Science was In the Mind of the Almghty Long Before Mankind Made Any Discovery

Submitted by M. Tovey (United States), Sep 15, 2008 at 19:38

I have already adopted the position that the exchanges here are nominally empty, that when I present the truth of the Holy Bible and its implicit control over the entire universe, you resort to human logic to prove a point that cannot be humanly proven, not even with 1000x1000 terabytes of supercomputer memory.

Any graphic that can be produced to show any holographic image or solid model wireframe of something as immense, and quite frankly something way beyond any mere human imagination, is missing uncounted bits of information that might conceivably be used to argue for a 'woven sky'.

It is a given, observable scientific fact, that any particle that is in the position to reflect solar energy in the visible range would be seen, such as in the first heaven, the sky of earth we can see every day. In the second heaven, in the space beyond earth's gravity, there are the cosmic particles, such as comet dust, or the rings of Saturn, or the space station, that reflects the Sun's rays back to earth, that if there were any 'woven' matter, its is likely to be seen.

The idea of a 'woven' sky, or a 'woven' universe is a euphemism for the science community to use and try to describe what is only understandable in the common human mind that which is uncommon knowledge from a human perspective. To use a computer modelled projection that starts on a basis of assumed understanding of astromechanics unproven beyond the solar system as proof is on very shakey logical grounds, and should be considered only as good as its source. There is a computer saying that goes back to the days before program cards, G. in = G. out.

Supercomputer modelling does not offer proof of reality, only a virtual realm / graphic visual of the data inputted.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".