The Moon and Design

Originally posted by FabianFnas
This thread started up with a 'proof' that there is a designer:
Because the orbits of the Earth and moon is so perfect, giving a perfect solar eclipse, there must be a designer.

(Then the discussion went off topic...)

Sorry to say, this is exactly the proof that there is no design involved.
If the orbits and solar eclipse would be perfect that mig ...[text shortened]... ver changing.

The solar Eclipse theory is rather a proof that there is no designer out there.

AND eventually there will be no total eclipses at all since the moon is receding from Earth at a rate of about 4 cm a year. Takes a long time for sure but eventually the most it will do is an annualar eclipse where some of the sun will show around the edges of the moon.

Besides, if it WAS designed, who was it designed for? Certainly not for humans since solar eclipses have been going on for literally billions of years, so the first example of a solar eclipse happened when there was nothing on Earth but bacterial mats and maybe even before there was life on Earth at all.

Originally posted by sonhouse
AND eventually there will be no total eclipses at all since the moon is receding from Earth at a rate of about 4 cm a year. Takes a long time for sure but eventually the most it will do is an annualar eclipse where some of the sun will show around the edges of the moon.

Besides, if it WAS designed, who was it designed for? Certainly not for humans since ...[text shortened]... re was nothing on Earth but bacterial mats and maybe even before there was life on Earth at all.

If there really were a designer out there, he would put an indisputable signature somewhere. Like putting the value of pi somewhere in the DNA string. Or some indisputable proof somewhere.

The distance of the moon is certainly not such a proof.

Originally posted by FabianFnas
If there really were a designer out there, he would put an indisputable signature somewhere. Like putting the value of pi somewhere in the DNA string. Or some indisputable proof somewhere.

The distance of the moon is certainly not such a proof.

Hey, you stopped playing a long time ago, what's up with that?

Originally posted by sonhouse
Hey, you stopped playing a long time ago, what's up with that?

I'm off chess. It went to far. I became a chessoholic.
No, I've been 'sober' for a while, and I will stay that way.

Originally posted by FabianFnas
If there really were a designer out there, he would put an indisputable signature somewhere. Like putting the value of pi somewhere in the DNA string. Or some indisputable proof somewhere.

The distance of the moon is certainly not such a proof.

It seems that NO evidence of design will likely satisfy an atheist.

As long as they can always resort to "probabilities", then anything resembling design will be dismissed, and get chalked up to time and probability.

Even pi in DNA, they would say, was 'probably' going to happen, given a million years.

Originally posted by chaney3
It seems that NO evidence of design will likely satisfy an atheist.

On what basis do you make that claim?
In this thread, you lied over and over again and made an utter fool of yourself. Did you think such ridiculous behaviour would convince an atheists that you have some special insight about God?

As long as they can always resort to "probabilities", then anything resembling design will be dismissed, and get chalked up to time and probability.

Even pi in DNA, they would say, was 'probably' going to happen, given a million years.
As long as we resort to scientific analysis, rather than blatant lies, then we will continue to dismiss blatant lies claiming evidence for design when there is none.

When you have actual evidence, then let us know. When you find PI in DNA then let us know. If, on the other hand you wish to lie about eclipses, then take it to spirituality or your local pub.

Originally posted by twhitehead
On what basis do you make that claim?
In this thread, you lied over and over again and made an utter fool of yourself. Did you think such ridiculous behaviour would convince an atheists that you have some special insight about God?

[b]As long as they can always resort to "probabilities", then anything resembling design will be dismissed, and get chalk ...[text shortened]... n the other hand you wish to lie about eclipses, then take it to spirituality or your local pub.

What lies?

The moon is 400 times smaller than the sun, yet the sun is 400 times further away, combined with the moon's orbit, causes an eclipse. We've been over this.

You say "no big deal, nothing to see here, just another coincidence and probability of a lucky universe".

I see it differently.

Originally posted by chaney3
What lies?

The very pretence that you don't know, is a lie on your part.

The moon is 400 times smaller than the sun, yet the sun is 400 times further away, combined with the moon's orbit, causes an eclipse. We've been over this.
Yes, we have been over and over and over it, which demonstrates beyond any reasonable doubt that you could not possibly know what the truth is by now and that the truth does not align with your claims - hence you are lying.

You say "no big deal, nothing to see here, just another coincidence and probability of a lucky universe".
I bet you cannot quote me on that. In fact, you repeatedly in this thread attributed views to me I don't hold and never expressed.

I see it differently.
Which is irrelevant to the question of whether or not you lied. I have no problem with you seeing it differently. I do have a problem with you saying things that are patently untrue then suggesting that atheists don't hang on your every word is a sign that no evidence will ever convince them of something. That is grossly dishonest of you.

Now you may just be trolling and 'having some fun' as you said in the other thread, but I honestly think that people that find lying the best form of entertainment to be despicable fools.

Originally posted by twhitehead
The very pretence that you don't know, is a lie on your part.

[b]The moon is 400 times smaller than the sun, yet the sun is 400 times further away, combined with the moon's orbit, causes an eclipse. We've been over this.
Yes, we have been over and over and over it, which demonstrates beyond any reasonable doubt that you could not possibly know wh ...[text shortened]... onestly think that people that find lying the best form of entertainment to be despicable fools.[/b]

I am not lying, nor am I trolling.
I am however, very surprised at how yourself and others enjoy minimizing the facts, by simply assigning 'probability and luck' to everything and anything that science cannot explain.

Fyi....yes, I made a joke in the other thread, before I realized another poster revived this thread.

Originally posted by chaney3
I am not lying, nor am I trolling.

You have lied repeatedly in this thread.

I am however, very surprised at how yourself and others enjoy minimizing the facts, by simply assigning 'probability and luck' to everything and anything that science cannot explain.
Another lie.
Quote me 'minimizing the facts' or admit you just made that up.

Fyi....yes, I made a joke in the other thread,
Joke or not, it was a lie.

Originally posted by chaney3
I am not lying, nor am I trolling.
I am however, very surprised at how yourself and others enjoy minimizing the facts, by simply assigning 'probability and luck' to everything and anything that science cannot explain.

Fyi....yes, I made a joke in the other thread, before I realized another poster revived this thread.

Yet you think these eclipses are from perfect beings who designed it that way. Thing is, who then did they design them for? Humans? Doubt it. Eclipses have been around LITERALLY for billions of years. NOW however, it is very UNLIKELY for there to be an eclipse since the tilt of Earth and the tilt of the Moon V the sun are different and takes a special alignment for one even to show up. AND that will be GONE completely in another few million years because the moon receded from Earth a few inches EVERY YEAR WITHOUT EXCEPTION. That means at some point in time in the future, the moon will only be able to produce an annular eclipse which is where the moon is now apparently smaller than the disk of the sun and unable to cover up the whole sun like it does now, by then only leaving a ring of light around the moon, no blackness where the corona is visible. All that will be gone. So as a design, it sucks.

Originally posted by chaney3
It seems that NO evidence of design will likely satisfy an atheist.

As long as they can always resort to "probabilities", then anything resembling design will be dismissed, and get chalked up to time and probability.

Even pi in DNA, they would say, was 'probably' going to happen, given a million years.

As you already know, the solar system as a whole is a chaotic system, with orbital elements for every object shifting continuously. If there were to be found any objects with perfect non-shifting orbital elements, then you would have a case of a conscious design. But no kind of this is found. Especially not in the Earth/Moon system.

Therefore have you rather proved the non-existence of any designer at work than the existence of one. Your choice of evidence of an designer was very poor, or perhaps a very sloppy designer not worth her name. You could chose a better example, but you didn't.

A designer theory is a religious theory. Trying to use scientific methods to prove a religious theory is always futile.

Originally posted by sonhouse
AND that will be GONE completely in another few million years because the moon receded from Earth a few inches EVERY YEAR WITHOUT EXCEPTION.

Given the nature of the thread, please be more careful with your use of words. An annular eclipse, is still an eclipse. If you mean 'total eclipse' then say so.

Originally posted by twhitehead
On what basis do you make that claim?
In this thread, you lied over and over again and made an utter fool of yourself. Did you think such ridiculous behaviour would convince an atheists that you have some special insight about God?

[b]As long as they can always resort to "probabilities", then anything resembling design will be dismissed, and get chalk ...[text shortened]... n the other hand you wish to lie about eclipses, then take it to spirituality or your local pub.

Besides, you can't put Pi in DNA no matter how long that DNA strand is. Pi is an irrational number which means it has an infinite number of digits so that cannot happen since DNA, though having a very large data storage net, cannot hold an infinite number of numbers like Pi or any other irrational number.

I have no doubt if you converted the big four in DNA to numbers you will find 3.14 in there somewhere which someone would no doubt take as a sure sign goddidit.

Originally posted by sonhouse
Besides, you can't put Pi in DNA no matter how long that DNA strand is. Pi is an irrational number which means it has an infinite number of digits so that cannot happen since DNA, though having a very large data storage net, cannot hold an infinite number of numbers like Pi or any other irrational number.
.

actually, you don't have to put all the digits in, you could put in an algebraic formula that defines pi instead, which is finite in size so it can be done. Why an all-knowing god would bother pointlessly putting that formula in DNA were it wouldn't be even seen by most people, certainly not seen by anyone before the science of DNA analysis, is an entirely different matter. Even when it is seen, what does the message mean? Why pi and not one of the infinite number of other maths constants that could arbitrarily be defined?