The death of another YEC PRATT

[Leonhard]

Your jumping all over the place with silly meaningless Star Trek pictures.

It was one picture, so its 'picture' not 'pictures'

ALL the various versions still remains a literal interpretation of Genesis, whether 7 days or seven thousand years.

A literalistic interpretation is pretty much just taking the seven days, as seven days. That's what a literalistic interpretation means, going by the word. So when it says one day, its to be interpreted as one day. All that's needed to refute the Church Fathers being literalistic on the day-age issue, is just to point out the diversity of opinion. Rogue06 has done this, and you've failed to answer him.

That you're now shifting the goal post by having it encompance their opinions on other subjects of the Bible is irrelevant.

Yes, St, Augustine

You use a period between St and the name of the Saint. So it would be 'St. Augustine'

There was no version that included any concept comparable to evolution.

What's your point Shuny? I have no problem with the Church Fathers, interpreting the Bible according to the best understanding of nature they had at their time.

[shunyadragon]

It was one picture, so its 'picture' not 'pictures'

This is not the first time this ridiculous picture has been overused.

A literalistic interpretation is pretty much just taking the seven days, as seven days. That's what a literalistic interpretation means, going by the word. So when it says one day, its to be interpreted as one day. All that's needed to refute the Church Fathers being literalistic on the day-age issue, is just to point out the diversity of opinion. Rogue06 has done this, and you've failed to answer him.

That you're now shifting the goal post by having it encompance their opinions on other subjects of the Bible is irrelevant.

No shifting the goal posts at all. The interpretation of a day as a day or a thousand years has a basis in a literal interpretation of Genesis with Biblical references. ALL believed in a literal Biblical world flood.

You use a period between St and the name of the Saint. So it would be 'St. Augustine'

A true anal grammarian par excellence.

What's your point Shuny? I have no problem with the Church Fathers, interpreting the Bible according to the best understanding of nature they had at their time.

The point is that the fundamentalist literal interpretations of Genesis are grounded in the beliefs of the Church Fathers, and the consistent history of Christianity. The literal interpretation view is not just a recent manifestation of of Protestant Christianity. It is consistent in the history of Christianity.

[TheLurch]

Wiki: 2I/Borisov

2I/Borisov, originally designated C/2019 Q4 (Borisov),[8][12] is the first observed interstellar comet[13][6] and the second observed interstellar interloper after ʻOumuamua.[14][15] 2I/Borisov has a heliocentric orbital eccentricity of 3.3 and is not bound to the Sun.[3] The comet will pass through the ecliptic of the Solar System in December 2019, with the closest approach to the Sun at just under 2 au on 8 December 2019.

So looks like it won't be visible without a telescope.

My understanding is that you'd need a very high end amateur telescope to see it. But if you're near any observatories, there's a chance they'll do viewings - check your calendar. I'm in NYC, and there's actually an observatory on top of the physics building at Columbia (far IR, but still...), so there might be some place closer than you think.

[Juvenal]

[oxmixmudd]

My understanding is that you'd need a very high end amateur telescope to see it. But if you're near any observatories, there's a chance they'll do viewings - check your calendar. I'm in NYC, and there's actually an observatory on top of the physics building at Columbia (far IR, but still...), so there might be some place closer than you think.

Yep - peak magnitude looks to be around 15, which puts it out of reach for anything smaller than 10 inches aperture (limiting magnitude around 15.2). And even then, you'd need pristine dark skies and very good eyes to glimpse it.

But in these times 14(15.7 lm) to 17 (16lm) inch dobs are not uncommon, so you might just look for the local astronomy club to have a viewing. Most such clubs will have at least a few members with scopes big enough to catch it.

Jim

[rogue06]

Yep - peak magnitude looks to be around 15, which puts it out of reach for anything smaller than 10 inches aperture (limiting magnitude around 15.2). And even then, you'd need pristine dark skies and very good eyes to glimpse it.

But in these times 14(15.7 lm) to 17 (16lm) inch dobs are not uncommon, so you might just look for the local astronomy club to have a viewing. Most such clubs will have at least a few members with scopes big enough to catch it.

Jim

And tend to be more than happy to let someone take a look.

[shunyadragon]

And tend to be more than happy to let someone take a look.

I do not consider the discovery of the two interstellar objects as earth shaking or mysterious as many claim. They have been predicted to exist and it is in recent years that we have the technology to discover them and track them. The first is an interstellar asteroid of unknown origin and is likely a wandering remnant of a diseased solar system. The second is a comet from another star and can likely be traced to the star of origin. There will likely be more discovered.

Source: https://physicsworld.com/a/interstellar-comet-2i-borisov-comes-from-a-binary-star-13-light-years-away-say-astronomers/

Interstellar comet 2I/Borisov comes from a binary star 13 light-years away, say astronomers

© Copyright Original Source

[oxmixmudd]

I do not consider the discovery of the two interstellar objects as earth shaking or mysterious as many claim. They have been predicted to exist and it is in recent years that we have the technology to discover them and track them. The first is an interstellar asteroid of unknown origin and is likely a wandering remnant of a diseased solar system. The second is a comet from another star and can likely be traced to the star of origin. There will likely be more discovered.

Source: https://physicsworld.com/a/interstellar-comet-2i-borisov-comes-from-a-binary-star-13-light-years-away-say-astronomers/

Interstellar comet 2I/Borisov comes from a binary star 13 light-years away, say astronomers

© Copyright Original Source

Don't underestimate the importance shuny. It gives us a chance to investigate for the first time objects that are provably from outside our solar system that are not stars. The differences or similarities are very informative and will allow some theories to be confirmed and others denied. It is a small sample to be sure, but it is fairly significant as astronomical events go.

Jim

[shunyadragon]

Don't underestimate the importance shuny. It gives us a chance to investigate for the first time objects that are provably from outside our solar system that are not stars. The differences or similarities are very informative and will allow some theories to be confirmed and others denied. It is a small sample to be sure, but it is fairly significant as astronomical events go.

Jim

I don't underestimate the importance of these discoveries, because they begin a new age in astronomy concerning extrastellar objects. Based on the observations so far there is nothing really mysterious about these objects. They were predicted, and likely there will be more since the technology is increasing the ability to find them.

[TheLurch]

I don't underestimate the importance of these discoveries, because they begin a new age in astronomy concerning extrastellar objects. Based on the observations so far there is nothing really mysterious about these objects. They were predicted, and likely there will be more since the technology is increasing the ability to find them.

Well, the prediction had been that we'd find exosolar comets. But the first exosolar object we found, 'Oumuamua, was not a comet. And wasn't a typical asteroid either - it was truly bizarre, and people are still arguing over how to interpret it. So, in many ways, it's only now that predictions are really starting to be confirmed.

Fun 'Oumumua fact: i once fed an interview that mentioned it into automated transcription software, and it popped out as "Oh momma"

[shunyadragon]

Well, the prediction had been that we'd find exosolar comets. But the first exosolar object we found, 'Oumuamua, was not a comet. And wasn't a typical asteroid either - it was truly bizarre, and people are still arguing over how to interpret it. So, in many ways, it's only now that predictions are really starting to be confirmed.

In the past I remember only that in was predicted that our solar system would be visited by extrastellar 'objects.' I do not recall whether it was specifically in reference t comments, but I could see that the most likely visitors would be comets. Considering it is known that both asteroids and comets are known exist it is open to the possibility that interstellar objects could be either.

Fun 'Oumumua fact: i once fed an interview that mentioned it into automated transcription software, and it popped out as "Oh momma"

As far as 'Oumumua' is concerned, the orbit is extremely hyperbolic, and does not appear to be related to any other star, and is likely a wandering 'loner' probably a remnant of long gone solar system.

[shunyadragon]

It was proposed that Oumuamua was a Hyrogen (Comet/Asteroid?) sometime back, but since evidence indicates this is not so.

Source: https://phys.org/news/2020-08-scientists-oumuamua-isnt-molecular-hydrogen.html

Scientists determine 'Oumuamua isn't made from molecular hydrogen ice after all

© Copyright Original Source

[Esther]

Astronomy and Cosmology that continue to offer up evidence that the universe is older by a few magnitude that several thousand years.

Maybe the universe is older but I believe the earth is young.

[rogue06]

Maybe the universe is older but I believe the earth is young.

Too much evidence from a variety of sources and various scientific disciplines make that position untenable.

[Esther]

Too much evidence from a variety of sources and various scientific disciplines make that position untenable.

Yes I have been interested to see the two positions young earth, old earth. My understanding is that the young earth best fits a Biblical worldview but I have no zeal to debate this.