Extraterrestrials & UFOs

[JohnH]

Thank you so much for that miniature science lesson. I'm still not sure why you brought up the idea of a heliocentric universe. I'm also not sure how you can be so certain that our sun is not at the center of the universe.

I'm not even sure if the earth has a center; after all, the surface of a balloon has no center to it.

[Ken]

Who thinks that God created a heliocentric universe?

Well, heliocentric solar system in which the earth is not flat but a spherical planet that orbits the sun over the course of a year. And it is the earth’s rotation on its axis that gives us night and day and the tides. And it is the earth’s tilt that gives us the seasons.

Obviously our little sun is not at the center of the entire universe.

Thank you so much for that miniature science lesson. I'm still not sure why you brought up the idea of a heliocentric universe. I'm also not sure how you can be so certain that our sun is not at the center of the universe.

I brought it up because it is inconsistent with the 6-day Genesis creation story that was mentioned here by JohnH. A fact that caused the church enormous consternation in the 16th and 17th centuries. Although the ancient Greeks theorized a heliocentric universe in the 3rd Century BC, it wasn't until Copernicus in the early 1500s that the theory was scientifically proposed in the Christian era. Which, of course, generated enormous opposition from the church. And not just the Catholic Church. In 1539, Martin Luther said:

"There is talk of a new astrologer who wants to prove that the earth moves and goes around instead of the sky, the sun, the moon, just as if somebody were moving in a carriage or ship might hold that he was sitting still and at rest while the earth and the trees walked and moved. But that is how things are nowadays: when a man wishes to be clever he must … invent something special, and the way he does it must needs be the best! The fool wants to turn the whole art of astronomy upside-down. However, as Holy Scripture tells us, so did Joshua bid the sun to stand still and not the earth.

And of course, in the early 1600s Galileo was subject to the Holy Inquisition for his teachings of the heliocentric universe and ordered by his inquisitors to cease all teachings of heliocentrism. At that time, the pope also banned all books and works that mentioned it and any teaching of heliocentrism as well. In the 1680s Newton tied all the science together with his universal theory of gravitation and work on celestial mechanics published in his Principia. But as an Englishman, Anglican, and Cambridge professor he was out of the reach of the Catholic Church in Rome. It took until the early 1800s for the Catholic Church to finally revisit and reverse its opinions and allow publication of heliocentric works of science.

As for the sun being at the center of the universe? Well, this is our galaxy and...



We are actually at the center of our observable universe. But that is simply because of the speed of light which means we can't observe any objects in the universe that are more distant from us in light years than their actual age. Because any light from them has not yet reached us. But that is simply a reflection of our observation point here on earth and not our actual location within the universe. We just simply cannot see or detect any galaxies that are more distant from us in light years than their age.

[ken_sylvania]

Well, heliocentric solar system in which the earth is not flat but a spherical planet that orbits the sun over the course of a year. And it is the earth’s rotation on its axis that gives us night and day and the tides. And it is the earth’s tilt that gives us the seasons.

Obviously our little sun is not at the center of the entire universe.

Thank you so much for that miniature science lesson. I'm still not sure why you brought up the idea of a heliocentric universe. I'm also not sure how you can be so certain that our sun is not at the center of the universe.

I brought it up because it is inconsistent with the 6-day Genesis creation story that was mentioned here by JohnH. A fact that caused the church enormous consternation in the 16th and 17th centuries. Although the ancient Greeks theorized a heliocentric universe in the 3rd Century BC, it wasn't until Copernicus in the early 1500s that the theory was scientifically proposed in the Christian era. Which, of course, generated enormous opposition from the church. And not just the Catholic Church. In 1539, Martin Luther said:

"There is talk of a new astrologer who wants to prove that the earth moves and goes around instead of the sky, the sun, the moon, just as if somebody were moving in a carriage or ship might hold that he was sitting still and at rest while the earth and the trees walked and moved. But that is how things are nowadays: when a man wishes to be clever he must … invent something special, and the way he does it must needs be the best! The fool wants to turn the whole art of astronomy upside-down. However, as Holy Scripture tells us, so did Joshua bid the sun to stand still and not the earth.

And of course, in the early 1600s Galileo was subject to the Holy Inquisition for his teachings of the heliocentric universe and ordered by his inquisitors to cease all teachings of heliocentrism. At that time, the pope also banned all books and works that mentioned it and any teaching of heliocentrism as well. In the 1680s Newton tied all the science together with his universal theory of gravitation and work on celestial mechanics published in his Principia. But as an Englishman, Anglican, and Cambridge professor he was out of the reach of the Catholic Church in Rome. It took until the early 1800s for the Catholic Church to finally revisit and reverse its opinions and allow publication of heliocentric works of science.

As for the sun being at the center of the universe? Well, this is our galaxy and...



We are actually at the center of our observable universe. But that is simply because of the speed of light which means we can't observe any objects in the universe that are more distant from us in light years than their actual age. Because any light from them has not yet reached us. But that is simply a reflection of our observation point here on earth and not our actual location within the universe. We just simply cannot see or detect any galaxies that are more distant from us in light years than their age.

So after all that fighting and men of "science" insisting on a heliocentric universe, science now believes that the universe is not in fact heliocentric.

On one hand, you are saying that we cannot observe the entire universe while on the other you are saying that it is obvious that the sun is not at the center of it. And as an exhibit you enter a photo of the Milky Way Galaxy, an infinitesimally small fraction of the universe? Why not just say that we don't know where the center of the universe is, and in fact in proportion to all there would be to know about the universe we actually know very little.

And no, a heliocentric solar system is not incompatible with special creation by God as detailed in his Word. God can jolly well make the universe however He wants to make it, and it's no more absurd than the fancy theories put forth by modern "scientists."

[Ken]

So after all that fighting and men of "science" insisting on a heliocentric universe, science now believes that the universe is not in fact heliocentric.

On one hand, you are saying that we cannot observe the entire universe while on the other you are saying that it is obvious that the sun is not at the center of it. And as an exhibit you enter a photo of the Milky Way Galaxy, an infinitesimally small fraction of the universe? Why not just say that we don't know where the center of the universe is, and in fact in proportion to all there would be to know about the universe we actually know very little.

And no, a heliocentric solar system is not incompatible with special creation by God as detailed in his Word. God can jolly well make the universe however He wants to make it, and it's no more absurd than the fancy theories put forth by modern "scientists."

Heliocentrism or "heliocentric universe" simply refers to the Renaissance-era scientific theories that placed the sun and not the earth at the center of the solar system. By the time of Newton in the 1600s astronomers understood that orbital mechanics were more complicated and sophisticated than that due to Newton's universal law of gravitation. And that the universe was much larger than our solar system.

But whether you are looking at Copernicus' simplistic heliocentric model. Or our current scientific understanding. Neither of them are consistent with a literal interpretation of Genesis. I don't know where science will take us in the next 100 years or next 500 years. None of us do. But I'm quite confident it won't be back to a literal 6-day creation that happened 6000 years ago in the order described in Genesis.

The actual shape of our universe and even whether there is just one universe or many (i.e. a multiverse) is the subject of current astrophysical research and theorizing. But no one suggests that our earth is at the very dead center of it.

[ken_sylvania]

So after all that fighting and men of "science" insisting on a heliocentric universe, science now believes that the universe is not in fact heliocentric.

On one hand, you are saying that we cannot observe the entire universe while on the other you are saying that it is obvious that the sun is not at the center of it. And as an exhibit you enter a photo of the Milky Way Galaxy, an infinitesimally small fraction of the universe? Why not just say that we don't know where the center of the universe is, and in fact in proportion to all there would be to know about the universe we actually know very little.

And no, a heliocentric solar system is not incompatible with special creation by God as detailed in his Word. God can jolly well make the universe however He wants to make it, and it's no more absurd than the fancy theories put forth by modern "scientists."

Heliocentrism or "heliocentric universe" simply refers to the Renaissance-era scientific theories that placed the sun and not the earth at the center of the solar system. By the time of Newton in the 1600s astronomers understood that orbital mechanics were more complicated and sophisticated than that due to Newton's universal law of gravitation. And that the universe was much larger than our solar system.

But whether you are looking at Copernicus' simplistic heliocentric model. Or our current scientific understanding. Neither of them are consistent with a literal interpretation of Genesis. I don't know where science will take us in the next 100 years or next 500 years. None of us do. But I'm quite confident it won't be back to a literal 6-day creation that happened 6000 years ago in the order described in Genesis.

The actual shape of our universe and even whether there is just one universe or many (i.e. a multiverse) is the subject of current astrophysical research and theorizing. But no one suggests that our earth is at the very dead center of it.

No, I don't expect science to take us back to God's revealed truth.

I don't have any reason to think that our earth is at the very dead (or even the very alive) center of the universe. But we don't know nearly enough about the universe to have any kind of informed idea about how close to or how far from the center of the universe it might be.

[Ken]

So after all that fighting and men of "science" insisting on a heliocentric universe, science now believes that the universe is not in fact heliocentric.

On one hand, you are saying that we cannot observe the entire universe while on the other you are saying that it is obvious that the sun is not at the center of it. And as an exhibit you enter a photo of the Milky Way Galaxy, an infinitesimally small fraction of the universe? Why not just say that we don't know where the center of the universe is, and in fact in proportion to all there would be to know about the universe we actually know very little.

And no, a heliocentric solar system is not incompatible with special creation by God as detailed in his Word. God can jolly well make the universe however He wants to make it, and it's no more absurd than the fancy theories put forth by modern "scientists."

Heliocentrism or "heliocentric universe" simply refers to the Renaissance-era scientific theories that placed the sun and not the earth at the center of the solar system. By the time of Newton in the 1600s astronomers understood that orbital mechanics were more complicated and sophisticated than that due to Newton's universal law of gravitation. And that the universe was much larger than our solar system.

But whether you are looking at Copernicus' simplistic heliocentric model. Or our current scientific understanding. Neither of them are consistent with a literal interpretation of Genesis. I don't know where science will take us in the next 100 years or next 500 years. None of us do. But I'm quite confident it won't be back to a literal 6-day creation that happened 6000 years ago in the order described in Genesis.

The actual shape of our universe and even whether there is just one universe or many (i.e. a multiverse) is the subject of current astrophysical research and theorizing. But no one suggests that our earth is at the very dead center of it.

No, I don't expect science to take us back to God's revealed truth.

I don't have any reason to think that our earth is at the very dead (or even the very alive) center of the universe. But we don't know nearly enough about the universe to have any kind of informed idea about how close to or how far from the center of the universe it might be.

Look, if you or anyone else here wants to claim that both the universe and God are immense beyond our understanding and works in ways that are beyond our understanding then I will wholeheartedly agree.

The authors of Genesis simply described the world as they and their audience could understand it in the pre-scientific period of the late Bronze Age from when those texts are thought to originate.

Modern astrophysicists describe the universe as they understand it based on current scientific knowledge and theory.

In 500 years, scientists may have entirely new and more sophisticated understandings of the universe.

But one thing about science is constant, and that is the more you know, the more you find out how much you don't actually know. There is actually much more that we know we don't know today than was the case 100 or 200 years ago. That is because with every discovery comes more and more questions.

So I'm quite confident that we won't be able to put God in a human-constructed box 500 years from now. Any more than we can today. Or that the authors of Genesis could during their time either.

[JimFoxvog]

I don't have any reason to think that our earth is at the very dead (or even the very alive) center of the universe. But we don't know nearly enough about the universe to have any kind of informed idea about how close to or how far from the center of the universe it might be.

It is currently seriously in doubt whether the universe HAS a center.

See https://www.astronomy.com/science/ask-a ... -universe/, for example.

[Swiss Brah]

Roswell was a government hoax to hide operation paperclip.

[Szdfan]

Roswell was a government hoax to hide operation paperclip.

I’ll bite. How did this alleged UFO crash in New Mexico hide US recruitment of German rocket scientists after WWII?

[the-real-steve]

I believe there is something else "out there". Unsure how or what.

I had to think of the giants of men:

Origin of Giants: The Bible suggests that giants were the offspring of "sons of God" who had relations with human daughters, leading to a generation of "mighty men".

What is our opinion on this?

A year or so ago, I watched a really good podcast on this UFO's and such. I'll see if I can find it and share the link.