Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 60 (9084 total)
107 online now:
PaulK (1 member, 106 visitors)
Newest Member: evolujtion_noob
Post Volume: Total: 897,408 Year: 8,520/6,534 Month: 1/1,588 Week: 358/430 Day: 1/46 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   new creation/evolution debate forum
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 61 of 121 (618165)
06-01-2011 6:06 PM
Reply to: Message 60 by dwise1
06-01-2011 4:47 PM


Re: Shrinking sun, dust moon
dwise1 writes:
OK, so I also used direct and indirect proportional relationships
Exactly! That's algebra disguised as arithmetic.
And, that cube root relationship stuff to get the sun's diameter stuff sure looks like algebra. Maybe even Algebra II. And then you used trig (in a sentence at least)!!!!
If gravitational collapse is involved, then the mass lost through fusion will be less.
I would think that the mass loss would be the same regardless of how the energy was produced. But perhaps without fusion, the original size of the sun might have been a problem by being greater than the size of earth's orbit.
Now I've presented Hovind's repeating of Walter Brown's old "leap seconds" claim. Let's see whether he bites and if he's started to learn.
I wouldn't bother with claims that he does not suggest himself. In fact his comments regarding the Goldilock's zone don't read like something a die-hard creationist would post.
His leap second response seems quite reasonable.
Edited by NoNukes, : grammar

This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by dwise1, posted 06-01-2011 4:47 PM dwise1 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 64 by dwise1, posted 06-01-2011 7:38 PM NoNukes has replied

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 3078 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 62 of 121 (618167)
06-01-2011 6:22 PM
Reply to: Message 60 by dwise1
06-01-2011 4:47 PM


Re: Shrinking sun, dust moon
It appears that he is going on a massive "copy and paste crusade".
No longer making his own arguments; he is just pasting articles found on the web.
Put a line of his reply into google before wasting time replying to something he didn't write and possibly doesn't understand.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by dwise1, posted 06-01-2011 4:47 PM dwise1 has not replied

  
subbie
Member (Idle past 620 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 63 of 121 (618172)
06-01-2011 7:12 PM
Reply to: Message 60 by dwise1
06-01-2011 4:47 PM


Re: Shrinking sun, dust moon
I think you might be better off illustrating big number points using the big numbers. It's very easy for someone not familiar with scientific notation to miss the huge difference between 7.889608E+23 tons and 1.9891E+27. But if you write the numbers out, one on top of the other:
1,989,900,000,000,000,000,000,000,000
- 788,960,000,000,000,000,000,000
1,989,100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000
it's much easier to see that the lost mass is irrelevant to the total amount of mass.
I tend to also doubt his claimed age of 20, but if that is accurate, it's still evident from his writing that he's not real bright. In that circumstance, KISS.

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. -- Thomas Jefferson
We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate
...creationists have a great way to detect fraud and it doesn't take 8 or 40 years or even a scientific degree to spot the fraud--'if it disagrees with the bible then it is wrong'.... -- archaeologist

This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by dwise1, posted 06-01-2011 4:47 PM dwise1 has not replied

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5282
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 3.4


Message 64 of 121 (618174)
06-01-2011 7:38 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by NoNukes
06-01-2011 6:06 PM


Re: Shrinking sun, dust moon
And then you used trig (in a sentence at least)!!!!
Actually, I did work out that problem the first time around. But then I tried to use the browser's find (new IE9) to change one word (angular size vice angular displacement) and it shot me to Google, dumping my entire post. So, by not having followed my own advice, I got to write it a second time.
But, hey, he got extremely pissy at me for trying to go easy on him, so if he says he can handle the math, let him eat trig!
I would think that the mass loss would be the same regardless of how the energy was produced.
No, it would be a problem. Gravitational collapse would heat up the sun's core via the Kelvin—Helmholtz mechanism, which was proposed in the 19th century as a mechanism for the burning of the sun. If that were happening, then some of the energy emanating from the sun would be from gravitational collapse; ie, only some of the energy would be from thermonuclear fusion.
Our mass-loss figure is calculated with E=mc2. First we measure the total energy output of the sun per second, and then we plug that value in for E and solve for m. If less than the total energy output is due to fusion, then less mass is being lost.
QED
In fact his comments regarding the Goldilock's zone don't read like something a die-hard creationist would post.
His leap second response seems quite reasonable.
Only those weren't written by him. He's out there plagarizing the shit out the Internet.
And he quite obviously doesn't understand what he's stealing and pasting. In the human-population-growth topic (under Origins), we had to keep pressing him for the model that his charts were based on, so he stole an entire article and pasted it as his own words. It's an article from the NCSE's old Creation Evolution Journal doing a follow-up on David Milne's classic "Bunny Blunder" article. It's decidedly highly critical of the creationist claim and this guy is posting it to defend the claim. Hoisted on his own petard! Gotta love poetic justice.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by NoNukes, posted 06-01-2011 6:06 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 65 by Taz, posted 06-01-2011 9:22 PM dwise1 has not replied
 Message 69 by slevesque, posted 06-01-2011 9:58 PM dwise1 has not replied
 Message 70 by NoNukes, posted 06-01-2011 10:35 PM dwise1 has not replied

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 2657 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 65 of 121 (618178)
06-01-2011 9:22 PM
Reply to: Message 64 by dwise1
06-01-2011 7:38 PM


Re: Shrinking sun, dust moon
Regardless of his claims, I'm still convinced he's a teenager. Probably 15 at most.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by dwise1, posted 06-01-2011 7:38 PM dwise1 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 66 by Coyote, posted 06-01-2011 9:53 PM Taz has replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 1471 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 66 of 121 (618180)
06-01-2011 9:53 PM
Reply to: Message 65 by Taz
06-01-2011 9:22 PM


Re: Shrinking sun, dust moon
I signed in, but there are no forums available.
Is this correct or have I done something silly?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by Taz, posted 06-01-2011 9:22 PM Taz has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 67 by Taz, posted 06-01-2011 9:56 PM Coyote has replied

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 2657 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 67 of 121 (618181)
06-01-2011 9:56 PM
Reply to: Message 66 by Coyote
06-01-2011 9:53 PM


Re: Shrinking sun, dust moon

This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by Coyote, posted 06-01-2011 9:53 PM Coyote has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 68 by Coyote, posted 06-01-2011 9:58 PM Taz has not replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 1471 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 68 of 121 (618182)
06-01-2011 9:58 PM
Reply to: Message 67 by Taz
06-01-2011 9:56 PM


Re: Shrinking sun, dust moon
I did, but there are no forums available.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by Taz, posted 06-01-2011 9:56 PM Taz has not replied

  
slevesque
Member (Idle past 4006 days)
Posts: 1456
Joined: 05-14-2009


Message 69 of 121 (618183)
06-01-2011 9:58 PM
Reply to: Message 64 by dwise1
06-01-2011 7:38 PM


Re: Shrinking sun, dust moon
No, it would be a problem. Gravitational collapse would heat up the sun's core via the Kelvin—Helmholtz mechanism, which was proposed in the 19th century as a mechanism for the burning of the sun. If that were happening, then some of the energy emanating from the sun would be from gravitational collapse; ie, only some of the energy would be from thermonuclear fusion.
Our mass-loss figure is calculated with E=mc2. First we measure the total energy output of the sun per second, and then we plug that value in for E and solve for m. If less than the total energy output is due to fusion, then less mass is being lost.
QED
I'm pretty sure this is false according to relativity, and that the energy released by gravitational collapse does contribute mass when in it's potential form, and so mass would still be lost in equal amount if the same quantity of energy is emitted via gravity collapse or nuclear fusion.
But this is only by intuition, I may be wrong so input by Cavediver or anyone else would be appreciated.
Edited by slevesque, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by dwise1, posted 06-01-2011 7:38 PM dwise1 has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 70 of 121 (618185)
06-01-2011 10:35 PM
Reply to: Message 64 by dwise1
06-01-2011 7:38 PM


Re: Shrinking sun, dust moon
He says he's not a creationist. Maybe he's just trying to generate some traffic.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by dwise1, posted 06-01-2011 7:38 PM dwise1 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 71 by Coyote, posted 06-01-2011 10:57 PM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 1471 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 71 of 121 (618188)
06-01-2011 10:57 PM
Reply to: Message 70 by NoNukes
06-01-2011 10:35 PM


Re: Shrinking sun, dust moon
I can find no posts there. Did he delete them all or am I looking in the wrong place?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by NoNukes, posted 06-01-2011 10:35 PM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 72 by dwise1, posted 06-02-2011 1:35 AM Coyote has not replied
 Message 73 by Taz, posted 06-02-2011 1:49 AM Coyote has replied

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5282
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 3.4


Message 72 of 121 (618195)
06-02-2011 1:35 AM
Reply to: Message 71 by Coyote
06-01-2011 10:57 PM


Re: Shrinking sun, dust moon
They're still there. My saved link in is http://creationvsevolution.freeforums.org/index.php

This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by Coyote, posted 06-01-2011 10:57 PM Coyote has not replied

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 2657 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 73 of 121 (618197)
06-02-2011 1:49 AM
Reply to: Message 71 by Coyote
06-01-2011 10:57 PM


Re: Shrinking sun, dust moon
Try refresing.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by Coyote, posted 06-01-2011 10:57 PM Coyote has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 74 by Coyote, posted 06-02-2011 10:42 AM Taz has replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 1471 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 74 of 121 (618227)
06-02-2011 10:42 AM
Reply to: Message 73 by Taz
06-02-2011 1:49 AM


Re: Shrinking sun, dust moon
That worked!
Thanks.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by Taz, posted 06-02-2011 1:49 AM Taz has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 75 by Taz, posted 06-02-2011 1:22 PM Coyote has replied

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 2657 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 75 of 121 (618251)
06-02-2011 1:22 PM
Reply to: Message 74 by Coyote
06-02-2011 10:42 AM


Re: Shrinking sun, dust moon
Coyote, here is what you need to do. Your assigned temporary space is full. When this happens, you will experience symptoms like what you have been experiencing. You need to go into tools, empty out your temporary files, and give yourself more space for temporary memory.
Other symptoms of this happening is your flash videos not working correctly, your internet explorer taking forever to load anything, etc. Weird things happen when your temporary space is full. People have come to me over the years to ask about the weird behavior of their explorer. My advice of clearing out temporary files and assign more space works 99% of the time when weird things happen with internet explorer.
Edited by Taz, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by Coyote, posted 06-02-2011 10:42 AM Coyote has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 76 by hooah212002, posted 06-02-2011 1:33 PM Taz has replied
 Message 87 by Coyote, posted 06-02-2011 9:26 PM Taz has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2022 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022