Re: Re: Dark Matter And Dark Energy - an Astronomy Net God & Science Forum Message

God & Science Forum Message
Forums:	Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem


Home \| Discussion Forums \| God and Science \| Post	Login

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora

Re: Re: Dark Matter And Dark Energy

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Mike O'Connor on February 9, 2001 00:37:41 UTC

I am going to guess that x-rays were unknown 100-200 years ago.

What ever dark matter is, or isn't...it will either be found through science, or dismissed by science.

I believe both x-rays, and gamma-rays are invisible to the naked eye. Were they not found through science?

But Christianity will never evolve past the New Testament. (unless someone comes up with the New-New Testament.)

Follow Ups:

Re: Re: Re: Dark Matter and Dark Energy - yanniru - February 9, 2001 - 01:32 UTC
Re: Re: Re: Dark Matter and Dark Energy - blnelsonusa - February 9, 2001 - 15:12 UTC
- Christianity has to evolve. - alexander - February 9, 2001 - 18:44 UTC
  - Re: Christianity has to evolve. - yanniru - February 9, 2001 - 18:58 UTC
    - Re: Re: Christianity has to evolve. - alexander - February 9, 2001 - 20:33 UTC
      - if you're interested - gwynj - February 10, 2001 - 19:07 UTC
        
        Re: if you're interested - alexander - February 10, 2001 - 23:09 UTC
        
        Re: Re: if you're interested - gwynj - February 11, 2001 - 20:38 UTC
        
        Re: Re: Re: if you're interested - yanniru - February 17, 2001 - 20:54 UTC
        
        interesting post. - gwynj - February 17, 2001 - 22:38 UTC
        
        Re: interesting post. - yanniru - February 18, 2001 - 23:44 UTC
  - Re: Christianity has to evolve. - blnelsonusa - February 9, 2001 - 19:14 UTC
    - Re: Re: Christianity has to evolve. - alexander - February 9, 2001 - 20:31 UTC
      - Objectively Dubious - blnelsonusa - February 9, 2001 - 21:03 UTC
        
        Laws of Nature are Objectively Dubious for some? - alexander - February 9, 2001 - 21:39 UTC
        
        Re: Laws of Nature are Objectively Dubious for some? - blnelsonusa - February 9, 2001 - 23:10 UTC
        
        Re: Re: Laws of Nature are Objectively Dubious for some? - alexander - February 10, 2001 - 01:06 UTC
        
        Re: Re: Re: Laws of Nature are Objectively Dubious for some? - yanniru - February 17, 2001 - 21:14 UTC
        
        why not tell HIM that? - gwynj - February 10, 2001 - 19:04 UTC
        
        When I get more stupid with age, I will. But it takes time. - alexander - February 10, 2001 - 23:06 UTC
        
        there you go, showing faith again - gwynj - February 11, 2001 - 20:34 UTC
        
        Yeah, but that's making a mountain out of a molehill - stormcrow - February 12, 2001 - 15:23 UTC
        
        i don't know - gwynj - February 12, 2001 - 15:35 UTC

Additional Information

About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy

Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2024 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins