The Moon and Design

Originally posted by chaney3
The sun is 400 times larger than the moon.

Approximately.

The sun is also, 400 times further away from the moon.
Approximately.

The above 'coincidence' would not matter if the path of the moon did not cross paths with the sun.......but it does.
So how does the above 'coincidence' matter given that the two cross paths?

The orbit of the moon puts it directly in the path of the sun, producing an eclipse.
Yes, but the eclipse is solely a result of the two crossing paths. It has nothing whatsoever to do with their relative sizes as has been explained to you over and over in this thread.

So, question 2.
Why is their relative sizes important?

So, you are relying on 2 monumental accidents.
What are these '2 monumental accidents'? You've lost me.
Maybe before you answer question 2. Answer
question 1a: Do you have even a basic idea of what an eclipse is?

And I don't buy it. Design is more likely.
You don't buy it, because you don't understand it. You just read it on a creationist website.

Maybe.....you don't even see an eclipse as something special?
As far as I know, all moons cause eclipses. In fact I couldn't think up an orbit in which they would not. Can you?

Your ho-hum attitude would indicate that you are downplaying design so much that you will regard an eclipse as "no big deal"?
Yes, an eclipse is no big deal to me. Fun to watch, but not much more.
Why do you think they are special?

If so, we don't have much to discuss, because I believe that an eclipse is an extraordinary relationship between sun and moon.
So why can't we discuss why you think it is an extraordinary relationship? Is an eclipse with a moon of Jupiter also 'extraordinary'? What about Saturn's moons? Surely a double eclipse which is possible on those planets would be far more spectacular?

Originally posted by chaney3
I cannot believe the extent some will go to refute design.

That is probably because you do not realise that you are mistaken and thus assume people are dismissing 'facts' that aren't really facts. Your real problem is you refuse to listen to what people are telling you and just stubbornly repeat the same nonsense over and over and over.

Originally posted by chaney3
I will add one more monumental accident.

Ghost has said that the moon was formed by some sort of "monumental planetary collision" with earth.

How 'lucky' that after this alleged collision, the moon was not only 400 times smaller than the sun, but ended up in the orbit it did, to cross paths with the sun.

Too many accidents. I cannot believe the extent some will go to refute design.

Suppose there would be no design. How would the world and the Universe be any different from what it is now?

Originally posted by twhitehead
Approximately.

[b]The sun is also, 400 times further away from the moon.
Approximately.

The above 'coincidence' would not matter if the path of the moon did not cross paths with the sun.......but it does.
So how does the above 'coincidence' matter given that the two cross paths?

The orbit of the moon puts it directly in the path o ...[text shortened]... moons? Surely a double eclipse which is possible on those planets would be far more spectacular?

Your posts don't make sense.

I have laid out exactly how an eclipse happens, and you say accident, and I say design.

You also seem to intentionally pretend that you don't understand.

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
Suppose there would be no design. How would the world and the Universe be any different from what it is now?

No different, to an atheist.

Just one huge accident after another, with this luck leading to human life.

I don't buy it.

Originally posted by chaney3
Your posts don't make sense.

Because you don't read them.

I have laid out exactly how an eclipse happens, and you say accident, and I say design.
When did I say accident? Quote me.

You also seem to intentionally pretend that you don't understand.
No, I do not. It is you that intentionally doesn't understand.

Now please answer my questions instead of dodging.

Originally posted by chaney3
No different, to an atheist.

He asked what it would be to you, not what you imagine some hypothetical atheist would think. Why did you dodge?

Originally posted by twhitehead
He asked what it would be to you, not what you imagine some hypothetical atheist would think. Why did you dodge?

Okay. The answer is the same, just said a little differently.

If I did not believe in design, I would be an atheist, who believed in approx. 1,000 different accidents in the universe, leading to not only eclipses, but the marvel of human life.

But, I don't believe in such accidents, thankfully.

Originally posted by chaney3
Okay. The answer is the same, just said a little differently.

If I did not believe in design, I would be an atheist, who believed in approx. 1,000 different accidents in the universe, leading to not only eclipses, but the marvel of human life.

But, I don't believe in such accidents, thankfully.

Basically the same dodge. Read his question a bit more slowly this time then try to answer it honestly.

But in the mean time answer my questions.

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
Suppose there would be no design. How would the world and the Universe be any different from what it is now?

Let me ask you this:

If you remove design, what can be your explanation of the universe, earth and human life, other than accidents or luck?

Originally posted by chaney3
I have laid out exactly how an eclipse happens.

You said that the moon was 400 times smaller than the sun and the sun is 400 times further away. You also said their paths cross. You did not explain why the first two facts are relevant. So no, you did not 'lay out exactly how an eclipse happens'.
You also didn't explain why you think their paths crossing is special. As I have clearly stated, their paths crossing is virtually unavoidable.

Originally posted by twhitehead
You said that the moon was 400 times smaller than the sun and the sun is 400 times further away. You also said their paths cross. You did not explain why the first two facts are relevant. So no, you did not 'lay out exactly how an eclipse happens'.
You also didn't explain why you think their paths crossing is special. As I have clearly stated, their paths crossing is virtually unavoidable.

Wow. You don't see it?

It is NO coincidence that the sun is 400 times larger than the moon.

It is NO coincidence that the sun is 400 times further away from the moon.

You say that their crossing paths is "unavoidable", but you are dead wrong!!!

They ONLY cross paths because of the orbit the moon just 'happens' to be in.

How are you missing this? And why are you attempting to casually dismiss the importance of all these so called accidents?

Originally posted by chaney3
Let me ask you this:

If you remove design, what can be your explanation of the universe, earth and human life, other than accidents or luck?

I will answer your question if you answer mine.

Suppose there was no design. How would the Universe be any different from what it is now? Consider for instance the Moon's orbit. If it was not designed, what would be the Moon's orbit be like and why?

Originally posted by chaney3
Let me ask you this:

If you remove design, what can be your explanation of the universe, earth and human life, other than accidents or luck?

What would be the big problem with accidents or luck if, apart from also being natural law including the laws of physics that would thus give some limited order predictability and structure to the world, accidents or luck was all there is?

A far better question is how you would expect the evidence and your observations to be different from what they are if there was NO design and ONLY natural law and accidents or luck?
This is because, if no difference, then you have no evidence or observation to favor design over natural law and accidents or luck.

BUT, in addition, we have evidence to favor accidents over design. Just one example over a huge number of examples: the blood vessels of the human retina being in FRONT of the human retina thus partly obscuring the incoming light; that would be a very STUPID design if it was one! But, in contrast, such an apparently stupid and unintelligent arrangement can be very easily explained by evolution because evolution is a mindless unintelligent blind process.
So here we have evidence in favor of accidents (although evolution actually isn't 'just accidents' because natural selection is partly PREDICABLE) and we have evidence AGAINST design.

In contrast, as far as we are currently aware, we have NO evidence to favor design over accidents (of the creation of the universe, life, human being etc).

So, to sum up, we have evidence in favor of accidents and natural law over design and we have only evidence AGAINST design over accidents and natural law and NO evidence in favor of design;
Our obviously rational conclusion; design is unlikely.

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
I will answer your question if you answer mine.

Suppose there was no design. How would the Universe be any different from what it is now? Consider for instance the Moon's orbit. If it was not designed, what would be the Moon's orbit be like and why?

I have answered your question.

If there is no design, then everything is an accident and luck.

By removing design, there is no need to consider how things may be different than they are now, including the moon's orbit, because it is already an accident, as believed by atheists. Why would the list of accidents need to change just by removing design?