Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 109 (8803 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 11-20-2017 10:26 AM
354 online now:
Coragyps, Diomedes, DrJones*, dwise1, halibut, Heathen, jar, Percy (Admin), RAZD, Tangle (10 members, 344 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: jaufre
Upcoming Birthdays: DC85
Post Volume:
Total: 822,689 Year: 27,295/21,208 Month: 1,208/1,714 Week: 51/365 Day: 7/44 Hour: 0/0

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
394041
42
4344Next
Author Topic:   Falsifying a young Universe. (re: Supernova 1987A)
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19217
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 616 of 655 (823229)
11-07-2017 5:23 PM
Reply to: Message 611 by starman
11-07-2017 3:54 PM


Re: A bridge to the stars
Hey, science never knew the rings already supposed existed before the event!! They predicted a black hole...sorry none showed up.

Fail #25 -- still no substantiation for your vapid assertions.

Enjoy


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 611 by starman, posted 11-07-2017 3:54 PM starman has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 625 by starman, posted 11-08-2017 8:18 PM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19217
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 617 of 655 (823230)
11-07-2017 5:25 PM
Reply to: Message 612 by starman
11-07-2017 3:55 PM


Re: Another starman failure
Hey, science never knew the rings already supposed existed before the event!! They predicted a black hole...sorry none showed up.

Irrelevant, you still fail to provide any evidence for your fantasies.

Fail #26

Enjoy

Edited by RAZD, : losing count of the failures to support the assertions


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 612 by starman, posted 11-07-2017 3:55 PM starman has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 624 by starman, posted 11-08-2017 8:16 PM RAZD has responded

  
Stile
Member
Posts: 3036
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004
Member Rating: 3.1


(3)
Message 618 of 655 (823254)
11-08-2017 9:00 AM
Reply to: Message 614 by starman
11-07-2017 4:05 PM


Re: A bridge to the stars
starman writes:

I think Jesus will show us one day, and the (Nobel Prize) nonsense will be extinct.

Could be, sure.
And if this does happen, then Science will acknowledge that it happens and adjust accordingly.
However, if it doesn't happen, then Science will make progress where progress will happen and not stutter in the wrong direction.

A win-win situation for Science.

Don't worry about it, you will never be able to find out on your own anyhow.

Their normal is too small to be able to punch thier way out of the fishbowl.

This is what was said about those trying to build computers when they used to take up entire warehouses just to be as powerful as a mostly-useless calculator.
But progress continued despite the foolish notions, and look where we are now! Where will be tomorrow? Best to keep making progress and see.

No progress has been made determining if time exists in the far universe, it has been assumed.

I don't think you understand.

Making assumptions is exactly how progress is made.

1 - Make an assumption.
2 - Carry on as if that assumption is true.
3 - Don't run into any issues? Continue with assumption and make more assumptions and make progress.
4 - Run into an issue? Stop and understand problem, discard faulty assumption, make a different assumption and continue to make progress.

Making assumptions isn't the fault of science, it's the massive horsepower under the hood.
Testing and then discarding or verifying those assumptions is the steering wheel and front wheels.

Together, they assure that progress is made and in the right direction.

If you remove the assumption making... you can still steer but you'll never go anywhere. Stuck in the mud.
If you remove the testing/discarding/verifying... you can move "forward" but you have no idea if you're going the right way. Always end up lost.

Both are required, and they must work together.

Stars being far away uses both, and (currently) it is known that stars are far away as well as it is known that your computer runs software.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 614 by starman, posted 11-07-2017 4:05 PM starman has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 619 by RAZD, posted 11-08-2017 9:53 AM Stile has acknowledged this reply
 Message 623 by starman, posted 11-08-2017 8:16 PM Stile has responded

    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19217
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 619 of 655 (823255)
11-08-2017 9:53 AM
Reply to: Message 618 by Stile
11-08-2017 9:00 AM


the scientific method
Making assumptions isn't the fault of science, it's the massive horsepower under the hood.
Testing and then discarding or verifying those assumptions is the steering wheel and front wheels.

It's a little more complicated than that, instead of assumption we use hypothesis, which are concepts that attempt to explain evidence (rather than just assume something, like say that there was a "previous nature") in a way that is testable, then we have the iterative test and tweak process:

An hypothesis that passes a test becomes a theory, and testing of the theory continues so that it can be tweaked and poked and prodded to improve it.

Theories are never proven, they just go on being tested, however they can be falsified or invalidated if they fail any tests and the theory cannot be tweaked and poked and prodded to include the results of the test.

Advances in science are made when theories are falsified and a new and better explanation is produced as a result.

Together, they assure that progress is made and in the right direction.

If you remove the assumption making... you can still steer but you'll never go anywhere. Stuck in the mud.
If you remove the testing/discarding/verifying... you can move "forward" but you have no idea if you're going the right way. Always end up lost.

Both are required, and they must work together.

Stars being far away uses both, and (currently) it is known that stars are far away as well as it is known that your computer runs software.

Indeed, and super novae are of interest as they show how elements heavier than hydrogen and helium are made. Close ones like SN1987A that can be seen in a telescope and that have a known distance are useful in testing several theories, including how the remnant star and gasses cool and what elements are involved (such as cobalt and iron).

Enjoy


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 618 by Stile, posted 11-08-2017 9:00 AM Stile has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 622 by starman, posted 11-08-2017 8:14 PM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 7263
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 620 of 655 (823270)
11-08-2017 1:04 PM
Reply to: Message 609 by starman
11-07-2017 3:51 PM


Re: A bridge to the stars
starman writes:

All streets are on earth. Here we know distances.

We know the distances in space fro the same reasons, because we can see them.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 609 by starman, posted 11-07-2017 3:51 PM starman has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 621 by starman, posted 11-08-2017 8:13 PM Taq has responded

  
starman
Inactive Member


Message 621 of 655 (823296)
11-08-2017 8:13 PM
Reply to: Message 620 by Taq
11-08-2017 1:04 PM


Re: A bridge to the stars
You can't see time or that it exists the same as here. You only assumed a bunch of things and believed.

My Blog where comments and debate are welcome
https://mountaintwentyone.wixsite.com/home/blog

This message is a reply to:
 Message 620 by Taq, posted 11-08-2017 1:04 PM Taq has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 636 by Taq, posted 11-09-2017 12:33 PM starman has responded

  
starman
Inactive Member


Message 622 of 655 (823297)
11-08-2017 8:14 PM
Reply to: Message 619 by RAZD
11-08-2017 9:53 AM


Re: the scientific method
We can make stuff on the space station. Just because there are some elements where stars are does not mean any of your fables are true.

My Blog where comments and debate are welcome
https://mountaintwentyone.wixsite.com/home/blog

This message is a reply to:
 Message 619 by RAZD, posted 11-08-2017 9:53 AM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

  
starman
Inactive Member


Message 623 of 655 (823298)
11-08-2017 8:16 PM
Reply to: Message 618 by Stile
11-08-2017 9:00 AM


Re: A bridge to the stars
You cannot compare computers to the far past nature on earth, or to unknown deep space. Irrelevant.

My Blog where comments and debate are welcome
https://mountaintwentyone.wixsite.com/home/blog

This message is a reply to:
 Message 618 by Stile, posted 11-08-2017 9:00 AM Stile has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 635 by Stile, posted 11-09-2017 11:46 AM starman has responded

  
starman
Inactive Member


Message 624 of 655 (823299)
11-08-2017 8:16 PM
Reply to: Message 617 by RAZD
11-07-2017 5:25 PM


Re: Another starman failure
Showing science prophesied falsely is quite relevant.

My Blog where comments and debate are welcome
https://mountaintwentyone.wixsite.com/home/blog

This message is a reply to:
 Message 617 by RAZD, posted 11-07-2017 5:25 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 629 by RAZD, posted 11-09-2017 8:34 AM starman has not yet responded

  
starman
Inactive Member


Message 625 of 655 (823300)
11-08-2017 8:18 PM
Reply to: Message 616 by RAZD
11-07-2017 5:23 PM


Re: A bridge to the stars
Regardless of diversionary blather, it is true that they dd not know the rings were there before the event. You grow shrill.

My Blog where comments and debate are welcome
https://mountaintwentyone.wixsite.com/home/blog

This message is a reply to:
 Message 616 by RAZD, posted 11-07-2017 5:23 PM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

  
starman
Inactive Member


Message 626 of 655 (823301)
11-08-2017 8:19 PM
Reply to: Message 615 by RAZD
11-07-2017 5:22 PM


Re: Starman's total absence of argument via empty assertions
Guess who is in denial here? Have you proved time exists in far space or even addressed the issue?

My Blog where comments and debate are welcome
https://mountaintwentyone.wixsite.com/home/blog

This message is a reply to:
 Message 615 by RAZD, posted 11-07-2017 5:22 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 627 by RAZD, posted 11-09-2017 7:10 AM starman has not yet responded
 Message 630 by RAZD, posted 11-09-2017 9:22 AM starman has not yet responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19217
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 627 of 655 (823317)
11-09-2017 7:10 AM
Reply to: Message 626 by starman
11-08-2017 8:19 PM


Re: Starman's total absence of argument via empty assertions
Message 622: We can make stuff on the space station. Just because there are some elements where stars are does not mean any of your fables are true.

Message 624: Showing science prophesied falsely is quite relevant.

Message 625: Regardless of diversionary blather, it is true that they dd not know the rings were there before the event. You grow shrill.

Message 626: Guess who is in denial here? Have you proved time exists in far space or even addressed the issue?

Failures #27, 28, 29 and 30: not one whit of evidence provided to support your fantasy.

You are the one making the claim, the onus is on you to support it. With evidence.

Without the evidence and the support you comments are worth less than all the ant frass in antarctica.

You are like a moth circling a candle flame.

Your next post will fail also to provide supporting evidence.

Because you don't have any.

Enjoy

Edited by RAZD, : .


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 626 by starman, posted 11-08-2017 8:19 PM starman has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 628 by jar, posted 11-09-2017 8:29 AM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

  
jar
Member
Posts: 29609
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.0


(1)
Message 628 of 655 (823318)
11-09-2017 8:29 AM
Reply to: Message 627 by RAZD
11-09-2017 7:10 AM


Re: Starman's total absence of argument via empty assertions
starman's assertion that "Have you proved time exists in far space or even addressed the issue?" has got to be the stupidest comment I've heard from anyone over five years old in my life; and he may well simply get insulted by what I say and not understand that it is based on pity of him and hope that starman might actually grow up a little.

When we look at "far space" we can see change. It is not always the same. If things change in far space then time exists in far space and everything is not happening all at once.

That is not an assumption but rather a conclusion based on evidence; we observer things in far space changing rather than them never changing therefore time must exist in far space.


My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios My Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 627 by RAZD, posted 11-09-2017 7:10 AM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19217
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 2.4


(1)
Message 629 of 655 (823319)
11-09-2017 8:34 AM
Reply to: Message 624 by starman
11-08-2017 8:16 PM


Re: Another starman failure (#28)
Showing science prophesied falsely is quite relevant.

Nope, first because science progresses through failed predictions ... but second and more to the point:

Can you tell me why the telescopes were watching and videoing to see when the nova wave hit the ring?

It seems that you were lying to claim that scientists did not know the ring was there. Bad starman, now having to fabricate falsehood to play your little game.

You are such a tool for education of others: why creationists have bad arguments and worse arguments, they have no evidence and their purported "science" is inconsistent and frequently contradicts itself.

Enjoy

Edited by RAZD, : .


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 624 by starman, posted 11-08-2017 8:16 PM starman has not yet responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19217
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 2.4


(2)
Message 630 of 655 (823321)
11-09-2017 9:22 AM
Reply to: Message 626 by starman
11-08-2017 8:19 PM


Re: Starman's failure #30 -- another teaching moment
... Have you proved time exists in far space or even addressed the issue?

And here we have another teachable moment on the failures of creationist arguments in general, and starman's argument in particular.

Science doesn't prove things, never has, never will ...

... because there is always the chance that some random anomaly will be discovered that causes a rewrite, either a tweak of the current understanding or a new paradigm that explains not only all the evidence to date but includes the anomaly. Such was the case when Einstein's relativity explained the anomaly of Mercury's orbit around the sun that was not explained by Newton's Law of Gravity.

But more importantly, science doesn't need to prove anything.

Why? Because science and the scientific method build explanations of all the observed evidence, called theories, and the more inclusive a theory is at explaining the evidence the better it reflects what we know.

Theories are approximations of reality, the more those theories are tested and challenged by new information and yet still provide accurate results, the stronger the theory becomes.

That means we can proceed on the basis that those theories will provide usable results until shown otherwise.

ie -- there must be contrary evidence, or evidence of some anomalies not explained by the theory, before we need to consider a new explanation ... because until that point the theory works. Until that point the theory is usable and better than any belief or opinion or fantasy at providing usable results.

This is why creationism continually fails in relation to science.

... Have you proved time exists in far space or even addressed the issue?

So have you provided any evidence of the current knowledge of astronomy to show (A) that it is false or (B) that there is any anomaly in the results?

No? Then we don't need to consider your fantasy, because the current knowledge works in a consistent, congruent, comprehensive manner to provide results as accurate as we currently know is possible.

Does your concept provide any usable results? No? Then we don't need to waste time on it.

Does your concept provide a better explanation of all the astronomical evidence currently known? No? then it is pointless to consider.

This is why starman's comments are such an absolute, complete, and utter failure, post after post after post.

This is also why I can predict, based on the observation of his posts to date, that he will never post any evidence to substantiate his assertion, any evidence that the current understanding is wrong, any evidence of any anomaly that is explained better by his concept.

The only reason for the concept is to support some fantasy related to his personal interpretation of certain bible and scripture passages -- an interpretation that is not even consistent with other christians.

Guess who is in denial here? ...

Coupled with profound ignorance of science and the scientific method.

Enjoy

Edited by RAZD, : No reason given.


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 626 by starman, posted 11-08-2017 8:19 PM starman has not yet responded

  
RewPrev1
...
394041
42
4344Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017