Posts Made By: John Theodossy

Wes,

WOW . UNBELIEVABLE shot.

Next time you're out can you get a shot of Armstrong's footprint for me?

John

Hi Larry,

My question did not mean to imply that one without religion is one without morals. In fact, I meant it assuming quite the opposite. Most people, whether religious or not, have an internal sense regarding "right " and "wrong". What I was more interested in was where does one derive this internalized moral sense. For example, some of the above posts refer to the "societal" nature of morals where the "morals" are based on the current prevailing social structure. Religious individuals more often have a more "absolute" belief in what is "right" and "wrong" based on the specific teachings of their chosen religion.

In response to your examples I would argue that someone who only do the "right" thing to get into heaven or avoid hell is not actually practicing their religion. If this is someones only motivation, they have probably missed the fundamental teaching of the religion in question. Likewise, while "atonement" and "forgiveness" are a part of many religions, I would suggest that one who commits mis-deeds because they "can" has probably missed the fundamental teachings of the religion in question.

To Paul,
I like the "long tongs" comparison, and it is fairly accurate. The reason for this approach was not to be vague or to mask my own beliefs, but to avoid a discussion on specific points. For example, I was not interested in trying to define "right" and "wrong", nor imply that there is even is an absolute. I am more interested in where individuals derive their belief systems. For religious people, the origins of these beliefs most often comes from the teachings of their chosen religion. I am interested in where those without the specific reference point (eg the "Bible", the "Koran" etc.) derive their moral system.

I appreciate everyones responses so far.

John Theodossy

Hi Ben,

I just did the same, but have not yet recieved the mount. I wasn't sure if the saddle-plate was included so thanks for the heads-up that it does not. I will get one from scoestuff (http://www.scopestuff.com/). They have 3 versions (a short, a long, and a reinforced multi-hole version). I have had several good purchases from scopestuff.

John Theodossy

Hi Andrew,

While I cannot attest to the accuracy or authenticity of this site, they at least present the data in an apparently unbiased way. It is interesting information broken down in a variety of ways.

http://www.adherents.com/

John

Hi Andre,

The SAC line is a pretty good "bang for the buck". They have 2 main cameras, the SAC7b is a one shot color based on a modified web cam. The SAC8 is a supersensitive B&W imager based on a modified Sony security camera. Cost for the 7b is around $350, and for the 8 around $550. Only downside I have encountered with my SAC8 is that it is only an 8-bit device vs 16-bit for most of the others. I have been able to mostly overcome this limitation in post-processing.

You can check-out some images from the SAC8 on my website, as well as go through several other people's web pages through the web ring. Also, there are a bunch of SAC camera images from both cameras at: http://www.vela.net/Gallery/

Hope this is helpful

John Theodossy
http://geocities.com/myastrostuff/

Kegan,
A wonderful image. I'm not sure I made it any better, but a little different look. I'm sure others can do better.

John Theodossy
http://geocities.com/myastrostuff/

Nice image. How do you like the Sigma lens? I have been looking at it for regular as well as astro-photography. From your image, it looks like it does a pretty good job.

Thanks
John Theodossy
http://www.geocities.com/myastrostuff/

Hi Darrell,

Like Randy said, you can get some short captures images in Alt/Az. Depending on the sensitivity of the device you are using and your local sky glow, this may be all you need to put together some nice images. You can stack several "short" exposure's together to effectively increase the depth of your image.

I have a few images on my website of images captured in Alt/Az, and they are not limited to the moon and planets. I have been able to get mag11 galaxies in alt/az. If you are interested you can check-out my website and look on the "SAC8 Deepsky" page.

John Theodossy
http://geocities.com/myastrostuff/

Hi Paul

You have succeeded in completely overloading my brain, trying to contemplate God and the infinite all in one question .

So here's my try at getting my brain around it:

If our space-time is infinite, then any possible event (no matter how improbable) has or will occur (yeah, I know you already said this in your question). By extension, in a truly infinite system, there is no impossible event and any/all events have some non-zero probability, and therefore every possible event must occur (either it already has or it will in the future). So if every event must occur in a truly infinite system, and the existence of God is a possible event, the existence of God has either occurred or will occur.

Everyone have a headache yet? If not, my next thought goes like this. If our space-time is infinite and God does not yet exist, he/she/it must exist at some point in the future by the above argument. Now, if God does not yet exist but develops at some point in the future and has the characteristics generally attributed to him/her/it, he will also not be bound by our space-time limitations and will be able to exist not only in the future, but also in present and past.

So in an infinite space-time the existence of God is not only possible it is inevitable. And God will exist throughout the space-time.

Now my head really hurts, and I am putting on my asbestos underwear awaiting responses .

John Theodossy

Hi Bill,

I agree with your point that if a demand is being made by the religious folks that others must accept their beliefs, the standard of evidence should be higher. What I perceive here in the group, however seems different to me. The opinions of the religious folks are solicited. A question is posed and people give their views and experiences. These views are often then discounted as "invalid" because they are subjective in nature.

As to the pain of a kidney stone, I did not mean to give the impression that I thought pain was not real just because it is subjective, quite the contrary. But what you describe is empathy. When you see your friend experiencing the pain you experience empathy (also a subjective event), but you do not actually feel the pain sensation of your friend. Both your friends pain and your empathy are subjective events, experienced only you and your friend. They cannot be measured objectively by an outside observer. Again, I am not presenting this as my belief that pain is not real just because it is subjective. I meant it as an analogy to show that everyone accepts "subjective evidence" in some circumstances, so it is a double standard to then say religion/spirituality/supernatural is invalid simply because it is subjective.

John Theodossy