Posted on 10/30/2013 4:56:18 PM PDT by lasereye
Christopher Knight and Alan Butler realized that the ancient system of geometry they presented in their earlier, breakthrough study works as perfectly for the Moon as it does the Earth. They found a consistent sequence of integer numbers that they can apply to every major aspect of the Moon; no such pattern emerges for any other planet or moon in the solar system. In addition, Knight and Butler discovered that the Moon possesses few or no heavy metals and has no core—something that should not be possible. Their persuasive conclusion: if higher life only developed on Earth because the Moon is exactly what it is and where it is, it becomes unreasonable to cling to the idea that the Moon is a natural object—an idea with profound implications.
uh huh
this is a message from sitchin proving houdini was a fake
It’s a little known fact that once four scientific theories are proved incorrect, you can quote the Bible for scientific truths.
Why must the term “secular” be injected into this argument?
It is the effects on the tides that the Moon has its greatest significance. Because of the tides, life moved from the sea to the land. That adaptation gave rise to such things as cockroaches and mammalian life forms.
That is up there with being the best yodeler in Harlem.
>> That adaptation gave rise to such things as cockroaches and mammalian life forms.<<
Examples of both are the obozos.
>>It’s a little known fact that once four scientific theories are proved incorrect, you can quote the Bible for scientific truths.
<<
It is up there with the 30 second cookie on the floor rule.
You must live in a far more free land than I do. We only have a 5 second rule.
>It’s a little known fact that once four scientific theories are proved incorrect, you can quote the Bible for scientific truths.
correction: Its a little known fact that once four scientific theories have nicks in them, you can then quote the Bible for scientific truths or then raid the scientific literature for even less plausible ideas in search of those things that comport to your Biblical view.
or why 19th/20th century ‘Fundatamentalism’ died and morphed into ‘Evangelism’ and moved into a more scientifically plausible world.
correction : Evangelicalism
My bad.
I just polished up your groundbreaking quotable quote by raiding the ....
One thing that demonstrates is how many “scientific” theories are nothing more than factually unsupported speculation, which are often presented as “fact”. This is especially true with theories about origins/evolution.
Jimmy Kimmel?
So, theories evolve?
Do you have a better method for finding the truth than the scientific method?
As an aside, there are many scientists that are religious or at least agnostic.
I approve of the scientific method. One key element of it is that a scientific theory must be falsifiable.
I approve of the scientific method. One key element of it is that a scientific theory must be falsifiable.
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.