Four gigantic galaxies have been seen crashing into one another in one
of the biggest cosmic collisions ever seen.

A US team of astronomers observed the four-way cosmic smash-up using
Nasa's Spitzer and Chandra space telescopes along with ground-based
observatories.

The clashing galaxies are expected to eventually merge into a single,
behemoth galaxy up to 10 times as massive as our own Milky Way.

Details of the research appear in Astrophysical Journal Letters.

Is this an example of goddidit ?  or is what has been observed well
beyond the primitive ideas and fairy stories that form the basis of
religions?

-- 
********
David WG
********

On Apr 26, 4:01 pm, David Wynne-Griffiths 
wrote:
> Four gigantic galaxies have been seen crashing into one another in one
> of the biggest cosmic collisions ever seen.
>
> A US team of astronomers observed the four-way cosmic smash-up using
> Nasa's Spitzer and Chandra space telescopes along with ground-based
> observatories.
>
> The clashing galaxies are expected to eventually merge into a single,
> behemoth galaxy up to 10 times as massive as our own Milky Way.
>
> Details of the research appear in Astrophysical Journal Letters.
>
> Is this an example of goddidit ?  or is what has been observed well
> beyond the primitive ideas and fairy stories that form the basis of
> religions?
>
> --
> ********
> David WG
> ********

I think it was actually foretold in psalms 7.11
"Thou gatherest upeth all thy glalaxies and haveth them cum together"

On 27 Apr, 02:51, Ken  wrote:
> On Apr 26, 4:01 pm, David Wynne-Griffiths 
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Four gigantic galaxies have been seen crashing into one another in one
> > of the biggest cosmic collisions ever seen.
>
> > A US team of astronomers observed the four-way cosmic smash-up using
> > Nasa's Spitzer and Chandra space telescopes along with ground-based
> > observatories.
>
> > The clashing galaxies are expected to eventually merge into a single,
> > behemoth galaxy up to 10 times as massive as our own Milky Way.
>
> > Details of the research appear in Astrophysical Journal Letters.
>
> > Is this an example of goddidit ?  or is what has been observed well
> > beyond the primitive ideas and fairy stories that form the basis of
> > religions?
>
> > --
> > ********
> > David WG
> > ********
>
> I think it was actually foretold in psalms 7.11
> "Thou gatherest upeth all thy glalaxies and haveth them cum together"- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

And if thy believeth anything in the psalms thou is thicker than the
veritable plank !

************
David WG
************

On Apr 26, 11:47 pm, davidwg  wrote:
> On 27 Apr, 02:51, Ken  wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 26, 4:01 pm, David Wynne-Griffiths 
> > wrote:
>
> > > Four gigantic galaxies have been seen crashing into one another in one> > > of the biggest cosmic collisions ever seen.
>
> > > A US team of astronomers observed the four-way cosmic smash-up using
> > > Nasa's Spitzer and Chandra space telescopes along with ground-based
> > > observatories.
>
> > > The clashing galaxies are expected to eventually merge into a single,
> > > behemoth galaxy up to 10 times as massive as our own Milky Way.
>
> > > Details of the research appear in Astrophysical Journal Letters.
>
> > > Is this an example of goddidit ?  or is what has been observed well
> > > beyond the primitive ideas and fairy stories that form the basis of
> > > religions?
>
> > > --
> > > ********
> > > David WG
> > > ********
>
> > I think it was actually foretold in psalms 7.11
> > "Thou gatherest upeth all thy glalaxies and haveth them cum together"- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> And if thy believeth anything in the psalms thou is thicker than the
> veritable plank !
>
> ************
> David WG
> ************

Max Plank?

The message

from Ken  contains these words:

> Max Plank?

Fred!

-- 
********
David WG
********

On Apr 27, 8:51 am, David Wynne-Griffiths 
wrote:
> The message
> 
> from Ken  contains these words:
>
> > Max Plank?
>
> Fred!
>
> --
> ********
> David WG
> ********

Flintstone?

'Is this an example of goddidit ? or is what has been observed well
beyond the primitive ideas and fairy stories that form the basis of
religions? 
--
******** 
David WG'

REPLY:  Since the Theistic Creator of this Universe has to be OVER and
ABOVE it in POWER and ABILITIES...he is therefore sovereign over the
universe ;  there isnt a thing that goes un-noticed by him . Thats the
kind of personal Creator we are dealing with here.  That might be a very
uncomfortable feeling for those of us who desire NO interference in our
own personal lives on how we wish to live them out.   Could be God
caused them directly to crash into one another, or, could be he set
everything in motion initially for them to finally crash into one
another at this point in history ;  that isnt the issue. The issue is :
He exists, he isnt going away because 8% of the population doesnt want
him to exist due to personal ulterior motives, and each and every one of
us will one day see his incredible splendor when we come face to face
with him (sooner than you want that to  happen if youre into rejecting
him).   To live your life apart from God and not trying to get to know
him better thru personal relationship, is a complete and  utter waste of
the meaning and purpose to ones own life.  Living for SELF interests is
the biggest mistake a willful God rejector could ever make.

And its not 'a primitive' idea...a personal Theistic Creator has been
known by all of mankind thruout the ages including all of the modern
Science Founders and including every child and adult  .  The 'primitive
idea'  is choosing to pretend God isnt needed so one can live out his
lifestyle choices unencumbered by morality.

On Apr 27, 10:41 am, DaveInLakeVi...@webtv.net (Dave in Lake Villa)
wrote:
> 'Is this an example of goddidit ? or is what has been observed well
> beyond the primitive ideas and fairy stories that form the basis of
> religions?
> --
> ********
> David WG'
>
> REPLY:................

Many, if not most of Dimwit Dave's replies, have
nothing to do with the original subject or, after someone made a
detailed and carefully crafted challenge complete with references to
one of his posts, there's usually no reply
He almost never answers a direct question, but instead goes
off on some tangent or leading question about Dog, sex, or religion
completely unrelated to the original subject with the intent to gain
control of the thread
and push HIS point of view?

Well, there a good reason for all this: HE NEVER READS THEM

Why should he?
He already knows no one ever agrees with any of his comments
It's much better, in his mind, to just push his views than to
waste valuable trolling time reading replies to his endless stream of
religious fundy bullshit

David Wynne-Griffiths wrote:
> Four gigantic galaxies have been seen crashing into one another in one
> of the biggest cosmic collisions ever seen.
>
> A US team of astronomers observed the four-way cosmic smash-up using
> Nasa's Spitzer and Chandra space telescopes along with ground-based
> observatories.
>
> The clashing galaxies are expected to eventually merge into a single,
> behemoth galaxy up to 10 times as massive as our own Milky Way.
>
> Details of the research appear in Astrophysical Journal Letters.
>
> Is this an example of goddidit ?  or is what has been observed well
> beyond the primitive ideas and fairy stories that form the basis of
> religions?

Dumbwit talks the talk very well: I'd say that from the way he speaks he 
knows so much about his god; the "Creator", that they regularly socialise, 
he meets with him regularly,  and that they are the best of friends.

...But if this is the case; and indeed everything that Dimwit says is true, 
then Dimwit is a wholly selfish and evil character who, by not allowing us 
to have the single shred of concrete evidence for his claims is condemning 
us, if his claims are indeed true.

Now if Dimwit's god is as Dimwit so assuredly tells us he is; then will 
Dimwit's god not take a rather dim view of Dimwit not disclosing the 
readily-available concrete evidence which will cause us to believe and have 
the same relationship with his "Creator" as that "Creator" intends according 
to Dimwit's own words? Surely, then, in the unlikely case that Dimwit's 
right and we've all got it wrong; if indeed it is the rest of the platoon 
who are marching out of time rather than Dimwit alone, then will Dimwit's 
god not be furious with him for hiding and refusing to disclose the single 
shred of solid concrete evidence that would have made us all believers? 
Thanks to Dimwit maybe thousands of people will be condemned - Yet Dimwit 
thinks he's going to be sitting up in heaven alongside his god and friend 
poking fun at those he refused to allow to believe as we stumble in eternal 
darkness or roast forever in the fires of Hell. If Dimwit's god is real, and 
is as Dimwit says he is; then at best Dimwit's fate will be roasting in 
excrucitaing agony in the hottest parts of Hell for an eternity of 
eternities; if what he preaches is true..

Either Dimwit hates us all so much that he's prepared to deny us the 
salvation which he preaches and suffer the awful consequences - Which makes 
him a masochistic socio/psychopath; or he's just a delusional dishonest 
hate-filled uneducated simpleton grasping at straws and pretending he has 
the longest one without seeing any of the others: Either way he's a loser.

-- 
http://www.kustomkomputa.co.uk
- Personalised Desktop Computers

On Apr 27, 1:22 pm, "Dr.Hal0nf1r£$"
<fem...@nospam.kustomkomputa.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
Either way he's a loser.............

http://www.kustomkomputa.co.uk

And an asshole

Dr.Hal0nf1r£$ wrote:
> 
> ....But if this is the case; and indeed everything that Dimwit says is true, 
> then Dimwit is a wholly selfish and evil character who, by not allowing us 
> to have the single shred of concrete evidence for his claims is condemning 
> us, if his claims are indeed true.

You need to apply a bit of logic here...

There are many competing religions. If any one of these religions 
had any single scrap of evidence then they would declare their hand 
immediately to win outright.

We can safely assume therefore that there cannot be any evidence 
whatsoever.

regards, Ian