Actually, we should have about 15 nights with no Moon, so you really don't understand what it means for the Moon to orbit the Earth. But, in compensation, we have 15 days with a Moon.
The semi-major axis of the Moon's orbit around the Earth is about 384,400 km (it is an elliptical orbit). The semi-major axis of the Earth's orbit around the Sun is about 149,598,000 km (or 93 million miles). So, yes, it is about 0.257% of the Sun's distance.
The Moon is not synchronized with our "spin" (daily rotation). It's own day is synchronized with its orbital period, which is why it constantly faced toward us. Neither are the stars synchronized with our "spin," though their reference position relative to local midnight moves 360 degrees / 365 days = 0.986 degree per day. They are not moving; we are. Their apparent rotation through the day is 360 degrees / 24 hours = 15 degrees / hour. You have to understand that, for us, the stars are "fixed." The cosmos is not rotating at all. The stars' actual movements are so small, they can't be detected unless a century or so has passed.
I learned that believers in the textbook wave all the problems away by imagining that unfathomable distances take care of it all magically.
Kinda like the theory of evolution which is totally impossible also becomes a science "fact" when you throw billions of years of time at it.
You think light can travel thousands of light-years virtually in a straight line, while you spin at 1000 mph, having no centrifugal force, and you can see pin points of light in the sky. Just because they're so far away.
You know. Enoch wrote about Earth's design, and the courses of the sun and moon. Also how the stars move.
He wrote that the full moon would be rising in the east while the sun is setting this coming Passover.
Whether you regard this scripture as truth or not, it's evidence among lots of archeology we could visit, that proves the ancients had no need for a NASA to spend billions of dollars to produce crappy special effects and play with computers - to tell them how the cosmos rotates around us. As a clock the way God made it.
Btw, the moon is not missing for half of the month on earth.
The distances are not unfathomable. They are finite and measured. Get a grip and live with them. Nothing in common with the notion of "evolution."
Do you have any reason to think that light does not travel in a straight line, at a speed that makes anything terrestrial seem like no movement at all? Of course we have centrifugal acceleration. If you would ever take the trouble to calculate it, you would find that it is so tiny, we cannot sense it. But it does make a difference if we launch rockets eastward or westward. We see points of light because that is all our retinas can register for such a distant object having such a small angular diameter. This is why we have telescopes, to magnify their image.
Enoch is what? An astronomer? Did he make observations? You don't even quote him. A full moon always rises in the east. A moon of any sort always rises in the east. The Sun rises in the east, in fact. This is supposed to be impressive?
I see you have given up on our discussion thread, and have fallen back on your baseless assertions. There are no crappy special effects and computer play, just your profound ignorance.
The Moon is never missing, but half the time we see it in daylight and half the time we see it at night, depending on whether it is nearer the sun than Earth or farther from the sun than Earth. I'm sorry you missed out on 3rd grade.
oh it is a very real problem that you think you can see light that traveled millions of miles straight at a spinning ball that you're riding on. The problem gets worse with greater distance and speeds. It doesn't vanish. And centrifugal force pushes away from the axis but gravity pushes toward the center. No problem there either I guess?
You're thinking that gravity is perfectly counter-balancing CF wherever you happen to be standing I suppose?
I have no problem with light travelling straight. Actually all of my observations make a whole lot more sense on the Earth God describes than the stories the "fool on the hill" tells himself. (Beatles reference, good song)
The significance of Enoch is this: He wrote that the Full Moon would be rising at sunset. That's not just saying it comes up on the East. It's timing. He was not an astronomer. He was a prophet. Refresh your memory, read Jude. Jude quotes Enoch and calls him "prophet of God", "seventh from Adam". This is pretty high endorsement. Plus Jesus said "as in the days of Noah". It would seem they expected us to be familiar with Enoch's writings.
I work in GIS - geographical information - (among other things). You probably have more formal education than I do in GIS. You should know that a map can be modeled or wrapped onto any shape. Math can model. It doesn't make the model necessarily real.
So I believe the scriptures. If you can believe in a virgin birth then you should have no trouble with biblical creation.
There is no problem. You describe no problem. You wave your hands and claim there is a problem. Light travels at 186,000 miles per second. The Earth is standing still by comparison, but we can measure Doppler shifts to determine effects of relative velocity along the line of sight.
Centrifugal force is smaller than gravity, by a lot, but it is able to produce the oblateness causing the equatorial diameter to be greater than the polar diameter. We don't notice it, as I said, because it is too small to notice. I have done the calculation. It would be instructive (to you) to also perform that calculation. If you can. I find people who want to argue this are innumerate.
I don't understand your point about Enoch. A full Moon, of necessity, occurs on the opposite side of the Earth from the Sun. The Moon and the Sun are 180 degrees apart. It will necessarily rise when the Sun sets. Always. It is not a miraculous sign; it is a consequence of orbital geometry. Why do you fix on this? It is akin to making a point about why the sky is blue. So what?
No map can be presented on a flat surface (!) without significant distortion (unless the area mapped is so small as to be almost flat). The only fully accurate map would be that presented on a globe. We have always known that. That is one of the early proofs of the sphericity of the Earth, that large-scale maps cannot be faithfully rendered as a flat geometry.
Do the scriptures define the principles of geometry? Or of mathematics? Or of chemistry? Or of physics? Nevertheless, they are true and faithful. The Creation itself is the Word of God and we are enjoined to pay attention to it as well as to Scripture. And why would I have any trouble with Biblical creation? There is nothing in it that conflicts with what we see about us.
Actually, we should have about 15 nights with no Moon, so you really don't understand what it means for the Moon to orbit the Earth. But, in compensation, we have 15 days with a Moon.
The semi-major axis of the Moon's orbit around the Earth is about 384,400 km (it is an elliptical orbit). The semi-major axis of the Earth's orbit around the Sun is about 149,598,000 km (or 93 million miles). So, yes, it is about 0.257% of the Sun's distance.
The Moon is not synchronized with our "spin" (daily rotation). It's own day is synchronized with its orbital period, which is why it constantly faced toward us. Neither are the stars synchronized with our "spin," though their reference position relative to local midnight moves 360 degrees / 365 days = 0.986 degree per day. They are not moving; we are. Their apparent rotation through the day is 360 degrees / 24 hours = 15 degrees / hour. You have to understand that, for us, the stars are "fixed." The cosmos is not rotating at all. The stars' actual movements are so small, they can't be detected unless a century or so has passed.
Learning anything yet?
I learned that believers in the textbook wave all the problems away by imagining that unfathomable distances take care of it all magically.
Kinda like the theory of evolution which is totally impossible also becomes a science "fact" when you throw billions of years of time at it.
You think light can travel thousands of light-years virtually in a straight line, while you spin at 1000 mph, having no centrifugal force, and you can see pin points of light in the sky. Just because they're so far away.
You know. Enoch wrote about Earth's design, and the courses of the sun and moon. Also how the stars move.
He wrote that the full moon would be rising in the east while the sun is setting this coming Passover.
Whether you regard this scripture as truth or not, it's evidence among lots of archeology we could visit, that proves the ancients had no need for a NASA to spend billions of dollars to produce crappy special effects and play with computers - to tell them how the cosmos rotates around us. As a clock the way God made it.
Btw, the moon is not missing for half of the month on earth.
The distances are not unfathomable. They are finite and measured. Get a grip and live with them. Nothing in common with the notion of "evolution."
Do you have any reason to think that light does not travel in a straight line, at a speed that makes anything terrestrial seem like no movement at all? Of course we have centrifugal acceleration. If you would ever take the trouble to calculate it, you would find that it is so tiny, we cannot sense it. But it does make a difference if we launch rockets eastward or westward. We see points of light because that is all our retinas can register for such a distant object having such a small angular diameter. This is why we have telescopes, to magnify their image.
Enoch is what? An astronomer? Did he make observations? You don't even quote him. A full moon always rises in the east. A moon of any sort always rises in the east. The Sun rises in the east, in fact. This is supposed to be impressive?
I see you have given up on our discussion thread, and have fallen back on your baseless assertions. There are no crappy special effects and computer play, just your profound ignorance.
The Moon is never missing, but half the time we see it in daylight and half the time we see it at night, depending on whether it is nearer the sun than Earth or farther from the sun than Earth. I'm sorry you missed out on 3rd grade.
oh it is a very real problem that you think you can see light that traveled millions of miles straight at a spinning ball that you're riding on. The problem gets worse with greater distance and speeds. It doesn't vanish. And centrifugal force pushes away from the axis but gravity pushes toward the center. No problem there either I guess?
You're thinking that gravity is perfectly counter-balancing CF wherever you happen to be standing I suppose?
I have no problem with light travelling straight. Actually all of my observations make a whole lot more sense on the Earth God describes than the stories the "fool on the hill" tells himself. (Beatles reference, good song)
The significance of Enoch is this: He wrote that the Full Moon would be rising at sunset. That's not just saying it comes up on the East. It's timing. He was not an astronomer. He was a prophet. Refresh your memory, read Jude. Jude quotes Enoch and calls him "prophet of God", "seventh from Adam". This is pretty high endorsement. Plus Jesus said "as in the days of Noah". It would seem they expected us to be familiar with Enoch's writings.
I work in GIS - geographical information - (among other things). You probably have more formal education than I do in GIS. You should know that a map can be modeled or wrapped onto any shape. Math can model. It doesn't make the model necessarily real.
So I believe the scriptures. If you can believe in a virgin birth then you should have no trouble with biblical creation.
There is no problem. You describe no problem. You wave your hands and claim there is a problem. Light travels at 186,000 miles per second. The Earth is standing still by comparison, but we can measure Doppler shifts to determine effects of relative velocity along the line of sight.
Centrifugal force is smaller than gravity, by a lot, but it is able to produce the oblateness causing the equatorial diameter to be greater than the polar diameter. We don't notice it, as I said, because it is too small to notice. I have done the calculation. It would be instructive (to you) to also perform that calculation. If you can. I find people who want to argue this are innumerate.
I don't understand your point about Enoch. A full Moon, of necessity, occurs on the opposite side of the Earth from the Sun. The Moon and the Sun are 180 degrees apart. It will necessarily rise when the Sun sets. Always. It is not a miraculous sign; it is a consequence of orbital geometry. Why do you fix on this? It is akin to making a point about why the sky is blue. So what?
No map can be presented on a flat surface (!) without significant distortion (unless the area mapped is so small as to be almost flat). The only fully accurate map would be that presented on a globe. We have always known that. That is one of the early proofs of the sphericity of the Earth, that large-scale maps cannot be faithfully rendered as a flat geometry.
Do the scriptures define the principles of geometry? Or of mathematics? Or of chemistry? Or of physics? Nevertheless, they are true and faithful. The Creation itself is the Word of God and we are enjoined to pay attention to it as well as to Scripture. And why would I have any trouble with Biblical creation? There is nothing in it that conflicts with what we see about us.