Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 88 (8842 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 06-19-2018 11:20 PM
290 online now:
DrJones*, Minnemooseus (Adminnemooseus) (2 members, 288 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: MrTim
Post Volume:
Total: 833,959 Year: 8,782/29,783 Month: 1,029/1,977 Week: 167/380 Day: 51/66 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
45464748
49
50Next
Author Topic:   Falsifying a young Universe. (re: Supernova 1987A)
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 10695
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 721 of 736 (827544)
01-27-2018 2:46 PM
Reply to: Message 713 by creation
01-27-2018 1:35 PM


Re: The Win-Win situation for Science
NoNukes writes:

My explanation tells why our observations do tell us about how time progresses in remote locations. Instead of addressing a single point that I made, what you do here is repeat your denial.

creation writes:

NoNukes ...

The only place you see anything progress is here. Face it. Light we see here is here. No matter where it is from it is seen here, and unfolds in time here. No denying it.

So still no response, only a quote with no words from my message and a repeated denial.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

"Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!

We got a thousand points of light for the homeless man. We've got a kinder, gentler, machine gun hand. Neil Young, Rockin' in the Free World.

Worrying about the "browning of America" is not racism. -- Faith

I hate you all, you hate me -- Faith


This message is a reply to:
 Message 713 by creation, posted 01-27-2018 1:35 PM creation has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 732 by creation, posted 01-28-2018 4:15 PM NoNukes has responded

    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19509
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 722 of 736 (827550)
01-27-2018 3:33 PM
Reply to: Message 714 by creation
01-27-2018 1:39 PM


Re: The Win-Win situation for Science
Nothing posted that dealt with the evidence.

Worthless babble.

Repeated.

Pathetic


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 714 by creation, posted 01-27-2018 1:39 PM creation has not yet responded

  
caffeine
Member
Posts: 1432
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 723 of 736 (827551)
01-27-2018 3:35 PM
Reply to: Message 715 by creation
01-27-2018 1:41 PM


Re: The Win-Win situation for Science
Since all the fishbowl represents is the extend of what man knows and where he has been, the evidence is clear and undeniable and overwhelming. W only been so far, and we only know so much.

Nobody has ever been to the centre of the earth. Do you then think that we have no way of knowing if and how time passes at the centre of the earth? If not, why not?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 715 by creation, posted 01-27-2018 1:41 PM creation has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 731 by creation, posted 01-28-2018 4:12 PM caffeine has not yet responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19509
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 724 of 736 (827552)
01-27-2018 3:35 PM
Reply to: Message 718 by creation
01-27-2018 1:56 PM


Re: The Win-Win and WIN again situation for Science
Another post devoid of evidence.

More irrational babble.

Sad.


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 718 by creation, posted 01-27-2018 1:56 PM creation has not yet responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19509
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 2.3


(1)
Message 725 of 736 (827553)
01-27-2018 3:52 PM
Reply to: Message 719 by creation
01-27-2018 1:59 PM


Re: A couple questions for creation ...
The fishbowl is just a term to describe the solar system and area where man has actually been and has some direct knowledge.

This is totally inadequate. The post this is a purported reply to is:

quote:
Please do not ignore that you have provided no evidence for time existing as it does on earth in deep space.

Please define the limits of your "fishbowl" ... is it your brain? the earth? the solar system? the galaxy? the universe?

Where's the line?

How do you know?

How can we tell if you are right?

You have made similar claims about the past ... what is the limit of our knowledge of the past: is it your lifetime? written history? the archeological history of human existence? the paleontological history of life of earth? the age of the earth? the age of the universe?

Where's the line?

How do you know?

How can we tell if you are right?

If you can't answer these questions, then why should we consider your argument worth considering?

Inquiring minds want to know.


Without answers to those other questions, your reply is meaningless.

The fishbowl is just a term to describe the solar system and area where man has actually been and has some direct knowledge

Where's the line? is it fixed or expanding?

How do you know?

How can we tell if you are right?

How can WE know it is not your brain pretending to think?

What difference is there just outside your imagined boundary? What happens when outside becomes inside?

How do you know?

How can we tell you are right?

How do you know it is not just your imagination?

Note that you have not made a single post that doesn't violate Rule 4:

quote:
Points should be supported with evidence and reasoned argumentation. Address rebuttals through the introduction of additional evidence or by enlarging upon the argument. Do not repeat previous points without further elaboration. Avoid bare assertions.

Total fail.

Again.

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 719 by creation, posted 01-27-2018 1:59 PM creation has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 730 by creation, posted 01-28-2018 4:07 PM RAZD has responded

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 5762
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 726 of 736 (827555)
01-27-2018 6:03 PM
Reply to: Message 720 by creation
01-27-2018 2:00 PM


Re: The Win-Win situation for Science
creation writes:

You want to get into proofs that are outside of science on a science forum?

Absolutely, proofs are proofs regardless of what forum you stick them in. Infallible also - certainty is something that should be really easy to demonstrate.

Let's have at 'em.


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona

"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 720 by creation, posted 01-27-2018 2:00 PM creation has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 729 by creation, posted 01-28-2018 4:04 PM Tangle has responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 17328
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.1


(2)
Message 727 of 736 (827556)
01-27-2018 6:51 PM
Reply to: Message 713 by creation
01-27-2018 1:35 PM


Re: The Win-Win situation for Science
Responding to a number of your messages...

Regarding your Message 713 to NoNukes:

creation in Message 713 writes:

nonukes writes:

...

Still having trouble with quoting, I see.

The only place you see anything progress is here. Face it. Light we see here is here. No matter where it is from it is seen here, and unfolds in time here. No denying it.

You're still babbling the same nonsense. Evidence has been presented that you've ignored. You've instead chosen to repeat the same objection without elaboration like a broken record, and you've presented no evidence yourself, nor even a description of what you think is causing the distant universe to appear to behave the same as the local universe when it really isn't. From the Forum Guidelines:

  1. Points should be supported with evidence and reasoned argumentation. Address rebuttals through the introduction of additional evidence or by enlarging upon the argument. Do not repeat previous points without further elaboration. Avoid bare assertions.

The relevant portion of this rule is, "Do not repeat previous points without further elaboration."

Regarding your Message 714 to RAZD:

creation in Message 714 writes:

razd writes:

..

Still having trouble with that pesky quoting, huh. Well hang in there, you'll get it eventually.

God is not a cheerio God is not a dollar bill, and God is not science.

God is also not the topic of this thread. This is a science thread.

Since God is known by a plethora of infallible proofs outside of science, reason demands that the inability of science to detect God does not mean much outside of science. They just have pathetic detecting ability.

Gee, you should propose a thread to discuss this over at Proposed New Topics.

You have not dealt with time in far space so it is disingenuous to pretend some evidence was offered.

Not time, space-time. And multiple people have described how we know that the distant universe follows the same laws as the local universe. As already pointed out above, you've ignored this information and repeated your original claim without elaboration.

Regarding your Message 715 to Taq:

Still can't get that quoting right, huh. Well, genius, at least you've got consistency going for you.

Since all the fishbowl represents is the extend of what man knows and where he has been, the evidence is clear and undeniable and overwhelming.

You have presented no evidence for a "fishbowl". It's just something you made up, and made up things are easily refuted and overwhelmed.

We only been so far,...

But have seen much further.

...and we only know so much.

True, but even more true of you.

Regarding your Message 716 to Taq:

creation in Message 716 writes:

Nothing about time far away was presented actually.

As already pointed out above, a great deal of evidence was presented that you've ignored, and you've presented no evidence of your own.

Regarding your Message 718 to RAZD:

creation in Message 718 writes:

All that I ask is that you cease and desist ignoring the lack of evidence you have, and admit it is belief.

Pretending that evidence hasn't been presented to you when it most obviously has (just read the thread) is just you demonstrating how irrational the religious can be when their beliefs are threatened.

Every test scientists have made show a continuous pattern of time-space, and there is no cause, no rational, no reason, to believe anything else.

Utterly meaningless.

I grant that your response has this quality.

They put a clock in a plane. Whoopee do. They have no ability to test what time is outside this area. Heck, they don't even know what it is here!

Time in physics has a clear and unambiguous definition. A second is 9,192,631,770 cycles of a radiating cesium atom.

Amusingly the star space checker game accounts for things being different.

Mind games may loom large inside your head. They have no bearing on reality though.

The star space checker exercise is not a mind game, but it is worth mentioning that thought experiments have played an important role in science, for example, in Einstein's development of relativity.

The star spacer checker exercise models three distances involving the Earth and the SN1987A system. One distance is from the star to the Earth. Another distance is from the right to the Earth. And a third distance is from the star to the ring. RAZD used this diagram:

Click on the image to expand it to a viewable size.

The exercise examines how long it takes to go from the star directly to the Earth versus how long it takes to go from the star to the ring and then from the ring to the Earth. Rolling the die allows you to model the possibility that the speed of light was different and varied in the past. RAZD can correct me if I've bungled this description in some way.

You do not get to try and make the universe a checkerboard where the squares are all equal for no apparent reason...as clever as you might think your little invented games are.

But the distances must have remained consistent over time (taking into account the relative velocities of moving objects), else everything we see from the distant universe would be distorted.

In addition you have failed to present any evidence whatsoever that there has been any kind of change. You want us to 'prove' you wrong when you have provided no evidence to evaluate for truthiness.

I assume you are back on earth again? Well, science can't tell us if there was or was not a nature change here in the far past.

The Oklo natural reactor has already been described for you, which covers natural physical laws here in the distant past pretty well. And we've described how we know that the natural physical laws were the same in the distant past at great distances from here. Science *can* tell us whether natural physical laws were different in the past both here and far out in the universe.

So you may not claim either by science. I don't. I simply point out science doesn't know. Why not be honest also?

Yes, Creation, why not be honest and a) address the evidence that's been presented to you instead of just repeating yourself; and b) present your own evidence for the fictional "fishbowl".

Wishing is not science, denial of science is not science, making stuff up out of the blue is not science.

Great. So when you get some science get back to us.

Scientific evidence has been presented to you. Please stop ignoring it. Please stop repeating your ignorant blather about a "fishbowl".

You need to show the errors and evidence that it is errors (not make it up) if you want to say the current understanding of time and space is wrong. The onus is on you.

Easy to do. The error is that they base all models on belief only. The error is in deep space, that they just believe time exists there as here with no evidence. The error on earth is that they use present nature to model the past when they do not know what nature existed. Check and mate.

You're just repeating the same errors over and over again. Evidence has been presented to you. Ignoring it doesn't help you make your case. Addressing this evidence and showing how it is wrong, or presenting your own evidence, or both, is how you make your case.

Once again you provide a stellar example of the ridiculous lengths evos...

Evos? We're not talking about evolution.

...will go to pretend that the so called reality which is really religion, does exist as described by science -- you have to make everything illusion with not one thing based on fact. That origin science.

You're very confused. SN1987A is a cosmological phenomenon having nothing to do with evolution or the origin of life.

Regarding your Message 719 to RAZD:

creation in Message 719 writes:

The fishbowl is just a term to describe the solar system and area where man has actually been and has some direct knowledge.

You have presented no evidence for a "fishbowl" defining a boundary of demarcation between two different sets of natural physical laws. It is something you've made up.

Regarding your Message 720 to Tangle:

creation in Message 720 writes:

tangle writes:

Fantastic, let's see these proofs.


You want to get into proofs that are outside of science on a science forum?

Hey, congratulations, you finally figured out quoting.

I'll just repeat the suggestion I made earlier, that you propose a new thread over at Proposed New Topics to discuss your proofs about God.

--Percy

Edited by Percy, : Clarify cesium atom comment.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 713 by creation, posted 01-27-2018 1:35 PM creation has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 728 by creation, posted 01-28-2018 4:03 PM Percy has responded

    
creation
Member (Idle past 52 days)
Posts: 104
Joined: 01-14-2018


Message 728 of 736 (827609)
01-28-2018 4:03 PM
Reply to: Message 727 by Percy
01-27-2018 6:51 PM


Re: The Win-Win situation for Science
percy writes:

You're still babbling the same nonsense.

You're still babbling the same nonsense. Evidence has been presented that you've ignored that shows the supposed evidence you cite is beliefs only.. You've instead chosen to repeat the same objection without elaboration like a broken record, and you've presented no evidence yourself, nor even a description of what you think is causing the distant universe to appear to behave the same as the local universe when it really isn't..

I do not think the universe is any way. You do. You think time is the same, and we see no evidence given for that. Pointing out science does not know is not claiming I know. Nothing you have posted deals with time in the far universe. Seeing light here is seeing light IN time here. That does not even address if time exists the same far away.

Remember the forum guidelines.

Edited by creation, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 727 by Percy, posted 01-27-2018 6:51 PM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 734 by Percy, posted 01-28-2018 5:39 PM creation has not yet responded

    
creation
Member (Idle past 52 days)
Posts: 104
Joined: 01-14-2018


Message 729 of 736 (827610)
01-28-2018 4:04 PM
Reply to: Message 726 by Tangle
01-27-2018 6:03 PM


Re: The Win-Win situation for Science
Jesus rising from the dead as observed by hundreds of people.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 726 by Tangle, posted 01-27-2018 6:03 PM Tangle has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 733 by Tangle, posted 01-28-2018 5:17 PM creation has not yet responded

    
creation
Member (Idle past 52 days)
Posts: 104
Joined: 01-14-2018


Message 730 of 736 (827611)
01-28-2018 4:07 PM
Reply to: Message 725 by RAZD
01-27-2018 3:52 PM


Re: A couple questions for creation ...
razd writes:

Please define the limits of your "fishbowl" ... is it your brain? the earth? the solar system? the galaxy? the universe?

Where's the line?

How do you know?

How can we tell if you are right?

Since the furthest probe is not even a light day away, we can stat there. The limits of where man has been are clear. Since the fishbowl is just a term referring to what we know and where we have been, the limits are self evident.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 725 by RAZD, posted 01-27-2018 3:52 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 735 by RAZD, posted 01-29-2018 7:44 AM creation has not yet responded

    
creation
Member (Idle past 52 days)
Posts: 104
Joined: 01-14-2018


Message 731 of 736 (827612)
01-28-2018 4:12 PM
Reply to: Message 723 by caffeine
01-27-2018 3:35 PM


Re: The Win-Win situation for Science
caffeine writes:

Nobody has ever been to the centre of the earth. Do you then think that we have no way of knowing if and how time passes at the centre of the earth? If not, why not?

Time is not the issue there. But science does not know what the inner earth is like. They assume it obeys the laws we see on the surface. However, since the bible indicates some spiritual component down there, they can assume all they like. They do not know. Having one sort of seismic wave not go through an area there does not tell us, for example it is liquid. How would we know what that sort of wave would do if trying to pass through something that was more than just physical? No. We see that on the surface of the earth, such waves would not go through a liquid. Then we assume that if the waves do not pass through something in the unknown interior of the earth, that also 'golly gee, just must' also be liquid.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 723 by caffeine, posted 01-27-2018 3:35 PM caffeine has not yet responded

    
creation
Member (Idle past 52 days)
Posts: 104
Joined: 01-14-2018


Message 732 of 736 (827613)
01-28-2018 4:15 PM
Reply to: Message 721 by NoNukes
01-27-2018 2:46 PM


Re: The Win-Win situation for Science
nonukes writes:

So still no response, only a quote with no words from my message and a repeated denial.

False. Nothing you post needs denying. You didn't even deal with the issue of time far far away. Try not to deny that seeing some light in time here has no relation to what time may or may not be elsewhere. Or do you have some other point? Spit it out. I assure you it will not be worthy of any denial either. You flatter yourself pretending otherwise.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 721 by NoNukes, posted 01-27-2018 2:46 PM NoNukes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 736 by NoNukes, posted 01-29-2018 12:28 PM creation has not yet responded

    
Tangle
Member
Posts: 5762
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 733 of 736 (827624)
01-28-2018 5:17 PM
Reply to: Message 729 by creation
01-28-2018 4:04 PM


Re: The Win-Win situation for Science
creation writes:

Jesus rising from the dead as observed by hundreds of people.

Gosh, you nailed it in one! None of that darned science necessary, well done.


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona

"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 729 by creation, posted 01-28-2018 4:04 PM creation has not yet responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 17328
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.1


Message 734 of 736 (827625)
01-28-2018 5:39 PM
Reply to: Message 728 by creation
01-28-2018 4:03 PM


Re: The Win-Win situation for Science
Responding to several of your messages...

Regarding your Message 728 to me:

Boy did you ever make a mess of the quoting in that message! Let me know if you want me to go in and fix it for you. I've already fixed your mess where I quote you here.

creation in Message 728 writes:

percy writes:

You're still babbling the same nonsense. Evidence has been presented that you've ignored that shows the supposed...

evidence you cite is beliefs only.

No, it's evidence that you either dismiss or ignore.

You've instead chosen to repeat the same objection without elaboration like a broken record, and you've presented no evidence yourself, nor even a description of what you think is causing the distant universe to appear to behave the same as the local universe when it really isn't.

I do not think the universe is any way.

Well, your first four words are correct.

You think time is the same, and we see no evidence given for that.

I provided spectral line evidence and described how the shifts tell us the shape of space-time and are consistent with the theory of relativity. You had no answer other than to call it all just a belief, which is really just your belief since there is no evidence for your position.

Pointing out science does not know is not claiming I know.

Clearly you do not know.

Nothing you have posted deals with time in the far universe.

Actually I've talked about space-time, and once again you're engaging in gross misrepresentation. The evidence I've posted was about what the light arriving from objects millions and billions of light years away tells us.

Seeing light here is seeing light IN time here.

Yes, of course. The light we see, whether it originated across the street or across the universe, is seen wherever we happen to be at the time, or as you put it, "here".

That does not even address if time exists the same far away.

Again, we have to talk about space-time. The shape of space-time is not the same everywhere. It is bent by the gravity associated with mass, and by the relative velocities of coordinate systems. Observations are consistent with theory.

Remember the forum guidelines.

Follow the Forum Guidelines.

Regarding your Message 729 to Tangle:

creation in Message 729 writes:

Jesus rising from the dead as observed by hundreds of people.

I again suggest you take your religious arguments to the religious forums. This thread is in one of the science forums.

Regarding your Message 730 to RAZD:

creation in Message 730 writes:

razd writes:

Please define the limits of your "fishbowl" ... is it your brain? the earth? the solar system? the galaxy? the universe?

Where's the line?

How do you know?

How can we tell if you are right?

Since the furthest probe is not even a light day away, we can stat there. The limits of where man has been are clear. Since the fishbowl is just a term referring to what we know and where we have been, the limits are self evident.

Your "fishbowl" is fictitious, just a belief you have with no evidence. You have no answer for RAZD's question, "How do you know?" The evidence we do have indicates the laws of the universe are the same everywhere.

We can analyze any electromagnetic radiation arriving here on Earth or reaching our probes, so your Voyager claims are spurious. And anyway, they were launched around 40 years ago, so were you writing 40 years ago you would have claimed we only knew the nature of the universe out as far as Mars. The Voyagers are just an illustration of how religious claims about the nature of the universe shrinks as our knowledge expands. Religion should stick to the spiritual realm.

Regarding your Message 731 to Caffeine:

creation in Message 731 writes:

caffeine writes:

Nobody has ever been to the centre of the earth. Do you then think that we have no way of knowing if and how time passes at the centre of the earth? If not, why not?

Time is not the issue there. But science does not know what the inner earth is like.

Science will never know all there is to know, but we do know a great deal about the interior of the Earth.

They assume it obeys the laws we see on the surface.

If the laws were different we couldn't fail to detect it. Plus there's evidence from oil drilling and magma from deep within the Earth from volcanic eruptions that tells us that the laws down there are the same as up here. So is gravity, since we know the mass of the Earth and the moon and the other planets and the sun, and their motions obey our calculations.

However, since the bible indicates some spiritual component down there, they can assume all they like.

This is a science thread.

They do not know.

You're repeating yourself.

Having one sort of seismic wave not go through an area there does not tell us, for example, it is liquid.

Since S-waves (as opposed to P-waves) will not travel through a liquid, that is how we know the region of the Earth's interior that is molten.

How would we know what that sort of wave would do if trying to pass through something that was more than just physical?

There is no evidence of any type of matter that is "more than just physical."

We see that on the surface of the earth, such waves would not go through a liquid. Then we assume that if the waves do not pass through something in the unknown interior of the earth, that also 'golly gee, just must' also be liquid.

Obviously the interior of the Earth must have a molten liquid component - magma has to come from somewhere.

Regarding your Message 732 to NoNukes:

creation in Message 732 writes:

False. Nothing you post needs denying.

But that's all you've been doing is denying. You haven't engaged in any discussion or consideration of the evidence.

You didn't even deal with the issue of time far far away.

Again, that would be space-time, and NoNukes did "deal with the issue of time far far away." He said:

NoNukes in Message 699 writes:

I think the more important argument is that it implies that the same processes (the ones that are responsible for the light emission in the first place) are occurring at the same rate. In short by verifying that sun-like stars have spectra that look like our own sun, we have evidence that physics, including the passage of time, is the same as it is here even at places that are monstrous distances away.

The absorptions and emissions that make the spectra look different from a pure blackbody spectrum, are things that we know actually took place at the place where the light was emitted, and are governed by exactly the same physics as we use here.

Try not to deny that seeing some light in time here has no relation to what time may or may not be elsewhere.

Again, you should say space-time, and the light we see and analyze behaves the same regardless of point of origin.

Or do you have some other point? Spit it out.

NoNukes point was clear.

I assure you it will not be worthy of any denial either. You flatter yourself pretending otherwise.

Denial is all you've shown you're capable of so far. Discussion and consideration of evidence seems to be beyond your capacity.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 728 by creation, posted 01-28-2018 4:03 PM creation has not yet responded

    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19509
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 735 of 736 (827645)
01-29-2018 7:44 AM
Reply to: Message 730 by creation
01-28-2018 4:07 PM


Re: A couple questions for creation ...
razd writes:

Please define the limits of your "fishbowl" ... is it your brain? the earth? the solar system? the galaxy? the universe?

Where's the line?

Since the furthest probe is not even a light day away, we can stat there. The limits of where man has been are clear. Since the fishbowl is just a term referring to what we know and where we have been, the limits are self evident.

So the line, the boundary of the fishbowl is a sphere with a 1 light day radius.

Okay, we can start there. It looks totally arbitrary, (why not 1 light day plus a foot? a mile?) but we can start there.

razd writes:

How do you know?

How can we tell if you are right?

You didn't answer these questions. Drawing an arbitrary imagined line in space has no reason to be accepted until you can tell us how you know, and how we can check to see whether you are right or just making stuff up.

What experiment have you run that we can test and try to repeat?

These are the important questions that show it is not totally arbitrary.

Then we get to questions like

  1. What is it like just outside the line?
    • Is just 1" outside 99.999999 similar to inside? or totally different?
    • what causes the difference?
    • how do you know?
    • how can we tell you are right

    and

  2. As voyager moves does the line move?
    • Why?
    • If yes, what makes it move?
    • if no, what makes it stay?
    • how do you know?
    • how can we tell you are right

As you can see, there are many questions you need to answer before you demonstrate cause to accept your concept as anything but fantasy.

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 730 by creation, posted 01-28-2018 4:07 PM creation has not yet responded

  
RewPrev1
...
45464748
49
50Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2018