Falsifying a young Universe. (re: Supernova 1987A)

Yes time here can be measured. Notice it is here.There IS no distance regardless of time! Time is essential is all distance. At least here in our spacetime where there is time. Is this really all that hard to get?

That was a long post. Let me at least address the issue of where time is in parallax. The mods are already threatening me here with suspensions. You think anyone could debate here in any honest way??!! Ha.Anyhow time is part of spacetime. You with me so far? If then time is part of space...spacetime...the when we take a slice of space for a base line, that has to include time.

You get old. You take a train ride and it takes time. Everything takes time. That'll do er I guess. Even if we did not measure it, time goes by. The squirrel in your yard will die. The skunks will grow bigger.... Ok, fine, give man a little pat on the back. He made rolex watches and stuff. You see how long they take. So you cannot measure time in the distant universe? Those who believe in God attribute that to Him first.Edited by Admin, : Fix quote.

The 'planets happen to be almost the exact size of these....https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLyBG4mqZ3s

Well, let's start out by asking if movement in all cases requires the same time?

Try to remember it is the claims of the standard model of cosmology, and science that we are asking someone to defend. Try to offer more than bad attitude.

Guess who posed the question you rudely refuse to answer?

Or with the cycles of the moon and etc man did not devise. If man is there he can measure it how he likes. If a money was noting time maybe it would have more to do with cycles of nature or something. What is time, you ask? Science doesn't know. If you claim it does then tell us. The isotopes being looked at. Finally someone admitting they have no clue. Well, there was the bits about new moons, and years too. If Adam lived 930 years or so, then one assumes a year was a thing that they were familiar with.Edited by time, : No reason given.

I was talking about the size of the objects going round something else, not the orbit patterns.
If we look at the link hereForbidden - Stack Exchange.....we see that objects can be quite small, and still have orbits due to gravity. Then there is the question of what gravity may be like if time and space are different! Then there is the question of what atomic orbits may be like if fundamental forces start to be different...etc. The deeper we look at the issue the more we see you don't know.

The pictures of the atoms and the exoplanets were about the same size. You make too much of the comparison. Besides my last post dealt with that...

I notice I was suspended, guess I missed it as I didn't post for a few days. I am suspending my posts here to punish you for awhile. Fraudulent biased mods will no longer receive responses from me either. Ha,

quote:

---

As long as there are no issues while acting like the stars are far away, science will continue to act as if the stars are far away.

---

Kids have no issues acting like Santa will come down the chimney.

Like you had a choice.

quote:

---

We have hard evidence for how far away stars are..

---

Let's see it. You seem to believe you do. Ha.

Not sure how you think space in our solar system is without time? The base line for the measurement is from the solar system you know, tens of millions of miles. To make that slice of space and time equal in your mind with other lines you draw to a star is assuming time exists not just on the base line, but all the way to the star and that is not known, only believed. So it is not known after all.