Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 89 (8876 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 12-10-2018 2:45 PM
202 online now:
Coragyps, Diomedes, DrJones*, PaulK, ringo, Tangle, Tanypteryx (7 members, 195 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Bill Holbert
Post Volume:
Total: 843,763 Year: 18,586/29,783 Month: 531/2,043 Week: 83/386 Day: 33/50 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
4849
50
5152
...
63NextFF
Author Topic:   Falsifying a young Universe. (re: Supernova 1987A)
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(2)
Message 736 of 944 (827671)
01-29-2018 12:28 PM
Reply to: Message 732 by creation
01-28-2018 4:15 PM


Re: The Win-Win situation for Science
False. Nothing you post needs denying. You didn't even deal with the issue of time far far away.

Actually, I did. But you are such a 'hear no evil' blooming idiot that you ignore the point. I will summarize it here.

Even if we acknowledge that we cannot view the passing of time remotely, we can observe the effects of that time passing remotely. So when we observe that the stars and the elements formed by stars have exactly the same properties there that they do here, we are actually comparing processes here and there. Those processes do involve time. When we observe spectrum lines here, the absorptions or emissions that formed those lines actually occurred remotely. When we observe wobbles in stars that reveal their orbital motions, the wobbles occur remotely and not here. Yet they are observed to obey Kepler's laws (or Einstein's equations when the objects are massive enough) When we observe SN 1987, we can see that the timing we observe of events (like the illumination of objects in the viciinity) that occur remotely are consistent with what we should expect if those events occurred here. When we observe stars at distances from 4.3 light years to thousands of light years away, some distances of which we can observe by parallax, we can see that physics is the same here as there. I'll also add that with the exception of some of the observations of SN 1987a, none of our estimates of distance involve the use of timing light travel, so they are not subject to the BS that you claim we know nothing about.

Taken altogether those kinds of facts are not proof, because nothing is provable in science, but they are strong evidence that the universe acts the way we believe it does and not the way you wish it did. For your wishes that reality does not work as we expect, there are zero supporting facts or evidence. It is your belief alone and your requirement for a tiny, young universe that makes you invent excuses.

As for observing you, What we can see is that you've launched onto an evidence denying mantra that you repeat endlessly. Your debating technique is nothing different from shouting while holding our fingers in your ears.

You cite authority but don't discuss it. You deny without delving into what others posts. That makes you amusing -- for maybe a post or two. But in the end, you are seen to be full of shite. If this kind of nonsense were required in order to be a Christian, then Christianity would be a religion of self-deception, and a snake eating its own tail. Fortunately for us Christians with our eyes open, such deceptions are not required.

You are welcome to have the last two or three words. That's all your dumb ass is capable of.

Edited by NoNukes, : Small tweaks. a little more info.


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 732 by creation, posted 01-28-2018 4:15 PM creation has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 737 by creation, posted 10-02-2018 1:59 AM NoNukes has not yet responded
 Message 741 by creation, posted 10-02-2018 10:25 PM NoNukes has not yet responded

  
creation
Member
Posts: 654
Joined: 01-22-2017


Message 737 of 944 (840548)
10-02-2018 1:59 AM
Reply to: Message 736 by NoNukes
01-29-2018 12:28 PM


Re: The Win-Win situation for Science
Observing effects of time is not knowing what time is.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 736 by NoNukes, posted 01-29-2018 12:28 PM NoNukes has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 738 by Taq, posted 10-02-2018 6:28 PM creation has responded

    
Taq
Member
Posts: 7610
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 738 of 944 (840633)
10-02-2018 6:28 PM
Reply to: Message 737 by creation
10-02-2018 1:59 AM


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

Observing effects of time is not knowing what time is.

How are you able to cross a street? You can observe a car covering distance over a set amount of time, but according to you that doesn't mean anything. So how do you determine when it is safe to cross the street?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 737 by creation, posted 10-02-2018 1:59 AM creation has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 739 by creation, posted 10-02-2018 7:08 PM Taq has responded

  
creation
Member
Posts: 654
Joined: 01-22-2017


Message 739 of 944 (840647)
10-02-2018 7:08 PM
Reply to: Message 738 by Taq
10-02-2018 6:28 PM


Re: The Win-Win situation for Science
to 738

There is no street anyone crossed out in the far universe. Just because it may take a certain amount of time to cross one here, does not mean that time exists the same out in the unknown far reaches of space.

That should be obvious.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 738 by Taq, posted 10-02-2018 6:28 PM Taq has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 746 by Taq, posted 10-03-2018 4:53 PM creation has responded

    
creation
Member
Posts: 654
Joined: 01-22-2017


Message 740 of 944 (840650)
10-02-2018 7:17 PM
Reply to: Message 735 by RAZD
01-29-2018 7:44 AM


Re: A couple questions for creation ...
to 735

No. Currently man has not gone beyond that line, if he does, then we extend it. But lets face it man will never get to even a few light days away in your lifetime.

You do not look for a difference out there. You look here. We only see it all here. Always. Exclusively. Only here. Nowhere else ever. What you see then always HAS to be IN our fishbowl time and space!!!!!!! You have no way of knowing anything else about what time is like out there beyond the fishbowl.

Since the 'line' or boundary of where man has been with probes changes as the probes go out further, then the fishbowl limits extend. Man has more experience and has gone further. But it is so pitifully small a distance that it is almost insignificant in the big picture of the created universe. We must remain limited to the ONE little observation point. We simply cannot declare time and space all over the universe to be the same based on the one point of observation.

There is NO way you cam claim light took any great time at all to get to earth!

All you can say is something like..'here on earth we see light move in space and time a certain speed, and it takes so much time....and if all the universe were the same, then it ...would...could..should take the same sort of time to move out there.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 735 by RAZD, posted 01-29-2018 7:44 AM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 756 by RAZD, posted 10-07-2018 10:33 AM creation has responded

    
creation
Member
Posts: 654
Joined: 01-22-2017


Message 741 of 944 (840665)
10-02-2018 10:25 PM
Reply to: Message 736 by NoNukes
01-29-2018 12:28 PM


Re: The Win-Win situation for Science
Your problem is that any and all time anything involves is only seen here! Here where time exists as it does.

Even processes that involve time are only seen here. So, for example, if we see an object orbiting another object in say, 11 months, or 11 days that is 11 days or months as known/experienced/seen here in the fishbowl!

How much time may be involved far far far away we can't know by looking at the one observation point here.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 736 by NoNukes, posted 01-29-2018 12:28 PM NoNukes has not yet responded

    
creation
Member
Posts: 654
Joined: 01-22-2017


Message 742 of 944 (840674)
10-03-2018 2:08 AM
Reply to: Message 734 by Percy
01-28-2018 5:39 PM


Re: The Win-Win situation for Science
quote:
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.

You were wrong. It would only tell us things if time and space were the same at all points. Distances to stars (via parallax for example) cannot be attained unless the space and time used in the base line here were the same all the way to the star That is NOT known. Most of what you think the light tells us is all based on a false premise.

quote:
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.

Wrong. We do not know how big or far away anything is out there beyond the fishbowl. So what gravity exited there is unknown. What bends light is not known. Just because something bends light here in our time and space does not mean that is the only thing that does in the universe.

The observations we have here are IN our time, so how could they not be consistent with theories based on time here?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 734 by Percy, posted 01-28-2018 5:39 PM Percy has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 743 by Tanypteryx, posted 10-03-2018 11:52 AM creation has responded

    
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 1894
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 743 of 944 (840698)
10-03-2018 11:52 AM
Reply to: Message 742 by creation
10-03-2018 2:08 AM


Re: The Win-Win situation for Science
quote:
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.

You were wrong. It would only tell us things if time and space were the same at all points. Distances to stars (via parallax for example) cannot be attained unless the space and time used in the base line here were the same all the way to the star That is NOT known. Most of what you think the light tells us is all based on a false premise.

You saying something doesn't make it true.

You have not presented anything but ignorant bluster, meanwhile we can extract all sorts of useful knowledge from the light we see. The emission and absorption lines in the spectrum of light from distant stars shows us the same elements that we see in light emitted right here.

Now, you can rant about that but we will just laugh at you and go on learning new things about the near and far Universe with all our wonderful instruments.

You are powerless to change that because no one is going to pay any attention.

quote:
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.

Wrong. We do not know how big or far away anything is out there beyond the fishbowl. So what gravity exited there is unknown. What bends light is not known. Just because something bends light here in our time and space does not mean that is the only thing that does in the universe.

Oh, well that was clear.

The observations we have here are IN our time, so how could they not be consistent with theories based on time here?

Even if you were correct, what difference does it make to you if scientists are making observations here and sharing them with whoever is interested? I step outside at night and look up and see the stars or I receive images from the Hubble Telescope on my computer and your ranting doesn't make a bit of difference to my enjoyment of the beauty and new knowledge.


What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python

One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie

If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy

The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq


This message is a reply to:
 Message 742 by creation, posted 10-03-2018 2:08 AM creation has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 744 by creation, posted 10-03-2018 12:25 PM Tanypteryx has responded

    
creation
Member
Posts: 654
Joined: 01-22-2017


Message 744 of 944 (840706)
10-03-2018 12:25 PM
Reply to: Message 743 by Tanypteryx
10-03-2018 11:52 AM


Re: The Win-Win situation for Science
Atoms and cells and molecules may be beautiful to some folks. Looking at some lights in the sky that are of unknown origin and distance and size and in unknown time and space is not knowledge.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 743 by Tanypteryx, posted 10-03-2018 11:52 AM Tanypteryx has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 745 by Tanypteryx, posted 10-03-2018 12:49 PM creation has responded

    
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 1894
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 3.0


(1)
Message 745 of 944 (840714)
10-03-2018 12:49 PM
Reply to: Message 744 by creation
10-03-2018 12:25 PM


Re: The Win-Win situation for Science
Looking at some lights in the sky that are of unknown origin and distance and size and in unknown time and space is not knowledge.

You are correct, you would not be able to learn anything.


What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python

One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie

If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy

The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq


This message is a reply to:
 Message 744 by creation, posted 10-03-2018 12:25 PM creation has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 747 by creation, posted 10-03-2018 10:47 PM Tanypteryx has responded

    
Taq
Member
Posts: 7610
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 746 of 944 (840730)
10-03-2018 4:53 PM
Reply to: Message 739 by creation
10-02-2018 7:08 PM


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

There is no street anyone crossed out in the far universe. Just because it may take a certain amount of time to cross one here, does not mean that time exists the same out in the unknown far reaches of space.

That should be obvious.

You still haven't answered the question. How do you know when it is safe to cross the street if you can't trust anything you see that is more than 1 millimeter from your retina?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 739 by creation, posted 10-02-2018 7:08 PM creation has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 749 by creation, posted 10-04-2018 3:47 PM Taq has responded

  
creation
Member
Posts: 654
Joined: 01-22-2017


Message 747 of 944 (840749)
10-03-2018 10:47 PM
Reply to: Message 745 by Tanypteryx
10-03-2018 12:49 PM


Re: The Win-Win situation for Science
That is where science is.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 745 by Tanypteryx, posted 10-03-2018 12:49 PM Tanypteryx has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 748 by Tanypteryx, posted 10-04-2018 2:07 AM creation has responded

    
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 1894
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 748 of 944 (840759)
10-04-2018 2:07 AM
Reply to: Message 747 by creation
10-03-2018 10:47 PM


Re: The Win-Win situation for Science
That is where science is.

Wow, that's deep, Man.


What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python

One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie

If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy

The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq


This message is a reply to:
 Message 747 by creation, posted 10-03-2018 10:47 PM creation has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 750 by creation, posted 10-04-2018 3:49 PM Tanypteryx has not yet responded

    
creation
Member
Posts: 654
Joined: 01-22-2017


Message 749 of 944 (840835)
10-04-2018 3:47 PM
Reply to: Message 746 by Taq
10-03-2018 4:53 PM


Re: The Win-Win situation for Science
Man knows a lot about this fishbowl we live in. Too bad he hasn't been anywhere else huh?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 746 by Taq, posted 10-03-2018 4:53 PM Taq has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 751 by Taq, posted 10-04-2018 4:01 PM creation has responded

    
creation
Member
Posts: 654
Joined: 01-22-2017


Message 750 of 944 (840836)
10-04-2018 3:49 PM
Reply to: Message 748 by Tanypteryx
10-04-2018 2:07 AM


Re: The Win-Win situation for Science
I agree. The fact that science is ever learning but never able to come to the knowledge of the truth is deep.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 748 by Tanypteryx, posted 10-04-2018 2:07 AM Tanypteryx has not yet responded

    
RewPrev1
...
4849
50
5152
...
63NextFF
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2018