Someone Drilled a hole in the Sky

[Gil Bavel]

I was brought up Jewish, but have been agnostic for years and an outright atheist lately, thanks to the God Delusion and just about everything that Chris Hitchens wrote (although I certainly don't agree with him politically) about religion.

Okay.

Today, I see the total solar eclipse footage from China:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/25965921#25965921

And I wonder....

Is the fact that we live in a time that the moon exactly covers the sun from the Earth during totality proof of God?

Discuss.

(After you watch the footage).

The moon has (allegedly) been spinning out from the Earth 2.0 for billions of years.

Gene, David--anyone out there with a science degree--what are the odds that we would be born and alive in a period where the moon covers up the sun exactly?

Okay, run with it, guys.

 

[Tony2013]

I was brought up Jewish, but have been agnostic for years and an outright atheist lately, thanks to the God Delusion and just about everything that Chris Hitchens wrote (although I certainly don't agree with him politically) about religion.

Okay.

Today, I see the total solar eclipse footage from China:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/25965921#25965921

And I wonder....

Is the fact that we live in a time that the moon exactly covers the sun from the Earth during totality proof of God?

Discuss.

(After you watch the footage).

The moon has (allegedly) been spinning out from the Earth 2.0 for billions of years.

Gene, David--anyone out there with a science degree--what are the odds that we would be born and alive in a period where the moon covers up the sun exactly?

Okay, run with it, guys.

Well the odds are fairly high, I would say. It could just be one of those cosmic coincidences, but that would largely depend on how you interpret coincidence.

And if it's not a coincidence... what sort of significance is it that the moon covers the sun perfectly during a full eclipse? Is it a model of God's unity, that all things eventually fit into each other perfectly?

I think you're meant to decide for yourself. Personally I don't see anything special in it, just very fascinating. I definitely think there is a god, just not the God of the Bible, the one that's going to judge me and send me to hell because he loves me more than anything.

 

[Experiencer7]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spaceship_Moon_Theory

My nose is 37 inches from my ass. That's intelligent design.

 

[exo_doc]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spaceship_Moon_Theory

My nose is 37 inches from my ass. That's intelligent design.

I can't remember who said it, but here's another one about the Cosmic Engineer;

"Intelligent Design? What "intelligent designer" of the human body would put the septic system running right under the playground?"

 

[Chuckleberryfinn]

It proves nothing except that the moon almost perfectly covers the sun in an eclipse.

 

[Gil Bavel]

It proves nothing except that the moon almost perfectly covers the sun in an eclipse.

Okay, well, I was trying to promote a little contemplative conversation, not start a fire, or a discussion about "intelligent design".

Is it a conspiracy theory or not, that there could be evidence for a non-interfering creator (beyond the majesty that is the mystery that a single blade of grass grows at all in the first place) in the fact that the moon fits exactly over the sun during totality? Does it inspire you to think about God? Does it make you wonder about the question of Life, the Universe and Everything any more than anything else?

It's a really simple question--do you believe yes, that it's a conspiracy theory, or not? I'm not asking for any other criteria--just your opinion.

It's something that's occurred to me over the course of my life--having experienced a total eclipse twice, and being in the bizarre after-effect of the shadows of everything--leaves, for instance--taking on the shape of the darkening moon.

The miracles of the Old Testament are so far in the distant past, and so unreliable as to their authorship, or even their reality, that we have to work with what we've got. There are no burning bushes, or sticks to snakes or water to wine in our time--not as far as I've seen.

I could believe that a creator God (in the deist, Spinoza, non-interfering sense) might have left clues for us, and I'm curious if any of you that have thought about it agree. The ONE that really pops out for me is this total eclipse issue.

Which is why I asked for anyone with science backgrounds stronger than mine (or even just plain old mathematics backgrounds) to offer up a statistical probability (generally speaking, I'm not going to hold you to it) to hazard a guess as to what the odds are that this would happen in our lifetimes.

I mean, sure, eventually someone would live in such a time (assuming the planet and its inhabitants survived that long, which is a stretch in itself). The religious among us might simply add the phenomenon onto all the rest of what they see as the "end times" scenario, and recommend that it's just another sign of our impending doom.

That's not what I'm after. I guess I'm asking each of you for your own personal opinion about this phenomenon in and of itself, if you're willing to consider it, and wiling to go out on a limb and share it.

It's certainly not paranormal, not in the sense we understand it.

But it is damned coincidental--and extremely improbable.

Perhaps a better question might be this--what, if anything, can you think of, would be better proof for the existence of God than this?

 

[Chuckleberryfinn]

Perhaps a better question might be this--what, if anything, can you think of, would be better proof for the existence of God than this?

Since the eclipse doesn't prove the existence of God, the question is irrelevant. There isn't anything that proves the existence of God better because the item of comparison itself isn't a proof.

Here is an example of what actually would prove the existence of God:

God rearranging the stars in the sky to spell a message in all human languages that He created the heavens and the Earth. This would, I think, constitute proof.

 

[mike]

personally im a fan of the idea the moon was placed in orbit, by aliens.
in that context the question becomes one of did they make it that size or place it in that orbit with the results described on purpose.

there may well be an intellect behind the phenomena, but it doesnt have to be a gods one

it may just be a random co incidence, or a massive engineering feat.

nothing screams "god" at me from the facts

 

[BrandonD]

personally im a fan of the idea the moon was placed in orbit, by aliens.
in that context the question becomes one of did they make it that size or place it in that orbit with the results described on purpose.

there may well be an intellect behind the phenomena, but it doesnt have to be a gods one

it may just be a random co incidence, or a massive engineering feat.

nothing screams "god" at me from the facts

Not only does the moon perfectly cover the sun, but its orbit is arranged so that only one side ever faces the earth. Both of these facts are very peculiar from my point of view.

I also think the idea that the moon might be an artificial satellite (or in some way artifically modified) is compelling.

 

[Astroboy]

Not only does the moon perfectly cover the sun, but its orbit is arranged so that only one side ever faces the earth. Both of these facts are very peculiar from my point of view.

I also think the idea that the moon might be an artificial satellite (or in some way artifically modified) is compelling.

Most major moons in the solar system have synchronous rotation (same face of orbiting objects faces the object being orbited around) due to tidal locking. Pluto and its moon Charon perpetually face each other. Nothing unusual here.

We are not living in any special times because the moon perfectly fits over the sun during an eclipse. The moon is moving away from the Earth at such a slow rate (3.8cm/year) that there would have been no perceivable difference in the look of the eclipse 10,000 years ago. You would have to go back several million years to see a difference.

As far as the moon being an artificial satellite...whatever makes your reality more interesting, dude.

A greater mystery is how Paulie Shore became famous.

 

[Experiencer7]

" Now it is such a bizarrely improbable coincidence that anything so mind-bogglingly useful could have evolved purely by chance that some thinkers have chosen to see it as a final and clinching proof of the non-existence of God. The argument goes something like this: "I refuse to prove that I exist," says God, "for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing."
"But," says Man, "the Babel fish is a dead giveaway isn't it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves that You do exist, and so therefore, by Your own arguments, You don't. Q.E.D."
"Oh dear," says God, "I hadn't thought of that," and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic."
Douglas Noël Adams

 

[Astroboy]

I guess this pretty much answers this question about the coincidence of the "perfect eclipse". It's not perfect.

Ring of fire: Indian Ocean to see solar eclipse - Yahoo! News

 

[BrandonD]

Most major moons in the solar system have synchronous rotation (same face of orbiting objects faces the object being orbited around) due to tidal locking. Pluto and its moon Charon perpetually face each other. Nothing unusual here.

We are not living in any special times because the moon perfectly fits over the sun during an eclipse. The moon is moving away from the Earth at such a slow rate (3.8cm/year) that there would have been no perceivable difference in the look of the eclipse 10,000 years ago. You would have to go back several million years to see a difference.

As far as the moon being an artificial satellite...whatever makes your reality more interesting, dude.

I agree. The mysterious things in this world can all be explained through the magic of terminology.

Have you ever wondered how the entire known universe sprang from the big bang, essentially from nothing in no time for no reason? It's because of a phenomenon called "Antichronospacial Germination". Now that I gave it a name, it all makes sense, right?

There are actually other arguments for the moon being an artificial satellite. This doesn't mean I believe the moon is an artificial satellite, it simply means that there exist arguments for the moon being an artificial satellite.

I would expect that people on this forum will recognize the distinction.

 

[Astroboy]

There are actually other arguments for the moon being an artificial satellite. This doesn't mean I believe the moon is an artificial satellite, it simply means that there exist arguments for the moon being an artificial satellite.

I would expect that people on this forum will recognize the distinction.

I'm sure everyone can recognize the distinction. But why do you find it necessary to defend or put forth arguments that you don't necessarily believe in? It is a curious trait.

Do you believe that give equal weight to all ideas and opinions makes one truly open minded or that having a strong opinion makes one close minded?

 

[BrandonD]

I'm sure everyone can recognize the distinction. But why do you find it necessary to defend or put forth arguments that you don't necessarily believe in? It is a curious trait.

Do you believe that give equal weight to all ideas and opinions makes one truly open minded or that having a strong opinion makes one close minded?

No, but that's a good question. My motivation isn't to defend arguments that I don't necessarily believe in. My motivation is to continually draw the distinction between what we know and what we don't know. The vast majority of the world fits in the category of "we don't know", and it's my opinion that this innate desire for people to draw conclusions and feel that they know is keeping us perpetually in the dark.

The fact is, I don't know whether or not the moon is an artificial satellite. I can conceive of an advanced civilization building an ultra-massive spacecraft. It's not out of the realm of possibility in my opinion.

A dog in New York City would probably tell another dog that it's absurd to imagine that something as immense as the Empire State Building is an artificial structure. When something can't be conceived, this can reflect the poor scope of one's imagination rather than a reflection of reality.

I also think it's totally possible that the moon's a completely mundane satellite.

I'm totally fine with not knowing whether the moon is artificial or not. I don't have to draw a conclusion, I don't feel this irrational desire to say that I "know" one way or another.

I'm more interested in seeing the world as it is, than feeling the emotional security of knowing. I think that other people want this also, but often get unconsciously influenced by our cultural definition of intelligence. Today intelligence means "knowing stuff".

So I constantly try to hammer into people's heads "We actually don't know anything", because I think that is one of the first steps towards us as a whole actually learning something.

Geez I ramble sometimes. I'll stop it there.

 

[Astroboy]

So I constantly try to hammer into people's heads "We actually don't know anything", because I think that is one of the first steps towards us as a whole actually learning something.

I wouldn't go that far and I don't think it's very useful to phrase it that way.

It is more accurate to say there is still a lot to learn. It doesn't mean the things we do know are wrong. That is a very different thing to say. This is probably where you lose people, or just me.

Even if we don't know what 95% of the universe is made of that doesn't mean the 5% we understand is fundamentally flawed. We certainly know enough about chemistry, physics, biology, astronomy to get to the moon and make things like computers, cell phones, and television possible.

The millions of things that make modern life possible are proof that we do have a decent if not functional understanding of many fields of science. This is something that I think everyone already grasps. It is very difficult to convince people that unknown forces will have any tangible impact of their daily lives or that the universe is somehow illusionary.

I do think some of your posts are very well thought out even if I strongly disagree with you. So, ramble if you must.

 

[BrandonD]

The millions of things that make modern life possible are proof that we do have a decent if not functional understanding of many fields of science. This is something that I think everyone already grasps. It is very difficult to convince people that unknown forces will have any tangible impact of their daily lives or that the universe is somehow illusionary.

The entire mountain of what we know is resting on a bed of thin air. So I do, in fact, believe that we don't 'know' anything at all.

Years ago I wrote a bunch of short stories to try and illustrate in concise ways very complex topics. I wrote a story to illustrate this particular problem. Here's how it went (be prepared for some rambling):

-The Stronghold-

"In the city of Seawall there is a most peculiar house. It has no windows and no doors. In fact, the only openings on the house are two small holes on opposite sides of it. These holes are too small for even the smallest child to crawl into, and the walls are too strong to break. Even a cannon cannot crack them.

Because of this, the house became known by everyone as The Stronghold.

Over the years, men peered into the holes of The Stronghold in an attempt to see what lied inside. A few caught slight glimpses. But they were only glimpses after all, and revealed very little.

One day, the men of Seawall grew frustrated with this mystery and decided to place objects into the holes and observe what occurred.

After many experiments, this is what they discovered:

If a man places a mouse inside the west hole, a larger mouse emerges from the east hole. And if he places a mouse inside the east hole, two mice emerge from the west hole.

If an iron ball is rolled into the west hole, a silver ball emerges from the east hole. And if an iron ball is rolled into the east hole, a jet of flame shoots forth from the west hole.

It certainly seemed as though there was some rhyme and reason to why The Stronghold operated in the way that it did. But even their wisest sages just could not find out what it was.

Eventually, everything that could possibly be placed into these holes had been placed, and the inhabitants of Seawall were no closer to discovering what might lay within this peculiar house.

Many years went by, and still the most curious men continued returning to The Stronghold and placing the same objects into the holes that had been placed there many times before. Afterwards these men would gather together in crowds and create elaborate stories of the wondrous mechanism that might lie inside, and argue ceaselessly over whose story was the most plausible. When their favorite story of the day became tiresome, they would simply create another one that was more entertaining.

To the rest of the inhabitants of Seawall, these persistent men eventually came to be known as "scientists".

---

Well if you don't agree, at least I hope you were entertained.

 

[Chuckleberryfinn]

A base allegory, reminds me of a manuscript I found in my basement one stormy night, written by a fellow named Clark Parker Thompson, or CPT.

A Fragment of A Base Allegory

Jethro had no friends, no wife, and no one to talk to. No one, that is, except his pets. He had a great variety of them. 2 dogs, 3 cats, a squirrel, a few birds, lizards, rodents, snakes, a chimpanzee named Gregory, and thousands of insects. Out of all of those animals, from the very tiny to the almost human, none of them could make him smile and forgive a thousand trespasses like his ants.

Red ants, that is. Great multitudes of them lived on the second floor of his house. He had punched out all of the walls and filled the vacancy with dirt -- and with ants. There was only one door that led up there, and on the inside of that door was a small glass viewing room through which Jethro could watch his colony. Watch them digging passageways, climbing walls, and attacking intruders. This was surely the largest ant farm in the history of the world. And if was not, Jethro would make sure that it was.

But -- and given the annihilating tonnage of Jethro’s love for these vermin, this is a very heavy and significant but -- his ants were disobedient, nonplusing ingrates. Yes, indeed: he’d drop little sugar cubes into their habitat and command them thus: “Do not eat of the sugar cubes.” And did the ants not listen? Indeed so. The little antennae men ignored his many bequest to leave alone the sugar cubes, to leave them put and to watch them caramelize into high art. It was a tragedy beyond all tragedies. A husband could accidentally slay his wife and his 8 children, but that would be as nothing compared to the weightiness of Jethro’s insectoid misfortunes. These multitudinous, crawling little beasts were not moved by his unmeasured generosity -- no! A glorious paradise such as any other ants could only dream; an ant afterlife, a Summerland full of spiders, lizards, and uncountable crawling vermin to sustain the colony for eons; vast cubic yards of fresh second floor desert land through which to tunnel great underground cities; all of this -- and those wretched goddamned vermin went straight for the sugar cubes, anyway, despite his commandment. Nevermind, indeed, that their loving master placed the cubes in their habitat for the specific reason that they not be eaten. To hell with his will!

So the ever-watchful Jethro tallied their sins on his chart and marked all of the disobeyers by painting their thoraxes with a single, white dot. Any ant containing the mark was a sinner and a wretch. As time passed more and more ants bore the mark and thus his love and compassion for them soured and only furious vengeance remained. Thus he randomly selected marked ants, tore off their pinchers, and placed them back into the colony to demonstrate his power and his will; but the ants continued to eat of the sugar cubes; thus he began punishing the innocent, removing their pinchers; feeding them to lizards; squashing them beneath his magnificent feet.

Finally he decided that, for every month that they ate of the sugar cubes, he would drop in two pebbles of ant-poison to make them suffer and thus learn his will through conditioning.

One day, he became so angry at his ants who never ceased to disobey his commands, that he dug out their queen and set her aside into a temporary farm and also dug out the only worker male he could find lacking the mark, named him Edgar, and submerged the rest of their society in 10 inches of water to kill them all off. Finally the queen and Edgar mated and outgrew the temporary farm so he put them back inside the farm he had built for them. But Jethro was clever; before returning them, he posted his rule on the wall of the ant farm in large bold letters: “Do not eat of the sugar cubes.” This way they would have no excuse for disobeying him again.

And for a time, a time, and a time and a half they listened, feasting instead on food closer to their home. But one day the ants found that they had eaten all of the nearby food, and so they ate again of the sugar cube.

 

[Slim Shady]

I've been told BP oil has purchased the drilling rights to the moon -_-