Image of the day

Captured by
Terry Wood

Jupiter (clearer) Nov 5th 2023 w/Mewlon 180c

My Account

New to Astromart?

Register an account...

Need Help?

Posts Made By: Phillip Jones

February 12, 2003 04:58 AM Forum: Equipment Talk

OIII Filter - what's it do?

Posted By Phillip Jones

I see OIII filters for sale everywhere, but no descriptions. What's it's purpose? I have a Tak FS-102 and a C9.25...would an OIII filter enhance my viewing with either or both of these scopes?

Thanks,

-Phil (aka Filter-Challenged)

February 18, 2003 12:20 AM Forum: CCD Imaging and Processing/Solar System

Red screen cover for laptop?

Posted By Phillip Jones

Anyone know where I can purchase a red screen cover for my laptop?

Thanks,
-Phil

February 19, 2003 12:45 AM Forum: Equipment Talk

PowerMate and sharpness

Posted By Phillip Jones

For those of you who are sticklers for image sharpness and clarity, do any of the TV PowerMates meet your standards (I'm primarily interested in the 2.5x)?

I have a Celestron Ultima Barlow. For me, it is good for only two things: looking at the moon and manual guiding. Anything beyond the moon and the barlow destroys all image sharpness/clarity...even in my ED and Flourite refractors.

I have never had the chance to try a PowerMate, which lack of ownership in a large astronomy club might be a sign that they are not worth the mulah.

Any feedback would be greatly appreciated.

-Phil

February 19, 2003 04:11 AM Forum: Religion

Origins debate: scientific or theological issue?

Posted By Phillip Jones

The Genesis text has become a modern day hermeneutical dilemma in the U.S. (hermenutics is the study of interpretation). The authorial intent of the text is dismissed by literalists, and as a result the literal interpretation has become a filter for validating scientific methodologies. Hence the numerous viewpoints expressed by Creationists equating evolution with atheism.

Theistic Evolution advocates accept two things (one from the scientific arena and one from the theologcial arena):

1) The high probabilities associated with the cosmological sciences pointing to evolution, combined with a Divine Designer concept.
2) An understanding that the Genesis text holds a much deeper meaning than what literalists have to offer: the text served as a theological response to the neighboring Babylonian and Egyptian cosmologies as a means of distinguishing the Hebrew God as the sole and infinite creator, with creation being intentional, and God loving His creation.

How Creationism took off in the U.S. and has turned into a full fledged structure of Christian fundamentalism is quite a phenomenon. The Creationists totally bypass the hermeneutical issue with the text and go straight for the scientific jugular.

It all comes down to interpretation. Creationist opt for a prima-facie approach to the text rather than seeking what was really intended in the text. Can you blame them? After all, arts and theatre are dying in our American culture...we are an information culture that doesn't like to have to read beyond the print.

We saw the Creationists rise in the 1980's and begin to fall in the latter 90's. Many of the Ph.D. folk who carried the Creationist banner in the 80's have abandoned the cause and moved on to a newer breed of thinking: Intelligent Design. While ID takes on a more open view of biblical interpretation and a more strategic approach to the scientific aspect, many of its following cling to an Old Earth literalist interpretation.

Here is a great article (2 links to it) by Dr. Conrad Hyers, author of "The Meaning of Creation"

http://www.religion-online.org/cgi-bin/relsearchd.dll/showarticle?item_id=1332
http://homepages.wmich.edu/~korista/literalism.htm

In conclusion, while the media, the extremists on both sides of the debate, and the fundamentalist pulpits will have you thinking that the debate centers around interpretation of scientific data, the real issue is with the interpretation of the Genesis text. Interestingly, there is a large knowledge gap between the scholarly realm and the pulpit realm. The scholars understand the role of the Genesis text, but usually do not speak out because it is the fundamentalists who are contributing funds to their employer. Scholars don't want to upset the donors.

Thus, this spiral will continue for many more years.

-Phil

February 19, 2003 05:08 AM Forum: Takahashi

Posted By Phillip Jones

Anyone know what the backorder status is on the TOA-130? I am thinking of getting one.

March 1, 2003 04:03 AM Forum: Takahashi

New NJP mount question

Posted By Phillip Jones

I received my new NJP Temma mount today. It looks fantastic. However, it didn't come with a manual. Nor did it come with a disk or CD for the software. Are these items missing, or is there something I don't understand with regard to the mount connecting to my computer?

THanks,
-Phil

October 27, 2003 06:51 PM Forum: Takahashi

Tak FM40 focuser

Posted By Phillip Jones

Anyone using the Takahashi FM40 focusing device? I am looking for an alternative to knife-edge for my Mamiya 645 and Nikon FM3. The FM40 was suggested, but I can't find any locate any info on it.

-Phil

December 3, 2003 05:13 AM Forum: Eyepieces

Scopetronix 14mm and/or 18mm

Posted By Phillip Jones

I am looking at purchasing one or both of these strictly for visual use. Any feedback would be wonderful. I have the UO Konig II 16mm, which has the poor edge performance (I emailed UO since it is under warranty, but no reply).

THanks!
-Phil

December 26, 2003 05:04 AM Forum: TeleVue

Diff between TV101 and NP101

Posted By Phillip Jones

What's the difference between the TV101 and NP101?

Thanks,
-Phil

April 25, 2004 01:51 PM Forum: Religion

Genesis 1 -- the deeper meaning PART I

Posted By Phillip Jones

Historically, the creation controversy stems from disagreement over scientific method, which is deemed as the crux of the debate. Yet, little or no attention is given to the debate surrounding the interpretation dilemma of the Genesis creation text, which some deem as the real crux.

Advocates of interpreting Genesis literally view the first creation account (Genesis 1:1-2:3) as a documentary on how God created, and the second creation account (Genesis 2:4-9) is either ignored, or its existence as a separate account is denied since it contains a different chronology. Opponents to the literalist view argue that defining the literary genre of the first account as historical narrative is a misunderstanding of the role of the text.

Discussion of views other than those dependent upon a literal interpretation prompts an immediate concern—fear that a non-literal interpretation invalidates the Genesis story. But there is one interpretation that finds a higher value in the story. During the nearly half-century of debate, the spotlight has focused almost solely on the literal interpretation of the first account, thus leaving the other interpretation virtually unknown. Many do not realize that some evangelical scholars contend that the Genesis creation accounts hold a deeper and more powerful meaning than what is offered in a literal interpretation.

In the first exilic era (time that the Hebrews were in exile), the Hebrew people were exposed to the Egyptian religious beliefs, whereas they were exposed to the Babylonian religion during the second exilic period. The creation accounts and deity hierarchies of both religions shared some commonalities: they were polytheistic, the deities were both good and evil, objects in the universe were deities, and creation was unintentional. Similarities between the first Genesis account and the Babylonian account, known as the Enuma Elish, are stronger than similarities with the Egyptian account. Thus, it is believed the first Genesis account was written during the second exilic era, and the second account was written during the first exilic era.

This does not mean that the Hebrew author(s) borrowed cosmological concepts from the neighboring religions. Instead, the Hebrew creation accounts are recognized as theological responses to the neighboring cosmologies. Each of the Genesis creation accounts served as a powerful contrast against the polytheistic backdrop of its respective counterpart by defining God as acting alone, distinguishing the objects of the universe as part of His handiwork (e.g. the sun and moon), and by defining creation as intentional and personal. Thus, the role of the Genesis text is theological allegory, not scientific or historical narrative.

Continued in Part II...