I wanted to briefly call attention to Steve Hays’ article over at Triablogue, responding to a conversation going on in the Peter Enns/inerrancy thread here at Greenbaggins.
I didn’t have much to add, except to comment on the old yarn about the “sun standing still” in Joshua. As an aerospace engineer, I can attest that there is nothing inaccurate about a statement like that if you take the observer’s location on earth to be your non-inertial reference frame. Newtonian physics still works just fine, you just have to add in Coriolis and centrifugal forces to account for the fact that your reference frame is not inertial (ie. the earth rotates). So what is the objection from biblical errantists? That it is an “error” for the Book of Joshua to speak in terms of a particular non-inertial reference frame?
-Posted by David Gadbois
davejes1979
glwjohnson
greenbaggins
jeffhutchinson
Wes White
Andrew Webb
paigebritton
Reed Here
reformedmusings
Jason J. Stellman said,
April 10, 2008 at 3:55 pm
“… you just have to add in Coriolis and centrifugal forces to account for the fact that your reference frame is not inertial.”
Well, obviously, but where do we get the plutonium to generate the 1.21 gigiwatts needed to power the flux capacitor?
David Gadbois said,
April 11, 2008 at 12:07 pm
OK, guys. I deleted, and will be deleting anything not having to do with the substance of the post.