If the rainbow didn't exist would scientists wonder why?

.

I had the enjoyment of driving through "the end of the rainbow" the other day. Very neat experience.

As for other comments here:

There were no rainbows previous to the flood, because it had never rained before! ... Genesis 2:6 ... King James Bible ... "But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground."

Previous to the flood, everything that grew was watered by this mist. NOT by rainfall.

.

.

If the rainbow didn't exist before Noah then you're god would have made an exception to the laws of physics. Why would he have done that. Did he plan for the mass murder of humanity right from the day of creation. And yes we would have missed it right from the publication of "The Book of Optics" by Alhazen the Arab scientist in the 11Th century.

Now here is something to ponder-

Science claims that the speed of light is a constant for a given medium.

The law of refraction is based on a change of velocity (Snell's Law).

So either science is wrong about the speed of light, or they are wrong on why a rainbow happens!

Take your pick- science is wrong some where!

The acceptance of the fixed velocity of light is a primary building block for computing the size of the universe and what is happening- take away this basic assumption and the model falls apart.

I just know that science in fact can not explain the rainbow the explanation fails because it happens!

Just like bumble bees can't fly according to science- but they do!

"If the rainbow didn't exist would scientists wonder why?"

I'll bet that sounded brilliant in your head.

"It's easy for atheists to observe Gods creation and call it nature"

Yeah and it's easy for godsters to observe nature creation and call it a god thing.

"We observe the rainbow (that God used as a token of a promise given to Noah) and can explain why it appears using science."

Yeah... nothing magical - simple light refraction.

"But if the rainbow didn't appear in the sky after a rain shower no one would even miss it."

True but scientists would wonder why the light didn't change like it was supposed to.

"God made it all and we can only observe it."

AND know why it looks the way it looks.

It reveals that you presume, for yourself, a form of omniscience... thinking that goes like this: If this were understandable, then I should be able to understand/imagine it.

I do/can NOT understand/imagine it therefore it is NOT understandable and since it is NOT understandable (by me), it logically follows that it cannot be 'true'.

Therefore... GODDIDIT.

~

If mankind had not created all of the gods in a vain attempt to come to terms with, identify with and explain that which they thought was significant in life but did not understand then none of the gods would have existed. There is a big difference between an ignorant idea and an actual (and common) natural event.

Only if science shows their should be one. Thats what happened with black holes and dark matter. Science said it should be there and science wondered where. So, if science showed, that a rainbow should be, science would wonder where it is.

You cannot wonder about something you are not aware of...

The stars were wondered about because they could be seen, so an explanation was sought.

Similarly,the source of disease was sought...resulting in the discovery of germs and even viruses.

You do know a rainbow is caused by sunlight being refracted through raindrops right?

I can't determine if you are thinking backward or sideways, but I can understand that you are not thinking forwardly.

No.

Hate evil, love good, And establish justice in the gate! (Amos 5:15)

MARANATHA! Come, Lord Jesus, COME!