Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: Fr Paul Robinson SSPX. v Young Earth Creationists  (Read 29135 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
  • *****
  • Posts: 46961
  • Reputation: +27814/-5167
  • Gender: Male
Re: Fr Paul Robinson SSPX. v Young Earth Creationists
« Reply #105 on: August 19, 2021, 06:04:06 AM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
  • No, I do not have a PHd in physics, I don't need one in this case. I figured that one out to show Newton's gravity theory is not the law its made out to be. Two heaver objects, the Earth and a cannonball, according to Newton, have a greater attraction towards one another than the Earth and a feather. But, as is known, both fall at the same rate, which to me shows Newton's mass attraction theory is flawed. That was my point.

    Even scientists admit that they have never been able to explain or even to prove the existence of gravity.  They can’t explain how objects can act upon one another at a distance.  If you were to put two metal balls on a table, gravity should, if ever so slightly, draw them closer to one another, but no such movement has ever been detected.  Gravity is nothing but conjecture.  I have seen theories where the behaviors formerly attributed to gravity are actually due to electromagnetism.  I’ve even come across a theory where a flow of ether causes the behavior.  Again, we hav generations of people brainwashed into believing in gravity ... when even scientists admit they have no clue what it is and how it works.  Same with evolution.  Even top scientists are discarding it, but kids are still brainwashed in schools into believing that it’s proven fact.

    Offline Meg

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6791
    • Reputation: +3467/-2999
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Fr Paul Robinson SSPX. v Young Earth Creationists
    « Reply #106 on: August 19, 2021, 06:56:00 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • You haven't seen "convincing evidence that the earth is a globe" --- so far ok, that's just a lack of education --- but then you say: "rather than flat."

    Did you see convincing evidence that the earth is flat?

    There's a lot of info regarding the flat earth on this subforum (Fighting Errors in the Modern World). Just go to the main subforum page, and you'll see the heading that says...."The Earth God Made - Flat Earth, Geocentrism," and click on the Flat Earth in that heading, and you'll see a bunch of threads on FE.  That is, if you are really interested in studying it. Most forum members are against it without really looking into it.
    "It is licit to resist a Sovereign Pontiff who is trying to destroy the Church. I say it is licit to resist him in not following his orders and in preventing the execution of his will. It is not licit to Judge him, to punish him, or to depose him, for these are acts proper to a superior."

    ~St. Robert Bellarmine
    De Romano Pontifice, Lib.II, c.29


    Offline cassini

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3911
    • Reputation: +3082/-275
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Fr Paul Robinson SSPX. v Young Earth Creationists
    « Reply #107 on: August 19, 2021, 07:03:59 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • It didn't detect it. What's the conclusion from the Michelson-Morley experiment? Well, the conservative conclusion is there's no fringe shift. But what's the implication of that conclusion? The implication of that conclusion is the earth is not moving relative to the ether. If the earth were moving relative to the ether, the path lengths, the times to travel the two paths in the Michelson-Morley apparatus would have differed either at different times of year or in different orientations. We would have detected that as a shift in the interference pattern, a shift that was easily measurable for speeds much less than the known speed of the earth in its orbit, and we would have seen that shift."
    Einstein's Relativity and the Quantum Revolution, Modern Physics for Non-Scientists, 2nd Edition, Richard Wolfson, The Great Courses, Lecture 6: Earth and the Ether

    "... relative to the ether". Hmm. Kind of a big omission there, Laddy.
    I'm not going to bother with the others. If you cared at all about the truth, you would act differently.
    As usual, it takes much less time to lie than it does to correct that lie.

    'the conservative conclusion is there's no fringe shift.'  Sorry Stanley, but there was a fringe.

    In fact, this costly and intricate test discovered movement above five kilometres a second, far shorter than the required 30 kilometres per second predicted, but some sort of movement nevertheless. Michelson believed this was a valid demonstration, and even with a margin of error due to human or mechanical shortfalls he believed the 5kms a second interference did show the existence of ether and that it was not altogether dragged along with the Earth as Freshnel’s theory had speculated.

    In 1897, Michelson summarised the situation as follows: ‘In any case we are driven to extraordinary consequences and the choice lies between these three:

     
    1) The Earth passes through the ether (or rather allows the ether to pass through its entire mass) without appreciable influence.
    2) The length of all bodies is altered (equally) by their motion through ether.
    3) The Earth in motion drags with it the ether even at distances of many thousands of kilometres from its surface.’ - Swenson: Ethereal Aether, p.118.
     
    Michelson, we see, was desperate. His first conclusion is a viable theory if the small 3.5kms/s was not found. His second option is of course the Irishman Fitzgerald’s wacky ad hoc. For his third option he chooses the ether-drag theory that Sir Oliver Lodge seems to have falsified five years earlier in 1892. Incredibly however - for these men were after all, supposed to be the world’s leading physicists - Michelson omitted a fourth logical possibility based on the outcome of the experiment; 4) that the Earth does not orbit the sun, but that the geocentric universe rotating around the stationary Earth every day could well be the reason for the interferometer’s 3.5 kms/s interference found (or later when less than 3.5kms/s was found). Now unless all options are considered, the test-results are not being addressed according to the true scientific method.

     

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46961
    • Reputation: +27814/-5167
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Fr Paul Robinson SSPX. v Young Earth Creationists
    « Reply #108 on: August 19, 2021, 07:12:53 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • There's a lot of info regarding the flat earth on this subforum (Fighting Errors in the Modern World). Just go to the main subforum page, and you'll see the heading that says...."The Earth God Made - Flat Earth, Geocentrism," and click on the Flat Earth in that heading, and you'll see a bunch of threads on FE.  That is, if you are really interested in studying it. Most forum members are against it without really looking into it.

    Most people in general are against it ... without any examination whatsoever.  I am not 100% convinced, but I will look at the evidence.  What I have issues with are those who dismiss it out of hand and refuse to consider both sides of the argument.  That's very dangerous, to "trust the science," as we have seen with the entire COVID scenario ... or to trust almost anything that the modern world tells us.  THAT is when people get manipulated and brainwashed.  They use mockery and derision, instead of making actual arguments.  There are two big clues to me that the flat-earthers are in fact onto something.

    1) flat-earth theory has been actively ruthlessly suppressed by big tech ... Google, youtube, etc.  To find any information you have to go to the Russian search engine Yandex.  Why would they bother if there's nothing to it?  Would they bother to suppress some really crackpot theory, about how purple aliens from the planet Neptune run the world?  They wouldn't waste their resources on suppressing that.
    2) on "debunking" sites, the answers to some of the flat earth evidence are usually lame ... with a constant appeal to "refraction" and then ignoring the stuff they can't address, dismissing it with ad hominem attacks and mockery.

    Look at the evidence against your position, and if you have an answer for it, then fine.  But at least look at it before dismissing it with mockery and derision.

    I used to dismiss it as well.  I never mocked or ridiculed it, but I did dismiss it.  Once I actually looked at some of the evidence presented by flat-earthers, I really had no answer for most of it, and that left me scratching my head.  Unless all this evidence is simply made up and the videos I've seen are complete hoaxes, there's definitely something to it.

    Offline cassini

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3911
    • Reputation: +3082/-275
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Fr Paul Robinson SSPX. v Young Earth Creationists
    « Reply #109 on: August 19, 2021, 07:17:26 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Even scientists admit that they have never been able to explain or even to prove the existence of gravity.  They can’t explain how objects can act upon one another at a distance.  If you were to put two metal balls on a table, gravity should, if ever so slightly, draw them closer to one another, but no such movement has ever been detected.  Gravity is nothing but conjecture.  I have seen theories where the behaviors formerly attributed to gravity are actually due to electromagnetism.  I’ve even come across a theory where a flow of ether causes the behavior.  Again, we hav generations of people brainwashed into believing in gravity ... when even scientists admit they have no clue what it is and how it works.  Same with evolution.  Even top scientists are discarding it, but kids are still brainwashed in schools into believing that it’s proven fact.

    Understanding Gravity:[1]

    For great is the power of God alone, and he is honoured by the humble. Seek not the things that are too high for thee, and search not into things above thy ability: but the things that God hath commanded thee, think on them always, and in many of his works be not curious. For it is not necessary for thee to see with thy eyes those things that are hidden. In unnecessary matters be not over curious, and in many of his works thou shalt not be inquisitive. For many things are shewn to thee above the understanding of men. And the suspicion of them hath deceived man, and hath detained their minds in vanity.” (Ecclus 3:21-26).

    To say Newton solved the mystery of ‘gravity’ is ignorant or deceitful for no one other than God ‘understands’ what we call ‘gravity.’ We know the need for and effects of ‘gravity’ on Earth, and indeed on the surface of every other cosmic body, but can mere human reason really comprehend the mystery of gravity? Given, for example, that if we view the Earth’s global structure from space, as man can do now, (and the Moon's) we see its surface covered with ‘unattached’ things, half ‘upside-down’ relative to the other half. This being so, we can ask, how is it that on this same Earth everybody on its surface has the sky above and the Earth below. Is such a phenomenon not beyond human understanding? Let us put it this way. Here we are in the space shuttle, heading for global Earth. Now, no matter where we head for, even if it is a place right on the bottom of the sphere as we head towards it, somehow, by the time we land, we always end up the same way, the sky is always overhead, and the Earth is always below us. When does the ‘head-under-heels twist’ happen, we ask? If a fly landed on the same place on a light bulb, it would find itself ‘upside down,’ yet the same does not occur when the bulbs are cosmic bodies. How does this happen? ‘It is all because of gravity’ we are told, and thank God for it we say, because without it we would all be in one terrible incoherent state of chaos.
       
    There are, of course, many other known functions served by ‘gravity.’ Experience has shown us that without Earth’s gravity men could not/cannot survive for very long. The ability of our bodily parts to function properly, for example, is totally dependent on the Earth’s perfectly created gravity, and it is this dependency that will make long-term space travel for humans almost impossible, without even considering the effects of radiation. Forget all that hype and nonsense written about men ‘conquering space.’ The truth is that in apparently gravity-absent (weightless) space the human body will eventually break down. First muscle tissue would start to degenerate for want of proper gravity-resisting exercise. Then the bones weaken, start to lose calcium and become brittle. The heart, no longer having to pump blood against the effect of gravity, loses strength and vigour. In time other physical defects would begin to show, such as bodily fluids shifting around causing swelling in various parts of our anatomy. Thereafter physical and mental stress as well as exhaustion would set in. Back on Earth no such problems exist, thanks to the Earth’s ‘gravity.’ All living creatures can exist on its surface where they belong with perfect health and mob­ility, and the weight of a glass of wine and cigar just perfect.

    [1]From the Latin gravitás, meaning heavy.


    Offline Stanley N

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1208
    • Reputation: +530/-484
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Fr Paul Robinson SSPX. v Young Earth Creationists
    « Reply #110 on: August 19, 2021, 07:27:30 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • No, I do not have a PHd in physics, I don't need one in this case. I figured that one out to show Newton's gravity theory is not the law its made out to be. Two heaver objects, the Earth and a cannonball, according to Newton, have a greater attraction towards one another than the Earth and a feather. But, as is known, both fall at the same rate, which to me shows Newton's mass attraction theory is flawed. That was my point.
    I didn't say PhD, I said basic physics, the knowledge one should have a few weeks into a high school physics class. And I explained why you were wrong. You still don't get it?

    I am amused by the people you quoted. Bertrand Russell? I'm sure you accept everything else he has written. :laugh1:  A decently-educated undergrad can see though many of his errors because Russell too-frequently wrote outside his expertise. And Dawkins? Someone else a good Catholic should trust. :laugh1:   His field of expertise is not physics or astronomy. I expect you would reject him within his field of expertise, but you accept what he has to say outside his field?

    The quote mining is not helping you.

    Offline Stanley N

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1208
    • Reputation: +530/-484
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Fr Paul Robinson SSPX. v Young Earth Creationists
    « Reply #111 on: August 19, 2021, 08:00:28 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • Most people in general are against it ... without any examination whatsoever.  I am not 100% convinced, but I will look at the evidence.  What I have issues with are those who dismiss it out of hand and refuse to consider both sides of the argument.  
    Why do you think I, for example, "refuse to consider both sides"? Perhaps I already have considered them and found your side wanting.

    What does "considering both sides" entail? Do I have to give each "side" 50% of my time and keep it an "open question", when it's not?

    Are you still considering "both sides" of ancient aliens, or lizard people running government, or who wrote Frankenstein?

    We don't have time to resolve every issue with every position. We decide these on somewhat limited info as a prudential decision. If new info comes along I'll give it some consideration, but on some issues - flat earth - the evidence renders it so unlikely to be true that it's not worth seeking more evidence. I also don't consider it a very important topic.

    On more important issues, I DO seek info that challenges my conclusions. (That's partly why I read cathino :laugh1:). For example, I think the evidence strongly points to an old earth, but I have read several young-earth creationist books. Probably more than you have (I'm assuming you're YEC). Have you tried to challenge your beliefs? How many old earth books have you read?

    Quote
    Even scientists admit that they have never been able to explain or even to prove the existence of gravity.  They can’t explain how objects can act upon one another at a distance.
    Your writing is so imprecise. Gravity obviously "exists" - we stay on the ground. The exact mechanics of how it works at a quantum level may not entirely be resolved yet. It was only a few years ago equipment became good enough to successfully observe gravitational waves. And you're really over-stating by claiming they "can't explain" action at a distance. There certainly are explanations, and gravitational waves help to resolve those explanations.

    Offline Meg

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6791
    • Reputation: +3467/-2999
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Fr Paul Robinson SSPX. v Young Earth Creationists
    « Reply #112 on: August 19, 2021, 08:11:00 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Most people in general are against it ... without any examination whatsoever.  I am not 100% convinced, but I will look at the evidence.  What I have issues with are those who dismiss it out of hand and refuse to consider both sides of the argument.  That's very dangerous, to "trust the science," as we have seen with the entire COVID scenario ... or to trust almost anything that the modern world tells us.  THAT is when people get manipulated and brainwashed.  They use mockery and derision, instead of making actual arguments.  There are two big clues to me that the flat-earthers are in fact onto something.

    1) flat-earth theory has been actively ruthlessly suppressed by big tech ... Google, youtube, etc.  To find any information you have to go to the Russian search engine Yandex.  Why would they bother if there's nothing to it?  Would they bother to suppress some really crackpot theory, about how purple aliens from the planet Neptune run the world?  They wouldn't waste their resources on suppressing that.
    2) on "debunking" sites, the answers to some of the flat earth evidence are usually lame ... with a constant appeal to "refraction" and then ignoring the stuff they can't address, dismissing it with ad hominem attacks and mockery.

    Look at the evidence against your position, and if you have an answer for it, then fine.  But at least look at it before dismissing it with mockery and derision.

    I used to dismiss it as well.  I never mocked or ridiculed it, but I did dismiss it.  Once I actually looked at some of the evidence presented by flat-earthers, I really had no answer for most of it, and that left me scratching my head.  Unless all this evidence is simply made up and the videos I've seen are complete hoaxes, there's definitely something to it.

    Well said. It's interesting that FE is being suppressed by Google, youtube, etc. Indeed, why would they bother if they thought there was nothing to it?
    I don't want to derail Cassini's thread here, so I might start another thread on this subject. Hopefully it won't become too rancorous.
    "It is licit to resist a Sovereign Pontiff who is trying to destroy the Church. I say it is licit to resist him in not following his orders and in preventing the execution of his will. It is not licit to Judge him, to punish him, or to depose him, for these are acts proper to a superior."

    ~St. Robert Bellarmine
    De Romano Pontifice, Lib.II, c.29


    Offline DigitalLogos

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8304
    • Reputation: +4718/-754
    • Gender: Male
    • Slave to the Sacred Heart
      • Twitter
    Re: Fr Paul Robinson SSPX. v Young Earth Creationists
    « Reply #113 on: August 19, 2021, 08:42:52 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Flat Earth works, in my opinion, as a great exercise in skepticism of scientism. But, I don't believe it is true.
    "Be not therefore solicitous for tomorrow; for the morrow will be solicitous for itself. Sufficient for the day is the evil thereof." [Matt. 6:34]

    "In all thy works remember thy last end, and thou shalt never sin." [Ecclus. 7:40]

    "A holy man continueth in wisdom as the sun: but a fool is changed as the moon." [Ecclus. 27:12]

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46961
    • Reputation: +27814/-5167
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Fr Paul Robinson SSPX. v Young Earth Creationists
    « Reply #114 on: August 19, 2021, 08:59:15 AM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
  • Why do you think I, for example, "refuse to consider both sides"? Perhaps I already have considered them and found your side wanting.

    No, you haven't.  Given your attitude of mockery, it's obvious that you have not considered it with any seriousness.

    Your arrogance in favor of modern science is what I object to.  I doubt that cassini agrees about flat earth, but he's someone I could have a serious discussion with about, and we could agree to disagree, but your militant defense of all things modern science makes it a non-starter.

    Same things holds of other issues.  I can have discussions with some R&R folks, but not with others, because they're openly hostile and are clearly not open to honestly debating the issues.

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46961
    • Reputation: +27814/-5167
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Fr Paul Robinson SSPX. v Young Earth Creationists
    « Reply #115 on: August 19, 2021, 09:00:26 AM »
  • Thanks!3
  • No Thanks!0
  • Flat Earth works, in my opinion, as a great exercise in skepticism of scientism. But, I don't believe it is true.

    Right, even if one does not ultimately come to the conclusion about Flat Earth, studying the subject leads down a lot of paths that expose the fallacies and the fraud of much that is modern science.


    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46961
    • Reputation: +27814/-5167
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Fr Paul Robinson SSPX. v Young Earth Creationists
    « Reply #116 on: August 19, 2021, 09:02:42 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Well said. It's interesting that FE is being suppressed by Google, youtube, etc. Indeed, why would they bother if they thought there was nothing to it?
    I don't want to derail Cassini's thread here, so I might start another thread on this subject. Hopefully it won't become too rancorous.

    I agree.  I mentioned it in passing, without any intent to debate it.  Of course, some of the posters pounced on it and launched into their derision and mockery.  If they want to debate the subject, they can go to the FE subforum.  As soon as you see derision and mockery, you know you're not dealing with someone who is intellectually honest.  It's one thing to say, no, I don't believe it, quite another to deride and to mock it.

    Offline Romulus

    • Supporter
    • ***
    • Posts: 515
    • Reputation: +310/-61
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Fr Paul Robinson SSPX. v Young Earth Creationists
    « Reply #117 on: August 19, 2021, 09:54:59 AM »
  • Thanks!3
  • No Thanks!0
  • Ladislaus, RADAR in the military can only go so far because of the Earths curvature. Also what about the fact I can fly from California to China and from China due west I'll end up in the East Coast.

    Offline RomanTheo

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 327
    • Reputation: +164/-148
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Fr Paul Robinson SSPX. v Young Earth Creationists
    « Reply #118 on: August 19, 2021, 10:11:41 AM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
  • Ladislaus, RADAR in the military can only go so far because of the Earths curvature. Also what about the fact I can fly from California to China and from China due west I'll end up in the East Coast.

    Great question.  Another one is why does the sun *rise* exactly an hour later in each time zone to the west.  Or for that matter, why is it ever dark anywhere if the sun is always above the flat earth?

    Offline Incredulous

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 9438
    • Reputation: +9241/-925
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Fr Paul Robinson SSPX. v Young Earth Creationists
    « Reply #119 on: August 19, 2021, 10:53:29 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I didn't say PhD, I said basic physics, the knowledge one should have a few weeks into a high school physics class. And I explained why you were wrong. You still don't get it?

    I am amused by the people you quoted. Bertrand Russell? I'm sure you accept everything else he has written. :laugh1:  A decently-educated undergrad can see though many of his errors because Russell too-frequently wrote outside his expertise. And Dawkins? Someone else a good Catholic should trust. :laugh1:   His field of expertise is not physics or astronomy. I expect you would reject him within his field of expertise, but you accept what he has to say outside his field?

    The quote mining is not helping you.

    Stanley, are you a disciple of Fr. Paul in Colorado?  Is he your confessor?

    Then you should know,
    Fr. Robinson’s “realist’s guide to science”, contains a forward written by a physicist heretic, Fr. Stanley Jaki.

    I personally posted reams of information debunking Jaki’s errors.  For example, on evolution, he is a flaming chump.

    He agrees with Teihard de Chardin S. J. that modern scientists are wiser than our Church Fathers.

    Do you known Teihard has been found out to be an apostate conspirator and fraud?

    Man you are on the wrong boat.
    Better to save yourself while there’s still time.
    "Some preachers will keep silence about the truth, and others will trample it underfoot and deny it. Sanctity of life will be held in derision even by those who outwardly profess it, for in those days Our Lord Jesus Christ will send them not a true Pastor but a destroyer."  St. Francis of Assisi