-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
V
Nitrogen (freezes at -210 C.). Helium(-272). Hydrogen (-259). Pluto's temperature extremes are between -233 and -223 C.
Last edited:
One way is simple, the obvious fake look of the pictures. Another way is the source, a dubious institution that is famous for fake pictures. You can compare the problems and discrepancies between their fake pictures. Another way is looking at the impossibility by their own paradigm of getting a robot out there. Yet another way is look at the obvious contradictions in their own model (ie: the asteroid belt). Look at the contradictions of their model compared to reality (ie: fuel). Look at the contradictions of their claims compared to the Bible (ie: basic cosmology).
Even look at the contradictions of their own claims. Consider how they claim to have released pictures of what they call "pluto" in July, and in the article in the OP claim it took all this time to get these particular fake pictures which they claim were taken at the same time. So either the fake pictures from before were fake or the fake pictures this time were fake, or most logically both are fake.
Now I have some questions for you, and any other Christian here. The atheists can ignore it, they don't understand anything anyways. Why would you blindly trust without question an institution that tells absurd lies, that names its projects and names stars after abominations and demons, and that has a very open stance of being against the Bible?
Even look at the contradictions of their own claims. Consider how they claim to have released pictures of what they call "pluto" in July, and in the article in the OP claim it took all this time to get these particular fake pictures which they claim were taken at the same time. So either the fake pictures from before were fake or the fake pictures this time were fake, or most logically both are fake.
Now I have some questions for you, and any other Christian here. The atheists can ignore it, they don't understand anything anyways. Why would you blindly trust without question an institution that tells absurd lies, that names its projects and names stars after abominations and demons, and that has a very open stance of being against the Bible?
Science has always been at odds with the church, because scientific facts posit uncomfortable questions for the Church. The Churches' answer has been either to kill scientists and suppress information, or more recently, to adopt more allegorical interpretations of various parts of the bible.
The second is logical, but you're still stuck on at least the denial part of the first.
The second is logical, but you're still stuck on at least the denial part of the first.
Science is not at odds with the Bible. Science is what can be tested or observed. Science also has to be able to be replicated. As it stands, much of what they call science today is not science at all being founded purely on unproven or disproven theories and fake images.
A good example of this is Darwinism, for which there is ample scientific proof against it, but only theories, hoaxes, fake pictures, and dubious institutions to support it. It's much the same as with most modern cosmological theories such as heliocentricism. In fact these are inseparably linked. Perhaps this is why so few question the claims, being that if they discovered how false one is it would destroy the premise of the others.
A good example of this is Darwinism, for which there is ample scientific proof against it, but only theories, hoaxes, fake pictures, and dubious institutions to support it. It's much the same as with most modern cosmological theories such as heliocentricism. In fact these are inseparably linked. Perhaps this is why so few question the claims, being that if they discovered how false one is it would destroy the premise of the others.
If you can't believe in heliocentrism then even simple geometry is beyond you. So there's no point in me beginning to explain stratification, fossilization, radiometric dating, DNA, chromosomes, genetic mutation or environmental natural selection. It's all gobbledygook as far as your understanding is concerned. Why bother?