The Red Planet is about to be spectacular!

[BoyntonStu]

The Red Planet is about to be spectacular!

This month and next, Earth is catching up with Mars in an encounter that
will culminate in the closest approach between the two planets in
recorded history. The next time Mars may come this close is
in 2287. Due to the way Jupiter's gravity tugs on
Mars and perturbs its orbit, astronomers can only be
certain that Mars has not come this close to Earth
in the Last 5,000 years, but it may be as long as
60,000 years before it happens again.

The encounter will culminate on August 27th when
Mars comes to within 34,649,589 miles of Earth and
will be (next to the moon) the brightest object in
the night sky. It will attain a magnitude of -2.9
and will appear 25.11 arc seconds wide. At a modest
75-power magnification


Mars will look as large as the full moon to the naked eye.

Mars will be easy to spot. At the
beginning of August it will rise in the east at 10p.m.
and reach its azimuth at about 3 a.m.

By the end of August when the two planets are
closest, Mars will rise at nightfall and reach its
highest point in the sky at 12:30a.m. That's pretty
convenient to see something that no human being has
seen in recorded history. So, mark your calendar at
the beginning of August to see Mars grow
progressively brighter and brighter throughout the
month.


Share this with your friends, children, and grandchildren.

NO ONE ALIVE TODAY WILL EVER SEE THIS AGAIN

stU

[Livefire]

Dont know why you posted this in religious forum, but a interesting post nontheless. I will have to break out the telescope for the kids to check out!
Thanks for the info Stu!

[seeker]

you may want to check the NASA website for the truth of this email. It ain't what it says -- r/t explain, just check it out.

Seeker

[BoyntonStu]

Originally Posted by seeker

you may want to check the NASA website for the truth of this email. It ain't what it says -- r/t explain, just check it out.

Seeker

Although Mars' proximity to Earth in August 2003 (referred to as a perihelic opposition) was a rare occurrence, the red planet comes almost as near to us every 15 to 17 years. To the unaided observer, Mars' appearance in August 2003 wasn't significantly larger or brighter than it is during those much more common intervals of closeness.

Mars will have another close encounter with Earth in in 2005, but that occurrence will take place in October (not August), and the red planet will appear about 20% smaller than it did during similar circumstances in 2003.

The Mars phenomenon of 2003 was featured in a couple of articles on the web site Space.com which are still well worth the reading: Mars to Get Closer than Ever in Recorded History in 2003 and Orbital Oddities: Why Mars will be So Close to Earth in August. Interested observers also joined Mars Watch 2003 through the MarsToday.com web site.

---------------------------

This is the difference between Science and Religion. In Science, corrections are permitted as better answers to questions are found. In Religion, believers think that they already know all the answers and are defensive of finding any flaws.

I posted the article in Religion to point out how Science measures Nature and to show the scope of time and of space. To believe that the Earth is only about 5,000 years of age is simply a belief based on words on paprer, not on Scientific measurements.

stU

[weishaupt1776]

Originally Posted by BoyntonStu

To believe that the Earth is only about 5,000 years of age is simply a belief based on words on paprer, not on Scientific measurements.

The Institute for Creation research used numerous dating methods on some stones from a castle which was known to be several hundred years old.

Guess what?

Age measurements into millions of years.

Stu, the word "scientific" is an adjective BTW

[Livefire]

*SIGH*

More prima facie evidence Stu is an idiot!!! Weis, Ive pretty much ripped apart the content of everything he posts and HB showed us all that his logic and thought processes are flawed. No helping this character. Now he stoops to disinformation. I sure wouldnt want to do business with a corrupt individual such as this! The link below is dedicated to you Stu!



The Boynton Stu Theme Song

[BoyntonStu]

Originally Posted by weishaupt1776

The Institute for Creation research used numerous dating methods on some stones from a castle which was known to be several hundred years old.

Guess what?

Age measurements into millions of years.

Stu, the word "scientific" is an adjective BTW

Let's examine your post.

1> Are you saying that the STONES were several hundred years old?

2> Did they know what they were doing?

3> Perhaps it was a scientific mistake and another scientist will correcty the mistake on the next measurement.

4> A "scientific" measurement is one in which a person is trying to measure nature. An "unscientific" statement is an assumption made without measurement. For example, "The Sun revolves around the Earth". This unfounded notion was reversed after scientific measurements.

stU

I will now add another name to my ignore list. (not yours)

[Livefire]

WOOHOO!!!!

[Ice]

Stu,

I suggest the book "The Origin of Species Revisited" by an attorney named "Bird". In 2 volumes evidence from all sides of the controversy is presented. It is well worth reading and not just for the sake of the "evolution" controversy... it also addresses religous beliefs in regards to many various categories within the controversy (like age of the earth, which he cites the scientific evidence for).

After going through the evidence he presented and researching that same evidence using sources from both "camps"... I found that even the evolutionists admit it doesn't look good for their "theory".

There is a theory other than "evolution" and "creation"... it is called the "Theory of Abrupt Appearance." There is no attempt to explain "how" our reality (our existence, the universe, etc.) came into being. There is only the attempt to demonstrate that everything in existence just "abruptly appeared." (Similarly, the Theory of Evolution does not attempt to explain "how" the different creatures came into existence... like the Bombadier Beetle... it just attempts to demonstrate that it did happen).

The work by Bird is excellent and can be of assistance in order to clarify many of the different religous beliefs... like some believe that the book of Genisis supports the Theory of Evolution... and some believe it does not. There are many aspects addressed. He goes through biology, cosmology... and the list goes on. And it is interesting how he addresses the different beliefs in regards to each of those categories.

You may find some part(s)of your personal beliefs addressed within the pages of his work. I'm sure that all of us could find some part of a belief we hold within it.

A long time ago I asked myself a simple question: "Why do I believe what I believe?" And as I did the research my beliefs changed because I gained "facts" that became the foundation of my belief. First, I went the Science route. Then I researched each of the religions (some of which were discarded quickly due to its lack of a solid foundation). As time passed, I found that there isn't any "cult" (for lack of a better term), not excluding "Atheism", that agrees with me on all aspects even though they agree on some.

But the question needs to be researched... and it is a personal journey for each of us. That is why I'm not found in this forum too often.

Ice

[dadmoonbunny]

This is the difference between Science and Religion. In Science, corrections are permitted as better answers to questions are found. In Religion, believers think that they already know all the answers and are defensive of finding any flaws.



stU[/quote]It is my opinion that your statement of corrections being permitted as better answers are found to questions in science is flawed on a historical basis. I base this on the treatment of (one example) Nicolai Tesla. His name has been vilified over the years, yet it is he, along with George Westinghouse that produced and made public the first practical electrical system based on Alternating Current. Most people think it was Thomas Alva Edison, which is taught in public schools to this day.

Thomas Alva Edison was a very intelligent man, to be sure, but he was more of a question man, given to organizing and directing his large group of worker bees rather than actually doing his own work.

Again, this is only one example, but one that needs correction.

Science is quite often just as corrupt as religion. Another good example is the current pharmacuetical industry. World wide, they are doing everything in their power to get laws passed to prohibit access to natural remedies that have kept folks healthy for several hundred years before they came along. No forgiveness, just profiteering and greed.

With all due respect, Stu.

Sic Gorgiamus Alus Subjuctatos Nunc