMadman
How? Is Adam still in charge from Heaven or something?
I repeat, emphasized: God gave Adam the task of managing Earth's affairs, and Adam's affairs, along with his descendants. That means we share the responsibility of dominion, yeah?
Don't you see the irony?
What irony? I've cited Genesis 2 before, two or three times. Maybe someday it will cease being ironic: "Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:
But of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." Adam is given free will to eat of every tree, but there is a consequence [bearing personal responsibility by one's free choice] to eating of one tree. Nevertheless, Adam my do so if he chooses. Free agency is what that is called, not God's coercion or predestination. No irony.
But of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." Adam is given free will to eat of every tree, but there is a consequence [bearing personal responsibility by one's free choice] to eating of one tree. Nevertheless, Adam my do so if he chooses. Free agency is what that is called, not God's coercion or predestination. No irony.
As for the dominion, that doesn't mean Adam controlled will of others, it's just a metaphor for humankind ruling Earth.
One for three. That's a start.
Created:
-->
@RationalMadman
what he himself knowingly set in motion anyway.
Your answer is in front of you, should you bother to crack the book open. After "setting in motion," God gave Adam the injunction to "haver dominion over the Earth." Sounds like God gave Adam the task of managing Earth's affairs, and Adam's affairs, along with his descendants. Must I define "dominion," and its implications, including, by the way, the power to act by his/our own agency?
I'll let you find it.
Created:
Really? Just that little bit? Where, Joe? Is the Earth of one single climate, and if anywhere, the temperature rises 1.5 degrees, the whole Earth is doomed? There's variation greater than 1.5 degrees all over the Earth, and has been for billions of years. What says now we are, all over the Earth, at the brink? Hell, there's more variation that that just in the various instruments we use to measure global temperature, humidity, or even the stink in our armpits. Anyone concerned about that?
Is anyone surprised this guy was elected? I sure am. The man has a one-track mind.... if only he could find it.
The self-imposed human extinction line is forming over there on the left. Where else?
Created:
Okay, the foregoing in #45 was not directed to everyone. Some do get it, after all, and many of you are actually doing something about it, being successful peacekeepers, not sowing discord. but sowing peace, "not as the world giveth..." and you who do know exactly what that means. No, you're not perfect, nor am I, or anyone. All who try will slip sometimes. That is to be expected.
But just like the guy who consistently gets up again and rejoins the effort is aware good is being done, all of us should also fail, get up, and try again. It's worth it. The point is, it isn't even accepting Christ as our Savior, but leaving it at the declaration and never doing anything more about it.
Faith without works is dead.
After all, did Jesus ever say, "I believe in me. I am saved," retire, and go fishing? In case you're not sure, no, he did not. Why should we?
Created:
I find the argument, "If God is omnipotent, why doesn't he stop all human suffering" accomplishing nothing but limiting ourselves, and limiting God, let alone trying to say the result of God not stopping all suffering is proof he does not exist, else he would stop it.
What if it is not in God's purpose to end all suffering? Not yet. He will, ultimately, but you're not going to like the consequence of waiting for him to do it because the responsibility really always has belonged to us.
What if God is waiting for us to decide that we can stop it, ourselves? We can, and should. That happens to be our purpose, but we [some of us] continue to blame God when we know it is we, ourselves, who cause our suffering. We should not even be blaming Satan, because, after all, "the devil made me do it" is wrong, too. WE did it. We always have done it. We will do it unless we figure out our personal responsibility to stop it. Why is that so hard to understand? Well, first, because we [some of us] manage to convince others that God is responsible for everything that happens.
What if God is not responsible for anything but putting us here to work out our mutual problems by ourselves, just to prove we can.
What is stopping us from solving our problems? We look in it every morning, it it reflects nothing but our true nemesis: ourselves. We are to blame for the suffering we cause.
Why should we expect God to fix it for us as if we were helpless children? When are we going to decide to be the peacekeeping adults in the room?
Created:
-->
@RationalMadman
this contradiction if their God is Omnipotent, Omniscient and Omnipresent all at once.
Not a contradiction even if God is not omni^3 all at once, or all the time, because nothing compels God, let alone us, to act using all our various types of powers we possess all the time, or all at once. That's just imposing a limit on God that he should not act less than omni^3 whenever more power is not needed. Why should he? Why should we?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Reece101
I was talking about everyone, individually, including God. Not only him, but his God. And so on.
Created:
-->
@RationalMadman
I be hearin' rhythm and rhyme,
Rhymin' time, all the time,
Rhymin' time don't mean true
Don't mean false, just mean boo,
Just be what bein' told to you.
I be sayin' rhythm and rhyme,
Make it beat, but it's my time
Yo be sayin; must be true,
Can't be blue, be blue to you,
Just what bein' told to you.
Created:
-->
@Nevets
Influence? Of course. But we're talking origins of religions here, or do I misunderstand what you mean by "creation and evolution of Abrahamic religion?" Your words, my friend, not mine. And since the advent of the Messiah is taught to Adam and Eve, a point you have completely ignored, by the way, and repeated in Judaism when Moses brought the Law, which included, had you forgotten [an apparent epidemic] all tribes of the House of Israel in Egypt, and brought out of Egypt by Moses, and established in Canaan as multiple tribes, not just the House of Judah. Your first citation goes nowhere. The second only mentions the Jews, not any other House of Israel. You cannot combiine them. all together as even many "scholars" do, because they are of very separate material lineage [four mothers, no? not one]. Gather your entire history. Selective history might be interesting, but we're allegedly talking origins here. Stick to your subject.
Your source may claim, "Early Chgristianity began as a first century Jewish movement," but as I have demonstrated, Christianity, a religion, after all, based on Jesus Christ, the Messiah, the Redeemer, the Bruiser of Satan's Head, was taught to Adam and Eve, millennia before the first century.
You are ignoring origins. Stop, wake up, read the texts for what they are telling you. Paul did not invent "Christ, and Christ crucified" as a teaching point.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
Nevertheless, he must have known he was resisting arrest, never a good plan.
Created:
-->
@Nevets
share a common beginning in the monotheism of the Judaic religion.
You're entertaining an historic misconception. Christianity and Islam did not split out of Judaism. Not if the history is really understood for what it is.
1. Abraham [or Abram], was Judah's Great grandfather [Judah, for whom Judaism is named].
2. Actually, it was not even Judah who promulgated Judaism; Moses is you promulgator, 6 or 7 generations following Judah, being the one who delivered the Law [of Moses].
3. From the Law of Moses [Judaism] we are introduced to the concept of a Messiah [Christ, and Christianity].
4. Adam and Eve are advised [Gen 3] that Eve's seed [her descendent] will bruise the head of the serpent [Satan]. The bruising descendent is Christ.
5.Let us recall from Exodus that the Lord gave Moses commandments, written by the Lord on tablets, commandments re: the proper worship of God, and the proper comportment of the people with one another, and in just those 10 commandments are the principles taught by Christ in two sermons: on the Mount, and the Bread of Life. But also recall by further reading in Exodus that Moses came down from Sinai and observed the people breaking virtually all the Commandments just received, which actually included the building of a tabernacle, after which the first Temple of Solomon at Jerusalem was eventually built, and renovated on at least two occasions before Christ came. The Lord then gave just a replacement of the tablets, the 10 commandments, and then over time taught them the detail of obedience that is the sum of the Torah today, but none of the higher law originally given but from the 10 Commandments. That higher law would be withheld until Christ came. Thus, by his coming, Christ fulfilled the Law of Moses, offering its replacement, the Gospel of Jesus Christ, which should have been what was lived all along, the higher law, since Adam.
6. Islam owes allegiance to Abraham, but not to Judah. Islam comes from Abraham through Ishmael, not Issac. Abraham, therefore is a fountainhead for Judaism, and then Islam, but the idea of a Redeemer of mankind, a Messiah, is as old as Adam and Eve.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Please explain how this relates to "solipsism".
Because, typically, the solipsist, having illusions of his own, forgets that every other person on Earth jaded by solipsism also thinks everyone else is an illusion, and it does not take long for the delusional solipsists to go after God, the creation, the universe, etc, and declare that all of it is illusion, as well. Before long, they, themselves, will wink out of existence. Maybe then, we can get back to serious scientific/philosophic discussion.
Created:
-->
@ludofl3x
No problem. I know, sometimes, I can weave a cat's cradle. And I know that my views do not always align with traditional Christian theology. Some think I am a heretic because of it. So be it. I am crystal clear in my own head, and would be glad to discuss further with you anytime. I mean discuss, not pound away. Thanks for the insight. Much appreciated.
Created:
-->
@Matthew_18
Just so you're clear, not to be clouded by a certain Bible pounder, this thread is not hypothetical, else you would not be able to enter your own comments. You have, so the reality of it is solid enough. The pounder resides in his own world of illusion. So be it. In that illusion, he imagines that he has banned me from the site. That, also, is obviously in error. So be it. Welcome aboard.
Created:
-->
@Reece101
Yes, God knows all things [may not yet have experienced all things, however, but that's entirely another thread]. However, that it no way interferes with our having the gift to be agents unto ourselves. That God knows what we will do has no bearing on what we, ourselves, will choose to do. It merely means that if we choose to follow the plan God has for us, we will end up thinking and doing the things he expects. If we do not, again, by our choice, we will not end up where his plan would have put us, but that was entirely by our choice, as said. God knows in advance how and what we will choose, and will support, but not coerce, anyone.
Created:
-->
@RationalMadman
@ILikePie5
@Theweakeredge
@Benjamin
Thank you all for your kindness. A bit trite, I admit, but being first-page on both default leaderboards has been a goal ever since joining.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Reece101
Identity is an emergent property of evolution.
I believe the exact opposite; that identity is eternal.
Created:
-->
@zedvictor4
So do you think that there never was a beginning and never will be an end?
Absolutely. That is the only definition that fits the term "eternity." Mathematically, it's a line, not a ray, or worse, a segment.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Benjamin
I am very familiar with Switzerland, having lived there for a few months in Lausanne and briefly in Geneva while I was living in France over a three-year period in my early 20s. It's a beautiful country, and I imagine Norway is very similar. I found the people a little cold to begin with, but I managed to warm up to them quickly. I am very gregarious that way. I was impressed with a retired Egyptian Air Force pilot who retired there to become a crop duster. In the Alps! I asked to fly with him on a crop dusting stint one time. Yikes! Great pilot, and the runs across the crops was fine, but dropping into a run and coming out of one was straight down and straight up, almost stalling at the peak before rolling over to go down again. What a rush! Actually it was terrifying. In active duty in Egypt, he was the commanding officer of a stunt group like our Navy Blue Angels, only his group was 15 aircraft - a big group for what they do. So, his skills were top drawer.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
Yes it would be an easay fix. Recall that Dick Cheney did the same for Bush 43 in 2000 when Bush chose Cheney to search for an adequate VP candidate, then decided he'd already chosen the right guy in Cheney, except that both were then residents of TX. Cheney simply moved back to WY in time under the wire to establish official residency in WY so he would not violate the same-state rule.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mandrakel
With no utilitarian purpose, no, we should not. We also should use more humane practices in harvesting meat, because of the 20-odd amino acids we require as our optimum protein-producing system, 4 of them are uniquely sourced in animals, not plants. Yes, the human body can get by, but not thoroughly thrive on vegetarian sources for those four amino acids. And, consider that in saliva is an enzyme whose sole purpose is to breakdown meat-based protein, which is the most difficult of our necessary diet to digest. Further, we are equipped with four canine teeth, the which only purpose in nature is the tearing of flesh. All other vegetable matter is adequately handled by the other teeth. Humans are structured to be omnivores.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
Why apologize [ref to your #1]?
That's some good paronomasia going on. The French, at least, in the golden age, used paronomasia as sport at court, even at the risk of losing one's head for a poor pun.
Created:
Yes, I've encountered this map, and others life it, many times. I get what it is representing, but I don't understand how to adequately explains red/blue shift of stars, but that some stars do not exhibit the phenomenon at all, or why the sky ends at meeting the plane of Earth, or that all observable celestial bodies that cross the sky east to west transit back to the east every 24 hours. What? They magically pass through the wooden base with the little feet? Or through the gray fog behind it all? And why do all planetary bodies visible to us pass through phases as does the Moon, but the Sun never does except when the Sun is eclipsed by the moon, except even when eclipsed, the Sun is not always seen as a simple crescent, and that theMoon's eclipse is not always a simple expanding/contracting crescent, either? Too many contradictions in the relative motions of all, and yet, Earth is described as "immovable." If it is, why has the sky not always appeared to same to us, and will not in the future? I have seen [yes, not in reality, but by perfectly explainable projection at a planetarium] the sky 5,000 years ago, and 10,000 years from now. I watched the progression of 15,000 total years inside 45 minutes when I passed off my astronomy merit badge as an eagle scout. Special privilege by the planetarium director, who also happened to be the merit badge counselor, who recognized on me a keep interest well beyond just the desire to pass off a merit badge, allowed the view most customers do not have a chance to see. 5,000 years ago, the sky was different, but some constellations were still somewhat recognizable, but by 10,000 years into the future, I could not recognize a single one of the 40 constellations I had just identified for the merit badge. Entirely naturally, without man's intervention, nothing orbits the Earth but the Moon. Well, actually, there may be a few bound rocks in distant orbit, but nothing of any significance, And nothing that can be seen by naked eye.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
Nope. Her possibility of being offended would be split because there also is, coincidentally, Danish ancestry on Mom's side of her family
Created:
Whereas I have been on the first page on Debate leaderboard for quite a while, and currently in #10 position by the default qualifier [rating], as of now I am on the first page on the Forum leaderboard by the default qualifier: # of posts. That's a milestone of a sort. Have some cake and ice cream on me.
Created:
-->
@RationalMadman
Typically, lacking obstructing mountains, yes, but what OTH demonstrates is that the horizon does not equate with an edge, and one can, theoretically, given the transportability of OTH, circumnavigate the globe in a singular direction with iterative readings, returning to an origin point and demonstrate that there is no edge as a flat plane would have, ultimately and rather quickly.
Created: