Ancient History
Around fourth century CE, the famous Hindu astronomer, Bhāskara II in his work Surya Siddhanta wrote: "Objects fall on the earth due to a force of attraction by the earth. Therefore, the earth, planets, constellations, moon and sun are held in orbit due to this attraction." Newton rediscovered this 1200 years later.

Newton's theory of gravitation

In 1687, English mathematician Sir Isaac Newton published Principia, which hypothesizes the inverse-square law of universal gravitation.

A discrepancy in Mercury's orbit pointed out flaws in Newton's theory. By the end of the 19th century, it was known that its orbit showed slight perturbations that could not be accounted for entirely under Newton's theory, but all searches for another perturbing body (such as a planet orbiting the Sun even closer than Mercury) had been fruitless. The issue was resolved in 1915 by Albert Einstein's new theory of general relativity, which accounted for the small discrepancy in Mercury's orbit.

In general relativity, the effects of gravitation are ascribed to spacetime curvature instead of a force.

joseph1013:
But experiments were done to show the earth orbits the sun, not the other way around.

ooman:


Of course, we are from ancient apes, we are modern ape.

Hadeep:

Ya I know all the living being are animal on the surface of earth. But ofcourse the civilized ones, are we the human.

PastorAIO:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitation

Newton worked with a fixed Euclidian space so I do not see how his theory and Einstein's can be the same. They differ already in their understanding of the attributes of Space.

sinequanon:
I didn't mention god, you did. You need to calm down and stop arguing with yourself.

What is enabling this healthy lifestyle that other Americans don't have. Calm down (if you are able to), focus and try to answer the question.

sinequanon:
Back to ranting nonsense because you are out of your depth.

OK.

sinequanon:
Wrong. Technology can be based on trial and error (with no scientific explanation), hearsay, juju, alchemy, dreams and a host of other non-scientific things. There are examples in practice of all of these.

You are an ignorant, ranting regurgitator, who would do well to go away and expand her thought process. Bye!

ooman:


Of course we are humans, but we belong to the family of Homo in the scientific ranking, a family of ape.

Religion is a means of inquiry, too. Prayer is a means of inquiry. Bible study is a means of inquiry.

And science is an ideology. It is a way of observing the world and defining what is and isn't "real".

Science has social myths, too. Just look at eugenics, for example. Any form of inquiry is subject to mythology. What do you think makes scientists immune from all the corruption that goes on in every field of human endeavour?

What do you think makes scientists immune from all the corruption that goes on in every field of human endeavour?

That is no explanation. Just labels. What is considered yeye yesterday can be considered disciplined tomorrow. There is a lot of retrospection, and science is certainly no exception.

In what way do people kill themselves over religion, that is not economics?

sinequanon:


Religion is a means of inquiry, too. Prayer is a means of inquiry. Bible study is a means of inquiry.

And science is an ideology. It is a way of observing the world and defining what is and isn't "real".



Science has social myths, too. Just look at eugenics, for example. Any form of inquiry is subject to mythology. What do you think makes scientists immune from all the corruption that goes on in every field of human endeavour?

Making heroes of people is common in historical accounts. Isaac Newton, Albert Einstein etc. they have been turned into heroes for cultural reasons. When Einstein was asked if he got E = mc^2 after reading about Lorentz' derivation of space time transformation, he said that he couldn't remember! Yet, it is Einstein who gets all the accolades.



That is no explanation. Just labels. What is considered yeye yesterday can be considered disciplined tomorrow. There is a lot of retrospection, and science is certainly no exception.



What is meant by 'progress' is absolutely central to why science is an ideology. People take for granted that their destiny is to control and exploit the environment. It is out of this ideology that science defines reality. "If it can't potentially be commandeered, ignore it -- it isn't real."

In what way do people kill themselves over religion, that is not economics?

philfearon:

I strongly have come to believe that you are really confusing yourself bro.....
From the reply you gave Frank317,its obvious you are just confusing yourself the more....You keep begging the question which is:
What's the need of Redemption, when prevention is the best way?
All of his creation is flawed,starting from the angels down to every last thing in this earth...
Is it the sin of Adam that causes Earthquake,Hurricanes,Storm,Acidic Rain,Ozone Layer depletion,Tremors,Volcano's, etc? No! It is Your Gods flawed creation...It renders him Imperfect and Incapable of Been All-Knowing
If you can't understand this simple things,then am sorry,I must end my discuss with you,Cause it seems you cant see facts from Myths and illogicality and you are hell-bent on the Bible Said so!
Its obvious that God who is supposed to be The Highest of beings expresses human emotions like anger,regret,hatred,Love,Friendship,affection..All this things are mere human attributes,but they are attributed to God...Someone who expresses all this emotions will be flawed and blinded and Biased,and ultimately imperfect...Don't you still get it?

sinequanon:


Another piece of ignorant regurgitation.

This is one of the most common misunderstandings from lay people.

Science does not conclude whether "the Earth goes round the Sun or vice versa."

Science only says that certain model of the solar system yields simpler mathematics if you place the origin at centre of mass of the solar system (this is not even at the centre of the Sun).

For example, if you wished to predict the arrival of a comet, you may choose such a configuration.

However, meteorologists, place the origin at the centre of the Earth. The mathematics works out much easier in this case.

In Newtonian science, there are preferred configurations known as as inertial frames of reference, which is a standard. But saying in general that one thing goes round the other is meaningless. Each goes round the other from the perspective of the other.

Our shrieking ranter will probably be back to make another spectacle of herself.

sinequanon:


The are different paradigms, of course. And the one that is used most in everyday technology is the Newtonian one.

It works fine in its domain, and technology has not ground to a halt because the theory is not the best for sending a probe into outer space.

There is no particular, immediate reason in technology for theories to be unified. Two theories works fine.

There is only ONE theory of gravity. What your low intelligence calls another one is found in Albert Einstein's theory of general relativity. I wont teach you this one. Go find out yourself why they dont conflict.

PastorAIO:
If I make a scientific discovery and apply it to create a new technology, do you call that technology science?

PastorAIO:
If I discover through my local prophet that winches are going to attack me to night and I fast and pray religiously for deliverance, It seems that your can happily wrap the entire process under the umbrella of religion. But you are not willing to consider the application of science as technology to be under the wing of Science.

PastorAIO:
I'm referring to a methodology that is commonly called the scientific method.

PastorAIO:
Example please. I don't get how Eugenics is a social myth. could you explain that?

PastorAIO:
I never said scientists were immune from anything. The fact that there is corruption going on in a court of law does not mean that the Laws of the country are wrong or corrupt. The human element corrupts it.

What do you understand by the term Rigour, and by Degrees of freedom?

PastorAIO:
Check out the 30 years War in Germany. Also the English Civil War.

PastorAIO:


I must have misunderstood you. I believed you said that they do not conflict with each other. How do two theories that operate on 2 'different paradigms' not be in conflict.

I never said anything about how well it works. I said that we have 2 different theories of gravitation and you said:


Can you name one technology or scientific application that makes simultaneous use of both theories?

honourhim:


Yes God knows the end from the beginning. He is a like potter. A potter does not create to please the vessel rather he creates to please his concept. Read Romans 9:20-23.

Honestly bro your opinion about God doesn't remove anything from him as the almighty God.

Wrath/anger is part of his attributes/characteristics and something must happen to make it manifest just as mercy is part of his characteristics/attributes and something must happen to make it manifest.
Without these negatives we wouldn't have known and appreciate his mercy and love.

Those that will not perish stll needs the call before they can yield.

Yes he knew. The redemption plan he made from the foundation of the world shows that he knew. If he didn't know then he wouldn't be all knowing God. He knew bro.

You can't say for sure that you will not yield to repentance bro. There are a lot of atheists who thought they will not repent but when the time came they repented. Don't be suprised you may repent tomorrow. You don't know what the future holds so you can't conclude.

Like I said, whatever you call God doesn't remove anything from his greatness. You are only satisfying your emotions. It doesn't change anything. God is still the almighty.

These are my own views based on what I ve read in the bible and they are not final. Another person might have a better biblical view.

joseph1013:


How can a law be invincible? Adam hid because there was an express instruction from god (according to the fable). So tell me the express instruction given to Cain and all the people who transgressed before the written mosaic law.

malvisguy212:
GOD told adam not to eat from the tree of Good and evil and when they disobey God they face the punishment, am very sure adam and eve would have thought there children not to disobey God and teach them what is good and bad, so there conscience no what is good and evil.

In Darwin’s time there was an idea among the
nobility that their genetics were superior to those of
the rest of society. Many families including Darwin’s
took this belief to extreme levels by practicing incest
as a tradition.
They thought that if adolescents were to marry within
their own family then not only would all the wealth
stay in the family, but the “good” genes would also.
This also ensured that the family fortunes would be
retained for many future generations. This practice is
very common in aristocratic families, which explains
why they are all extremely mentally unstable. Darwin
came from a very classist and racist elite level of
society and that is reflected in his work, especially
“The Descent of Man”.

Ifeann:


Nice info. Didn't know this about Charles Darwin. Will investigate. This is why those who preach natural selection; evolutionists and atheism will lead the world to eugenics and mass destruction of undesirable humans in the future.

joseph1013:


Meaning that God allowed In.ce.st? According to the biblical scriptures, In.ce.st is forbidden.

“Never have sexual intercourse with anyone related to you by blood. I am the Lord." Leviticus 18:6 (God's Word Translation)

malvisguy212:
GOD told adam not to eat from the tree of Good and evil and when they disobey God they face the punishment, am very sure adam and eve would have thought there children not to disobey God and teach them what is good and bad, so there conscience no what is good and evil.

In Darwin’s time there was an idea among the
nobility that their genetics were superior to those of
the rest of society. Many families including Darwin’s
took this belief to extreme levels by practicing incest
as a tradition.
They thought that if adolescents were to marry within
their own family then not only would all the wealth
stay in the family, but the “good” genes would also.
This also ensured that the family fortunes would be
retained for many future generations. This practice is
very common in aristocratic families, which explains
why they are all extremely mentally unstable. Darwin
came from a very classist and racist elite level of
society and that is reflected in his work, especially
“The Descent of Man”.

WORLDPEACE:

The law forbidding incest was introduced in the mosaic law. Cain married his sister, no rocket science is required to figure that one out, just as Noah's grandsons must have married their sisters or cousins yet we don't see people asking about that even though no granddaughters are mentioned. Don't create a problem where there is non. Like someone said already, the bible says Adam came to have sons and daughters. I was brought up in a religious environment where that question was answered when I was less than five years old, only for me to grow up and still find people struggling with it. Is the omition really that perplexing when daughters are hardly mentioned in the bible?
Abraham married his half sister. Sarah was his sister. The law of moses came to forbid it along with a lot of things there had earlier been no law against. Christ too came to forbid polygamy which had been allowed in the law of moses.
I won't call myself a christian anymore. I do have my problems with religion and the concept of God we were sold in the bible but theist or atheist let's do our research well.

malvisguy212:
atheist will never tell you all this info, God bless you

philfearon:

You know,am still waiting for you to answer the last question I asked you?
Did you run away or just neglected it?

mctowel01:
There is no objective proof of God, but our existence and a lot of mysteries surrounding it point to something being beyond our physical realms. Has anyone wondered how an organic matter can just conjure up saved images in the name of dreams?
I don't know the equivalent, in megapixels, the vision of the eyes to a camera, but we all know how sophisticated an ordinary 5megapixels camera is. Compare it to the eyes which are more clearer than this
If you understand feedback, you will see how it applies itself automatically in the nervous system of the human body. Common, these are there for a purpose. It will be preposterous for one to deny the existence of a being(s)/deity(s)/nature, whatever you may call it, that is more supreme than our mere existence.

joseph1013:
The human eye does not show intelligent design. In fact it shows unintelligent design.

The configuration of the retina is in three layers, with the light-sensitive rods and cones at the bottom, facing away from the light, and underneath a layer of bipolar, horizonal, and amacrine cells, themselves underneath a layer of ganglion cells that help carry the signal from the eye to the brain. And this entire structure sits beneath a layer of blood vessels.

For optimal vision why would an intelligent designer have built an eye backwards and upside down? Because an intelligent designer did not build the eye from scratch. Natural selection built the eye from simple to complex using whatever materials were available, and in the particular configuration of the ancestral organism.

The human eye is not even the most complex...it is not the most well-developed. The octopus has a superior eye to us.

sinequanon:


LOL! Typical uncritical regurgitation!

First of all, in the term "intelligent designer", "intelligent" doesn't mean flawless. That is just a scientific straw man tactic. "Intelligent" means, having foresight.

Secondly, where is the research showing that an octopus eye is superior to a human eye? It may be so according to your regurgitated logic, but that does not mean it is the case in practice.

And any measure of superiority would be subjective. Are we talking about how far we can see, acuity, breadth of vision, speed of repair, ability to ignore a highlight without getting blinded by it (we can do that with our blind spot) etc. etc.

Finally, the eagle has the same so-called "back-to-front design" as the human and has phenomenal eyesight.

So, it is at least as much the case of scientists having to review their flawed expectations, than the design of the eye being flawed.

(Scientists have claimed that a number of organs are vestigial or useless, only because they couldn't understand their function. Lately they have realized that organs like the tonsils and appendix have important functions. They used to chop out the tonsils of children out of pure ignorance.)

joseph1013:
- Almost all animals and plants synthesize their own vitamin C, but humans cannot because the gene for this enzyme is defective. Lack of vitamin C results in scurvy and eventually death. The gene is also non-functional in other primates and in guinea pigs, but is functional in most other animals.

joseph1013:
- The breathing reflex is stimulated not directly by the absence of oxygen but rather indirectly by the presence of carbon dioxide. A result is that, at high altitudes, oxygen deprivation can occur in unadapted individuals who do not consciously increase their breathing rate. Oxygenless asphyxiation in a pure-nitrogen atmosphere has been proposed as a humane method of execution that exploits this "oversight".

joseph1013:
- The human appendix is a vestigial organ with no known purpose. However, appendicitis, an infection of this useless organ, is a certain death without medical intervention.

sinequanon:


According to the Theory of Evolution, humans evolved from creature that could synthesize vitamin C.

So how can survival of the fittest select for a defective gene over one that works, and wipe the "good" one out?

More likely that scientists don't know the full story. Perhaps there was some toll on processing vitamin C.

Anything scientists don't understand, they call "defective". Pure wanton ignorance.