[meteorite-list] Origin of the Moon& God

From: Tom aka James Knudson <knudson911_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Thu Apr 22 10:21:02 2004
Message-ID: <005301c3475b$af6f2a40$3ad043d8_at_malcolm>

Hello, to me, Science and religion are very similar because we are all
looking for the same answers, how we got here, why we are here, where we are
going and the ever so popular "the meaning of life". Scientist are looking
into it to see if they can figure it out. Us Christians believe we know the
answers. I do not feel like scientist are heretics at all, what I do
personally believe is when the Scientists get all the questions answered
they will have figured out that God does exist. : ) It almost seems to me,
like the Scientists are trying to figure out how God did it. The only
science I really have a problem with is Evolution, and that is not because
of my religion, it is because no one can answer my simple questions with a
believable or reasonable answer. : ) Just my opinion. : )
Thanks, Tom
Peregrineflier
The proudest member of the IMCA 6168
----- Original Message -----
From: Francis Graham <francisgraham_at_rocketmail.com>
To: <meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2003 8:10 PM
Subject: [meteorite-list] Origin of the Moon


> I'll try to make peace in this controversy.
> Science is NOT like religion, and people who say so
> have not considered the matter very well. Science
> depends on observations and experiments that can be
> done repeatedly and at will. The physical laws known
> to us are based on those kinds of hard work.
> Religion offers other kinds of knowing. Science
> cannot say there is or is not a God, because one
> cannot do repeatable at-will experiments or
> observations on God. We cannot at will see the vision
> that Ezekiel saw, for example. Anyone who says that
> science presumes there is no God, or should presume
> there is One, is not well versed in the limitations of
> the methods of science.
> When scientists say the Moon began in possibly such
> and such a way,such as impacts, inherent in this idea
> is that the laws of physics operated then as now. If
> God miraculously created the Moon in some different
> way we have no way of knowing. In fact, we have no way
> of knowing that God did not create us five minutes
> ago, complete with memories of lives which never
> really existed. This is the Omphalos argument, made by
> Rev. Philip Gosse.
> But the idea that the moon was made by physical
> processes much as they are today has evidence behind
> it; we see physical processes much as now occuring in
> parts of the Universe 4 billion light years away, the
> light of which took that long to reach us, so they
> occurred four billion years ago, near when the moon
> formed. Of course, once again, there is no way of
> knowing this too is not a ruse.
> Science takes the simplest course, governed by the
> logical dictum called Occam's Razor. We see physical
> processes now that occurred four billion years ago;
> the laws of physics are the same, therefore, the Moon
> could have formed in a non-miraculous way by physical
> processes of the laws of physics. It may all be a
> Divine ruse or error of not considering all the
> possible miracles that could give us the same
> appearances, but that is not the simplest explanation.
> Galileo met astronomers who thought, following
> Aristotle, that the Moon was smooth. He showed them
> lunar mountains through telescope. "But," they argued,
> "These mountains have a transparent invisible layer on
> top of them which has a smooth top."
> Without batting an eye, Galileo replied, "Yes, but
> there are invisible mountains on the smooth layer."
> One can make many ideas beyond the simplest. They
> might be correct. But science must take the simplest
> until evidence based on repeatable and at-will
> observable phenomena compels further.
> I tell my students who have any number of
> religious ideas about origins (and they widely vary,
> even among Christians) that to learn scientific ideas
> of origins involves understanding the simplest
> explanations with repeatable experiments and
> at-will-observations, and their children, the laws of
> physics, as a matrix. Anything they wish to add or
> subtract from it is based on their own personal faith,
> but that is not the domain of science, no more than it
> is possible to recreate Ezekiel's unique vision in a
> test tube.
> Francis Graham
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
> http://sbc.yahoo.com
>
> ______________________________________________
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com
> http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>
Received on Thu 10 Jul 2003 11:22:38 PM PDT