My pastor denied my gender

[midniterider]

3 hours ago, Georgia said:

I've just read back at some of the comments and noticed some name calling and people being really dismissive of my views. I kindly ask you all to not name call and just stick to the points I am making. Debate with me and tell me your thoughts but there's no need to be rude. I haven't been rude to anyone on here and don't intend to!

 

You all may think my views are nonsensical but please note I think the same of yours but will always be respectful and not judge. 

 

Thanks 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-j8ZMMuu7MU

 

[LogicalFallacy]

4 hours ago, Griffin said:

 

Anybody here from Australia? Can you see the North Star?

 

 

From NZ so close enough. No we cannot see the north star because... Well it's only visible from latitudes North of us. Conversely lattitues north of Hawaii cannot see the southern cross. 

 

Weird how that works on a flat earth. 

[older]

33 minutes ago, LogicalFallacy said:

 

From NZ so close enough. No we cannot see the north star because... Well it's only visible from latitudes North of us. Conversely lattitues north of Hawaii cannot see the southern cross. 

 

Weird how that works on a flat earth. 

It works because black holes suck the light of the North Star away from NZ. Same in the other direction vis a vis the Southern Cross. 

[LogicalFallacy]

4 hours ago, older said:

It works because black holes suck the light of the North Star away from NZ. Same in the other direction vis a vis the Southern Cross. 

 

Amazing. I never knew. That's it, I'm a flat earther now, I will....

 

wait... how come the moon when photographed from the US is inverted when photographed from NZ?

[Georgia]

8 minutes ago, Griffin said:

 

Anybody here from Australia? Can you see the North Star?

 

 

Hi!

 

No I didn't come to push flat earth at all! I mentioned it because it was fitting to my response at the time.

 

Yes I do reject the heliocentric model and I believe Genesis does too. There are many people trying to adapt creation to the BB and I understand why,  it's really hard to get your head around the idea that youve been lied to and all the evidence you see is false. 

It's hard to come to terms with the idea and sounds so out there so we will (especially Christians) search for an answer that satisfies our confusion and that can explain it all. Like the theory you presented above. But yes I believe it's flat

 

I was reading the Wiki pages about Cause and Effect and Infinite Regress etc and I don't mean to sound naive but please explain how you can apply human rules of philosophy to those of God's? That's a genuine question not a dig 

 

Really slow replies as I'm working, will give informed responses later 

 

 

 

[LogicalFallacy]

1 hour ago, Georgia said:

Yes I do reject the heliocentric model and I believe Genesis does too.

 

You are correct, Genesis does reject the heliocentric model, and that is why most people reject the Genesis idea of a earth centric flat model. Reality shows us this isn't the case. Even Ken Ham, most ardent supporter of Genesis and 6 day creation, rejects the idea of an earth centric flat model.

 

1 hour ago, Georgia said:

There are many people trying to adapt creation to the BB and I understand why,  it's really hard to get your head around the idea that youve been lied to and all the evidence you see is false.

 

The BB model is not the model that shows the earth is a sphere. The ancients figured that out millennia ago. There are simple experiments any one can do to show the earth is a sphere. To reject this reality requires one to be willfully ignorant in favour of an ancient text written by people who clearly didn't know much about the universe. Your eye, even on the best night and in the best location can only pick up a fragment of the visible universe. If you have a decent camera you can pick up more by factors over 1,000. And if you have a huge space telescope and point it and what appears to be an empty sector of space, take lots of photographs and collate them you see this: The people who wrote the bible could not do this, thus they did not properly understand the world they wrote about. Instead they tried to explain it with the Genesis story - just like every other culture on earth has done.

 

 

Tell me - is every star flat? Is every other world we can detect flat?

 

1 hour ago, Georgia said:

I was reading the Wiki pages about Cause and Effect and Infinite Regress etc and I don't mean to sound naive but please explain how you can apply human rules of philosophy to those of God's? That's a genuine question not a dig.

 

The problem is you are assuming God. If you could demonstrate your God we might be able to have a further conversation.

 

As it is, some concepts of God are contradictory to logical principles. It does not matter how much you don't understand xyz, or whatever, you can never ever have a square circle. Putting God into the equation doesn't change that fact.

[disillusioned]

1 hour ago, Georgia said:

 

... it's really hard to get your head around the idea that youve been lied to and all the evidence you see is false. 

 

This is because the evidence isn't false. The Earth is round, and it orbits the sun. There are so many independent lines of easily accessible evidence for this that I don't know where to begin.

 

To be a flat-earther, in 2019, is simply to be willfully ignorant. I'm sorry to put it so bluntly, but that is how it is.

 

1 hour ago, Georgia said:

 

I was reading the Wiki pages about Cause and Effect and Infinite Regress etc and I don't mean to sound naive but please explain how you can apply human rules of philosophy to those of God's? That's a genuine question not a dig 

 

 

It is possible that God exists, and that he isn't bound by logic. But logic is humankind's way of trying to make sense of things. So if God isn't logical, then we can't understand anything at all about him. We can't know his will. We can't discern what teachings are authoritative, and which aren't. This is quite problematic for a religion such as Christianity, which relies explicitly on claims about God's will and nature.

[LogicalFallacy]

11 minutes ago, disillusioned said:

It is possible that God exists, and that he isn't bound by logic. 

 

Is it possible though?

 

Is it possible to be all powerful, or all knowing? It's because of logic that apologists have backed off the all powerful part and instead say God is maximally powerful. That is as powerful as god can be without contradicting logic. You know the old problem - can God create a rock so heavy he cannot lift it?

 

We can conceive of a God that is logically contradictory, but does that make it possible? 

 

This is way too deep for 11:30pm. I'm off to bed. Night  

[disillusioned]

2 hours ago, LogicalFallacy said:

 

Is it possible though?

 

Is it possible to be all powerful, or all knowing? It's because of logic that apologists have backed off the all powerful part and instead say God is maximally powerful. That is as powerful as god can be without contradicting logic. You know the old problem - can God create a rock so heavy he cannot lift it?

 

We can conceive of a God that is logically contradictory, but does that make it possible? 

 

This is way too deep for 11:30pm. I'm off to bed. Night  

 

The point I was trying to make is that logic concerns things that humans are capable of understanding. It is entirely possible that we aren't capable of understanding everything. So it is possible that God (or other things) may exist in spite of their violating logic.

 

The fact that we can conceive of a logically contradictory God doesn't make it possible for one to exist; it's possible whether we can conceive of it or not. This is beause our ability to understand does not carry any special potency. Earthworms can't comprehend the internet. It exists nevertheless. I think that our comprehension may be similarly limited in its power.

[midniterider]

5 hours ago, Georgia said:

 

Hi!

 

No I didn't come to push flat earth at all! I mentioned it because it was fitting to my response at the time.

 

Yes I do reject the heliocentric model and I believe Genesis does too. There are many people trying to adapt creation to the BB and I understand why,  it's really hard to get your head around the idea that youve been lied to and all the evidence you see is false. 

It's hard to come to terms with the idea and sounds so out there so we will (especially Christians) search for an answer that satisfies our confusion and that can explain it all. Like the theory you presented above. But yes I believe it's flat

 

 

If the earth was flat I could listen to Logical Fallacy's FM radio stations in the USA. But I cant hear them from the USA. In reality, because the earth is generally a spherical shape, you cant listen to any VHF radio station for more than about 30 miles because of the curvature of the earth. Radio waves of that wavelength punch through the atmosphere and continue out into space. 

 

I watched the International Space Station cross my sky a few weeks ago as predicted by a satellite tracking website (n2yo.com). It went from the southwest horizon , right over head and disappeared to the northeast. It orbits roughly every 90 minutes. If the earth was flat I would always be able to see it. I talk on amateur radio satellites that orbit the earth every 90 minutes. For approximately 15 minutes I can talk through the satellite up to about 3000 miles on a predictable basis when the rest of the time all I can do on this VHF frequency is talk around town. If the earth was flat these satellites would be continuously usable. They would always be overhead. But they arent. They fly from horizon to horizon then disappear. Because the earth is a sphere.

 

If the earth was flat the space station would have to cross the earth then somehow teleport back to the starting spot to give the illusion of orbiting a spherical earth. Would this make sense? 

 

Why is the horizon so close by? Why can't I just look down towards the south and see New Zealand from the USA? Must be smog or something.  

 

ISS webcam orbiting the earth. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4993sBLAzGA

 

The radio stuff may not make much unless you are a radio nerd..but I threw it out there anyway. I'm trying to make science points with Logical Fallacy too...lolz.

 

[midniterider]

If the earth is flat:

 

Why is it dark on one half of the earth when it's light on the other half?

Why are there times zones?

Why is it winter time in New Zealand. It's summer in the USA. 

[disillusioned]

If the earth is flat, where did people get the idea that it is spherical? Who is lying and why? Who is in on the giant cover up?

 

Look, I used to be a YEC. I honestly thought that all the evidence for the true age of the earth was a hoax. Then I looked at the evidence and learned I was wrong. There's no conspiracy. No one is purposefully lying about the age of the earth. Why would they? The only people with an agenda are the true believers.

 

If the earth was flat, or 6000 years old, that wouldn't really be a problem for me. If the evidence pointed to a flat earth, I'd be fine with that. But it just doesn't.

[Georgia]

57 minutes ago, midniterider said:

If the earth is flat:

 

Why is it dark on one half of the earth when it's light on the other half?

Why are there times zones?

Why is it winter time in New Zealand. It's summer in the USA. 

 

I will respond soon as , don't take my absence for copping out, been working all day just got in 

[Georgia]

All this doom and gloom about God. So if you could agree as far as him being bad for creating bad things, would you also then agree he's good for creating all the good things in the world? The magnificent creation? If you blame him for others wrong doing, would you then also praise him for others good deeds and success? 

 

Can you guys tell me how you thought you got here and what your purpose's are? 

 

[Georgia]

1 minute ago, Georgia said:

All this doom and gloom about God. So if you could agree as far as him being bad for creating bad things, would you also then agree he's good for creating all the good things in the world? The magnificent creation? If you blame him for others wrong doing, would you then also praise him for others good deeds and success? 

 

Can you guys tell me how you thought you got here and what your purpose's are? 

 

Ignore.. wrong discussion 

[Georgia]

2 hours ago, disillusioned said:

If the earth is flat, where did people get the idea that it is spherical? Who is lying and why? Who is in on the giant cover up?

 

Look, I used to be a YEC. I honestly thought that all the evidence for the true age of the earth was a hoax. Then I looked at the evidence and learned I was wrong. There's no conspiracy. No one is purposefully lying about the age of the earth. Why would they? The only people with an agenda are the true believers.

 

If the earth was flat, or 6000 years old, that wouldn't really be a problem for me. If the evidence pointed to a flat earth, I'd be fine with that. But it just doesn't.

 

The heliocentric model is sun worship, this dates back to Babylon. If you have time, read this: 

http://dedication.www3.50megs.com/sunworship.html

 

It's kind of long though! 

 

Freemasonry (Satanism) has a large part to play , this is interesting - 

 

http://www.the-ten-commandments.org/origin_of_babylon_sun_worship.html

 

If the Geocentric model is correct as implied in Genesis then we are the centre of the Universe, everything revolves around us because we are divine, we did not get here by chance or by luck we were placed here. If you can believe in such a huge universe which doesn't end then you can also believe your insignificant and don't really have a purpose. 

 

It sounds so crazy and unbelievable that so many people could be in on it but obedience to authority is real - there are lots of experiments done on this topic, it shows people will obey the commands of those who are seen to signify authority- wearing an official uniform or having a title like a Dr. People will follow the commands of those who are in higher positions regardless of their true feelings or moral code.  Look into it, it's really interesting because you don't necessarily have to induce fear to get people to follow your commands regardless of their own beliefs. So you can easily have millions of people following orders that they don't believe in. 

 

If your a scientist and you publish a scientific journal which really challenges the mainstream theories you can very easily be isolated. Theres a good documentary on archeologists talking about challenging carbon dating, I will find it for you 

 

[Derek]

17 hours ago, older said:

It works because black holes suck the light of the North Star away from NZ. Same in the other direction vis a vis the Southern Cross. 

Ya, that's what I thought...f*ckin black holes...

[disillusioned]

14 minutes ago, Georgia said:

 

The heliocentric model is sun worship, this dates back to Babylon. If you have time, read this: 

http://dedication.www3.50megs.com/sunworship.html

 

It's kind of long though! 

 

Freemasonry (Satanism) has a large part to play , this is interesting - 

 

http://www.the-ten-commandments.org/origin_of_babylon_sun_worship.html

 

(Snipped)

 

I'm sorry, this is complete crackpot drivel. 

 

I'm not a scientist.  But I have studied science. I know quite a few scientists. They all adhere to a heliocentric model. No exceptions. Not even among those who regularly break with the mainstream. Also, none of them are sun-worshippers. To my knowledge,  none of them are free-masons or satanists either (some of them may be, but I have good reason to doubt that they are in general). They adhere to a heliocentric model because it's the only one that makes sense. That's it. And here's the really important thing: as an undergraduate physics student, I got into some really in-depth arguments with my professors. No one ever told me to believe what someone said because they had a doctorate. On the contrary, I was told by many professors that I should challenge and question them. That is how science works. People are regularly wrong. Even well-respected, credentialled people. And when they are, we all learn something. That is how science progresses.

 

I'll look at your article about the carbon dating if you can find it, but keep in mind that carbon dating is straightforward, and very well established. It isn't at all surprising that people who challenge it aren't taken very seriously.

[sdelsolray]

34 minutes ago, Georgia said:

 

The heliocentric model is sun worship, this dates back to Babylon. If you have time, read this: 

http://dedication.www3.50megs.com/sunworship.html

 

It's kind of long though! 

 

Freemasonry (Satanism) has a large part to play , this is interesting - 

 

http://www.the-ten-commandments.org/origin_of_babylon_sun_worship.html

 

If the Geocentric model is correct as implied in Genesis then we are the centre of the Universe, everything revolves around us because we are divine, we did not get here by chance or by luck we were placed here. If you can believe in such a huge universe which doesn't end then you can also believe your insignificant and don't really have a purpose. 

 

It sounds so crazy and unbelievable that so many people could be in on it but obedience to authority is real - there are lots of experiments done on this topic, it shows people will obey the commands of those who are seen to signify authority- wearing an official uniform or having a title like a Dr. People will follow the commands of those who are in higher positions regardless of their true feelings or moral code.  Look into it, it's really interesting because you don't necessarily have to induce fear to get people to follow your commands regardless of their own beliefs. So you can easily have millions of people following orders that they don't believe in. 

 

If your a scientist and you publish a scientific journal which really challenges the mainstream theories you can very easily be isolated. Theres a good documentary on archeologists talking about challenging carbon dating, I will find it for you 

 

 

I have concluded this one is a nutter.  Pure delusion, at least on this topic, although I suspect her disorder is present with other subjects as well.

[older]

3 hours ago, Georgia said:

It sounds so crazy and unbelievable that so many people could be in on it but obedience to authority is real - there are lots of experiments done on this topic, it shows people will obey the commands of those who are seen to signify authority

As in Christianity, for example.

[♦ ficino ♦]

3 hours ago, Georgia said:

 

 

If the Geocentric model is correct as implied in Genesis then we are the centre of the Universe, everything revolves around us because we are divine, we did not get here by chance or by luck we were placed here. ...

 

If your a scientist and you publish a scientific journal which really challenges the mainstream theories you can very easily be isolated. Theres a good documentary on archeologists talking about challenging carbon dating, I will find it for you 

 

 

Re your If - Then conditional: no, the geocentric model is not correct. Therefore we are not at the center of the universe, except in the trivial sense that any point can be construed to be at the center.

 

From what accredited university have you earned a Ph.D., and in what scientific field? What publications in refereed venues have you published?

 

I am guessing, the answers to these questions are "none."

 

Go away. You obviously have no expertise in the relevant disciplines.

[older]

3 hours ago, Georgia said:

If the Geocentric model is correct as implied in Genesis

The geocentric model cannot be supported outside of the bible. The heliocentric model is supported by overwhelming, independently confirmable and testable evidence.

[LogicalFallacy]

17 hours ago, midniterider said:

Why is the horizon so close by? Why can't I just look down towards the south and see New Zealand from the USA? Must be smog or something.  

 

Maybe New Zealand doesn't exist? 

 

Duuu duuuhh duuuunnnn!

[LogicalFallacy]

11 hours ago, Georgia said:

If the Geocentric model is correct as implied in Genesis then we are the centre of the Universe, everything revolves around us because we are divine, we did not get here by chance or by luck we were placed here. If you can believe in such a huge universe which doesn't end then you can also believe your insignificant and don't really have a purpose.

 

It's not correct, we are not at the center of the universe. Here's why:

 

 

Quote

 

"Q1.  Is the center of the Earth also the true center of the Earth-Moon system?

A1.  No. The gravitational center of the Earth-Moon system (it's barycenter) is displaced 4,641 miles towards the Moon.  That is, 4,641 miles away from the Earth's core, which is this planet's physical center.

 

Q2.  Is the Earth at the true center of the solar system?  

A2.  No. The Earth is on average 93,000,000 miles from the Sun, which is (generally) considered to be the center of the solar system.

 

Q3.  Is the center of the Sun also the true center of the solar system?

A3.  No.  The barycentre of the solar system is displaced by the combined gravity of the planets to a point just outside the Sun's surface.  Systems of planets orbiting other stars display similar or even greater gravitational displacements, which tells us that our planetary system is quite average and ordinary.

 

Q4.  Is the Sun at the true center of our region of the Milky Way?

A4.  No.  We are situated near the edge of the Orion Spur, which is a minor spiral arm of our galaxy.  The Scutum-Centaurus, Sagittarius and Perseus spiral arms are considerably larger and more important than our neighborhood.

 

Q5.  Is the Sun at the true center of our galaxy, the Milky Way? 

A5.  No.  The Sun orbits the nucleus (gravitational barycentre) of our galaxy at about a distance of 30,000 light years.  In the nucleus is a supermassive black hole called Sag A* (Sagittarius 'A' star), weighing about 4.2 million times the mass of our Sun.  Nearly all galaxies seem to have central, supermassive black holes.  This tells us that the Milky Way is quite an average galaxy, rather than a special or extraordinary one.

 

Q6.  Is our galaxy the true center of our Local Group of (approximately 50) galaxies?

A6.  No.  The barycentre of the Local Group lies between us and the Andromeda galaxy.  Since Andromeda is estimated to be 2.5 million (2,500,000) light years from us and since it is also more massive than the Milky Way, the barycentre of the entire Local Group is therefore likely to be closer to it than it is to us.  Perhaps as much 1.75 million (1,750,000) light years away.  Clusters of galaxies are observed to orbit common centers of gravity, making the behavior of our local grouping nothing special.

 

Q7.  Is our Local Group of galaxies the true center of our Supercluster of galaxies?

A7.  No.  We reside in the Laniakea Supercluster, which consists of four sub-parts: the Hydrus-Centaurus, the Pavo-Indus, the Southern and the Virgo Superclusters.  Our Local Group is a small part of the Virgo supercluster, which is now considered to be an appendage to the much larger Laniakea Supercluster of 100,000 thousand galaxies.  We are therefore a very small cog in a much, much bigger structure that extends almost half a billion light years from side to side.

 

Q8.  Is the Laniakea Supercluster the true center of the observable universe?

A8.  No.  It is just one of many galactic superclusters stretching across the entire observable universe (93,000,000,000 light years across) in vast filaments, sheets and curtains, separated from each other equally-gigantic voids, where few galaxies exist. 

 

Q9.  Is the observable universe the true center of the E-N-T-I-R-E universe?

A9.  Unknown. " Credits to @bornagainathiest https://www.ex-christian.net/topic/74813-attn-baa-beginning-of-the-universe-question/page/2/

 

 

 

 

 

 

Quote

 

If your a scientist and you publish a scientific journal which really challenges the mainstream theories you can very easily be isolated.

 

Oh totally. If you start writing papers about flat earth, alien visitations, alchemy, nightly talks with your own ghost you are going to get laughed off the stadium. 

 

But seriously, if you write a paper that not only challenges mainstream theories, but is shown to overturn them, then you are world famous. Problem is that mainstream theories tend to have a lot of supporting evidence behind them so overturning them is not easy. I might be bolder than some others here and go so far as to say some theories will never be overturned. Maybe added to as more understanding comes but never overturned. One of these is a spherical earth. The evidence for it is so overwhelming that to reject it requires willful ignorance of the facts.

 

Quote

Theres a good documentary on archeologists talking about challenging carbon dating, I will find it for you 

 

There is no credible challenge to carbon dating. What usually happens is some idiot who doesn't understand how it works comes along and says let me date xyz with carbon dating. The problem is that carbon dating measures (Hold your breath) carbon 14. Amazballs. Whoduthunk that carbon dating measures carbon? Anyhoo - this means it can only be used to measure things with carbon in it, and your sample better be free from containment or it will give false readings. If you try and measure a rock, well your result is going to be incorrect. It works, its been tested against known ages of test materials. If you try and use C-14 when you should be using radiometric dating, or the plethora of other methods then 1) you are an idiot, and 2) you are going to get an incorrect result because 3) refer back to 1.

 

https://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/earth/geology/carbon-14.htm

[Joshpantera]

Another epic fail by some bull headed, ignorant of the facts christian for all to read through, witness and consider. If there's a god picking and choosing a predetermined "elect," one would have to wonder elect of what exactly? The elect in terms of the most credulous? That's what it amounts to.....