1969 moon landing

[scotty12 3,771]

33 minutes ago, Pardus said:

Viruses don't kill people, ventilators do! Lol

Too much pressure going into them for their lungs to handle , so aye pretty much. 
 

hopefully when it all comes to light all participants are held responsible 

[Pardus 1,610]

54 minutes ago, scotty12 said:

Too much pressure going into them for their lungs to handle , so aye pretty much. 
 

hopefully when it all comes to light all participants are held responsible 

No mate, late onset pneumonia. But again, these were critically ill patients and had a strong chance of dying if they weren't mechanically ventilated.

[WataWalloper 3,474]

[Pardus 1,610]

3 hours ago, WataWalloper said:

The moon landing was in black & white?

[iworkwhippets 13,145]

That pic was taken in Burslem.Stoke on Trent , that's the moon showing  , top right 

[Francie, 2,800]

On 06/06/2025 at 20:25, Franks dad said:

Out of likes …. I get that people like to have faith and it can give comfort to oneself when death comes to mind , but scientifically and physically like you say ….. aren’t possible , it may as well as been written by the brothers grim ..

I think @Franks dad an @shark will be interested in lionels work

 

[Francie, 2,800]

15 hours ago, Pardus said:

 

I read earlier that Isaacs Newton said jesus was sent to earth to operate the levers of gravity,so I searched it up an came across this,interesting reading

have never encountered this reference before. And considering I do research precisely on the Newtonian argument of gravity being a continuous act of God, I would have really expected to have encountered this reference before in the vast research on gravity and the Newtonian theology. (though, to be fair, Newton's theological manuscripts are dense and not always well studied, so it is possible no Newton scholar has ever picked up on this reference while John Lloyd has. In which case it would be nice if Lloyd could write a research paper on this subject, because if Newton really did believe that Jesus was sent to Earth to 'operate the levers of gravity', that would upset our entire understanding of Newton's theology.)

For Newton, gravity was the result of a continuous act of God, who superadded the power of attraction to matter and upheld the universe in this way. Now, we can discuss if God is the direct cause of gravity (moving things around directly), or whether he delegated this task to some subordinate supernatural being. But he never mentions Jesus as the cause of gravity. Nor would it have been likely for him to suppose Jesus the cause of gravity instead of God; Jesus, after all, is fundamentally different from God - he is merely one of God's creatures. It would not sit well with Newton's Arianism to consider Jesus the maintainer (or cause) of gravity. And indeed, whenever Newton speaks of the divine cause of gravity (and the laws of motion in general), he explicitly refers to God, not Jesus. For instance, in the 31st query to his Optics:

it may also be allowed that God is able to create particles of matter of several sizes and figures, and in several proportions to space, and perhaps of different densities and forces, and thereby to vary the laws of nature (emphasis mine)

As James Force writes:

Having chosen matter of particular densities and forces of particular sorts (chiefly, gravity) this time around, God's ordained frame of nature has since been wheeling routinely along betraying in almost every motion the generally provident dominion of the Lord God of creation. God's will and power are detectable in the routine, everyday operation of secondary causes as described in the laws of nature. [...]

In his sermon on 2 Kings 17:15-6, Newton foreshadows the General Scholium while pointing out the preserving role which the Lord God of Dominion continuously has exercised over physical nature. God requires us, writes Newton, to worship him not because we can fathom his innermost essence. Rather, God, "The wisest of beings require[s] of us to be celebrated not so much for his essences as for his actions, the creating, preserving, and governing of all things according to his good will and pleasure."

God's preservation of the created order is necessary owing to the original forces he created. Because of gravity, he writes, "a continual miracle is needed to prevent the sun and fixed stars from rushing together through gravity."

As you can see, gravity was added to matter at creation, and requires continuous maintenance by God in order to preserve it.

Furthermore, we know that several other Newtonians (Richard Bentley, Samuel Clarke, William Whiston) argued that God himself was the direct cause of gravity. And there is textual evidence that supports the idea that Newton largely agreed with this opinion.

As John Henry writes:

The involvement of God in Newton’s thinking is clear from the draft of a letter which Newton intended to send to the Editor of Memoirs of Literature in 1712. Rejecting Leibniz’s claim that Newtonian gravity is ‘‘an unreasonable and occult quality’’, Newton writes:

"And why may not the same be said of the vis inertiae & the extension the duration & mobility of bodies, and yet no man ever attempted to explain these qualities mechanically, or took them for miracles or supernatural things or fictions or occult qualities. They are the natural real reasonable manifest qualities of all bodies seated in them by the will of God from the beginning of the creation & perfectly uncapable of being explained mechanically."

In case the addressee misses the theological point, Newton makes it crystal clear:

"But he [Leibniz] goes on and tells us that God could not create planets that should move round of themselves without any cause that should prevent their removing through the tangent... But certainly God could create planets that should move round of themselves without any other cause than gravity ..." ( Newton, 1959–77, v, p. 300, Newton’s emphasis).

[Pardus 1,610]

7 hours ago, Francie, said:

I read earlier that Isaacs Newton said jesus was sent to earth to operate the levers of gravity,so I searched it up an came across this,interesting reading

have never encountered this reference before. And considering I do research precisely on the Newtonian argument of gravity being a continuous act of God, I would have really expected to have encountered this reference before in the vast research on gravity and the Newtonian theology. (though, to be fair, Newton's theological manuscripts are dense and not always well studied, so it is possible no Newton scholar has ever picked up on this reference while John Lloyd has. In which case it would be nice if Lloyd could write a research paper on this subject, because if Newton really did believe that Jesus was sent to Earth to 'operate the levers of gravity', that would upset our entire understanding of Newton's theology.)

For Newton, gravity was the result of a continuous act of God, who superadded the power of attraction to matter and upheld the universe in this way. Now, we can discuss if God is the direct cause of gravity (moving things around directly), or whether he delegated this task to some subordinate supernatural being. But he never mentions Jesus as the cause of gravity. Nor would it have been likely for him to suppose Jesus the cause of gravity instead of God; Jesus, after all, is fundamentally different from God - he is merely one of God's creatures. It would not sit well with Newton's Arianism to consider Jesus the maintainer (or cause) of gravity. And indeed, whenever Newton speaks of the divine cause of gravity (and the laws of motion in general), he explicitly refers to God, not Jesus. For instance, in the 31st query to his Optics:

it may also be allowed that God is able to create particles of matter of several sizes and figures, and in several proportions to space, and perhaps of different densities and forces, and thereby to vary the laws of nature (emphasis mine)

As James Force writes:

Having chosen matter of particular densities and forces of particular sorts (chiefly, gravity) this time around, God's ordained frame of nature has since been wheeling routinely along betraying in almost every motion the generally provident dominion of the Lord God of creation. God's will and power are detectable in the routine, everyday operation of secondary causes as described in the laws of nature. [...]

In his sermon on 2 Kings 17:15-6, Newton foreshadows the General Scholium while pointing out the preserving role which the Lord God of Dominion continuously has exercised over physical nature. God requires us, writes Newton, to worship him not because we can fathom his innermost essence. Rather, God, "The wisest of beings require[s] of us to be celebrated not so much for his essences as for his actions, the creating, preserving, and governing of all things according to his good will and pleasure."

God's preservation of the created order is necessary owing to the original forces he created. Because of gravity, he writes, "a continual miracle is needed to prevent the sun and fixed stars from rushing together through gravity."

As you can see, gravity was added to matter at creation, and requires continuous maintenance by God in order to preserve it.

Furthermore, we know that several other Newtonians (Richard Bentley, Samuel Clarke, William Whiston) argued that God himself was the direct cause of gravity. And there is textual evidence that supports the idea that Newton largely agreed with this opinion.

As John Henry writes:

The involvement of God in Newton’s thinking is clear from the draft of a letter which Newton intended to send to the Editor of Memoirs of Literature in 1712. Rejecting Leibniz’s claim that Newtonian gravity is ‘‘an unreasonable and occult quality’’, Newton writes:

"And why may not the same be said of the vis inertiae & the extension the duration & mobility of bodies, and yet no man ever attempted to explain these qualities mechanically, or took them for miracles or supernatural things or fictions or occult qualities. They are the natural real reasonable manifest qualities of all bodies seated in them by the will of God from the beginning of the creation & perfectly uncapable of being explained mechanically."

In case the addressee misses the theological point, Newton makes it crystal clear:

"But he [Leibniz] goes on and tells us that God could not create planets that should move round of themselves without any cause that should prevent their removing through the tangent... But certainly God could create planets that should move round of themselves without any other cause than gravity ..." ( Newton, 1959–77, v, p. 300, Newton’s emphasis).

Faith is not based on science, don't let it dismiss their scientific work.

[Francie, 2,800]

1 hour ago, Pardus said:

Faith is not based on science, don't let it dismiss their scientific work.

Who's scientific work?

I just found it interesting what Newton said about gravity mate,an how he thinks God controls it

[Pardus 1,610]

8 minutes ago, Francie, said:

Who's scientific work?

I just found it interesting what Newton said about gravity mate,an how he thinks God controls it

Yes because there's real evidence that a god controls it isn't there? Lol

It was basically a coping mechanism for the unexplainable.

[Francie, 2,800]

2 minutes ago, Pardus said:

Yes because there's real evidence that a god controls it isn't there? Lol

It was basically a coping mechanism for the unexplainable.

Hahahaha ffs mate,so your saying now Newton needed a coping mechanism lol is he not the one who discovered the law of gravity mathematically?

So why are you saying he needed a coping mechanism?

So by your logic you need an everyone else needs a coping mechanism because they don't know what's controlling gravity,or are you going to tell us all about gravity lol

[Pardus 1,610]

2 minutes ago, Francie, said:

Hahahaha ffs mate,so your saying now Newton needed a coping mechanism lol is he not the one who discovered the law of gravity mathematically?

So why are you saying he needed a coping mechanism?

So by your logic you need an everyone else needs a coping mechanism because they don't know what's controlling gravity,or are you going to tell us all about gravity lol

Exactly, we know it's controlled by mass and energy but that's about it. You'd be just as well saying gravity was controlled by the Invisible Man or by some interstellar aliens or even the farts of a billion men, all have about as much evidence as it being controlled by God.

[Francie, 2,800]

6 minutes ago, Pardus said:

Exactly, we know it's controlled by mass and energy but that's about it. You'd be just as well saying gravity was controlled by the Invisible Man or by some interstellar aliens or even the farts of a billion men, all have about as much evidence as it being controlled by God.

Well that's your opinion mate,issac newton had a far far better understanding of universe than you do,so he's speaking from good authority,on the other hand,you aren't.

[Pardus 1,610]

3 minutes ago, Francie, said:

Well that's your opinion mate,issac newton had a far far better understanding of universe than you do,so he's speaking from good authority,on the other hand,you aren't.

Perhaps he did believe in a creator, but the universe being as it is is not evidence of a God and certainly not the God in the bible that you follow.

[Francie, 2,800]

1 minute ago, Pardus said:

Perhaps he did believe in a creator, but the universe being as it is is not evidence of a God and certainly not the God in the bible that you follow.

Creation itself is evidence of God mate,I know you an many others beleive that things just appear out of nowhere or nothing but it's not scientific.