Dr Henry Ritcher
Posted on 10/15/2019 7:51:12 AM PDT by fishtank
Creation astronomy from a rocket scientist
by David Coppedge
Posted on 10-14-19
Readers may remember our 2015 interview with Dr Henry Richter,1 the development manager of Explorer 1, America’s first satellite. 90 years of age, Dr Richter recently drove from his home 120 miles away to deliver a speech at the 60th anniversary of Explorer 1 at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL).
On that day in January 2018, he shared his unique insider’s perspective about the mission that launched America into the space race. Most employees at JPL working on missions today now have no memory of the early days of NASA and its famous spacecraft laboratory, where Richter helped make history in the late 1950s. His speech was heard by many at the lab and was very well received.
Since that interview, CMI has had the privilege of publishing a new book by Dr Richter, Spacecraft Earth: A Guide for Passengers—an educational, evangelistic book loaded with examples of intelligent design (see box). It describes wonders of creation all the way from the cell to the outer reaches of space, revealing to ‘passengers’ all the amazing features of our planetary ‘spacecraft’—its environment, inhabitants, and its mission.
(Excerpt) Read more at creation.com ...
Dr Henry Ritcher
There is no such thing as “intelligent design” as a scientific principle unless and until scientists can meet and interrogate said designer.
Other than that it is mere theology. Which is OK but should not be conflated with science.
ID posits the question “what does God need with a starship?”
Not really. God does not create out of necessity but out of desire. God does not need us, but He desires us. At His very core, Love is His essence and we were created out of this.
“Other than that it is mere theology.”
ID was invented to attempt to put holes in evolutionary theory.
“At His very core, Love is His essence and we were created out of this. “
6The LORD regretted that he had made human beings on the earth, and his heart was deeply troubled. 7So the LORD said, “I will wipe from the face of the earth the human race I have created-and with them the animals, the birds and the creatures that move along the ground-for I regret that I have made them.”
>>Not really. God does not create out of necessity but out of desire. God does not need us, but He desires us. At His very core, Love is His essence and we were created out of this.<<
100% agree. Theology, not science. My love for God and His for me (and His Son who died for us) is not shaken in the slightest by examining the amazing wonders of a Universe that consistently abides by rules we are still discovering. God made everything from the DNA in a pill bug to the Antares Nebula and so much more. All glory to Him for giving us this wonderful and wonder-filled universe.
>>ID was invented to attempt to put holes in evolutionary theory.<<
And it does a TERRIBLE job of it in that to be useful to science you have to be able to interrogate the Designer. What, is the Designer the Q from ST:TNG? Arbitrary and somewhat devious?
“As ancient astronaut theorists believe”..............
There you go again, posting evidence for space alien designers.
He left a remnant of mankind.
He did not have to do that. He could have started all over again if he elected to do so.
Yet he desired to have a relationship with mankind.
That was the reason for His Son coming down and paying the price for our Salvation.
That is love.
Physicist Donald Hoffman has proven that space-time is NOT the fundamental reality.
He has a well-supported theory of “conscious agents” which is underpinned by the mathematical proof (scientific theories cannot be “proven” but can be well-supported by evidence) using game theory and is consistent with evolutionary theory.
This means that all of matter and energy and scientific observation itself presupposes intelligence. Without intelligence there is no space-time or science. Space-time did not exist prior to intelligence.
This is not Creationism or Intelligent Design. It is BASED upon evolutionary theory.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oadgHhdgRkI
“The probability that we see reality as it is... is zero.” Proven by mathematical theorems within evolutionary theory.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3eZVOHHcZDA
“Space-time is doomed”— consensus of big-name scientists.
I should have said “consensus of a few scientists, who are well-respected by their peers, with this consensus being based on their research”.
Otherwise it comes across as the logical fallacy of appeal to authority, like advocates of man-made global warming use. That was not my intent.
“Physicist Donald Hoffman has proven that space-time is NOT the fundamental reality.”
He is not a physicist and has proven no such thing.
The Big Bang:
In the dark nothingness was nothing. Then suddenly, something! And explosion of matter into a matterless void.
The Bible:
In the beginning, God said, “Let there be light. And there was light.”
Am I the only one seeing the similarity here?
“He is not a physicist”
I’m glad you contradicted me on this so I could go back and correct my faulty memory. His area of scientific specialization is cognitive science. His theory obviously has ramifications for physics. He has co-authored papers with other scientists who are physicists, as you may learn from the vast amounts of information easily locatable online by anyone whose reply is more than a childish “Nope.”
“and has proven no such thing”
You obviously have not investigated it. You started with your conclusion and presuppositions and ended without exploring the evidence.
Here is a peer-reviewed article by Hoffman (co-authored by Justin T. Mark, Brian B. Marion), published in Journal of Theoretical Biology, that PROVES you wrong:
http://cogsci.uci.edu/~ddhoff/PerceptualEvolution.pdf
Hoffman’s credentials are extensive:
https://www.amazon.com/Case-Against-Reality-Evolution-Truth/dp/0393254690
“Donald D. Hoffman received a Ph.D. from MIT in 1983 and is a Professor of Cognitive Sciences at the University of California, Irvine. His research on perception, evolution, and consciousness received the Troland Award of the US National Academy of Sciences, the Distinguished Scientific Award for Early Career Contribution of the American Psychological Association...”
He is a highly-published and -cited author:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_D._Hoffman
“He has co-authored two technical books: Observer Mechanics: A Formal Theory of Perception (1989) offers a theory of consciousness and its relationship to physics; Automotive Lighting and Human Vision (2005) applies vision science to vehicle lighting. His book Visual Intelligence: How We Create What We See (1998) presents the modern science of visual perception to a broad audience.”
http://cogsci.uci.edu/~ddhoff/publications.pdf
His writings have been published by MIT, Scientific American, and MANY mathematic, engineering, and scientific journals.
You don’t get published in authoritative scientific print resources or scientific, peer-reviewed journals if your work is not science: Encyclopedia of Cognitive Science (London: Macmillan Publishers), Consciousness and Cognition, Perception, The Oxford Compendium of Visual Illusions (Oxford University Press), Clinical EEG Neuroscience, McGraw-Hill Yearbook of Science & Technology, Cosmology, Evolutionary Psychology, Journal of Theoretical Biology.
To the extent that the underlying mathematics of evolutionary theory & game theory are correct, space-time does not exist (as a fundamental reality), and this is demonstrable BASED on evolutionary theory. Hoffman has formulated a peer-reviewed scientific theory that is testable, and it is well-supported.
‘In the beginning, God said, “Let there be light. And there was light.”
if nobody was around to record it, how does anyone know what God did or did not say...?
Is God a nobody?
>>scientific theories cannot be “proven” but can be well-supported by evidence<<
Sorry FRiend, not even close. A Scientific Theory is not a hypothesis “all growed up.” A Scientific Theory is a broad explanation of observed phenomena which is internally and externally consistent.
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.