I’m absolutely certain that God knows what He means and also that we’re still trying to figure out what that is (or isn’t)…
2 Likes
What??? Unlikely Moses wrote anything and later translations in Greek/English were excellent as god would guide that. why not?
I’m betting we didn’t even scratch the surface.
2 Likes
Which translation did God guide?
3 Likes
Any common translation is excekllent. if they were that different even that woul;d bring review.
God would ensure we got the words right.
Then why have we not?
4 Likes
I just wanted to say that no one calls it the visible light spectrum yet we all know what we are talking about.
universal truths are better understood thru parable rather than scientific methods.
isnt it awesome how water falling from the sky refracts perpetual light . a teardrop shape acting as a prism. who would have thought.
because even with all this technology we are unable to compute how we perceive different hues and if we experience these hues in the same way.
because even if we have figured out the exact wavelength produce a specific hue the only way to scientifically test any of these theories out is thru language and opinion.
science tells us we didnt even perceive blue until modern times.
for all our profound thoughts we have trouble believing in what we dont see with our eyes. things within our visible light spectrum.
Im not saying youre wrong,different is not contradicting
I like to see this moment as God allowing humanity to see the world in a different light. That even if Yes and No are from God and everything else is not. God does not see us or want us to see the world as black and white not the grey of indifference either but thru obedience and grateful we can see the beauty of creation and all its shades at a truer purer tone 
If “very rare” is some new wording of “every time”, then, I suppose it does.
Refraction happens when ever there is an interface between media of different optical densities. One could maybe even make a case that God has no way to prevent it whilst preserving much of anything else about physics, but that’s a chat perhaps best reserved for the prompt. At any rate, what decides whether or not we see a rainbow is that difference in refractive index (that controls the angular radius of the bow), how high the sun is in the sky (that controls the axis of the bow’s centre – if the sun is too high, the entire bow would have to be below the horizon), and whether or not there is quite enough water in the air for the colours to be bright enough (there’d be a bow even for the thinnest of mists, but our eyes are only so sensitive). Whether the water droplets that produce the rainbow are quite large enough to be decidedly falling to the ground makes literally zero difference.
1 Like
Welcome to Peaceful Science, @osynv. I hope you will find this an interesting place to read and participate.
Perhaps one of the most common questions here on Peaceful Science is “What is the evidence for that?” Can you provide a citation? And are you saying that until modern times the cones in our human retinas were not yet able to perceive light within the wavelengths English speakers label as blue?
As a has-been linguist, I can certainly attest that many cultures (both ancient and modern) do not have a distinctive word in their language that is basically the equivalent of the English word “blue”. Instead, they tend to lump that color into a more general label that in English we might translate as “some other” or “nondescript” or . . . . [I’m struggling to provide good equivalents.] I recall a particular Amazonian tribe which had no distinctive term for the color blue until a travelling salesman in a canoe brought a pile of thrift-store discard clothing to their village. Within weeks a word for blue began to become part of their vocabulary.]
Of course, the fact that some languages lack a distinctive term for the color English speakers would call BLUE does not mean that those people are unable to perceive with their eyes the color blue. So I’m curious to confirm that I’m understanding what you are stating.
2 Likes
Many languages don’t distinguish between blue and green, at least not using single words, and linguists tend to translate their color word as “grue”. But I bet they have descriptive terms that distinguish things anyway, just as we do with various shades of blue. They could have “grass grue” and “cornflower grue” just as we have “midnight blue” and “sky blue”.
Even some languages that have a word for “blue” don’t consider the sky to be that color. They call it “white” or something similar. And also fueling the claim is Homer’s use of “wine-dark” to describe the sea. Whatever did he mean by that?
3 Likes