Two types of science

Perhaps you should have accepted Percy's help in formulating your proposal. This would be a perfectly reasonable thing to say if you were a five year old. But even a quick reflection ought to be enough to understand that this is not the way even you think.How many of your five senses can detect carbon monoxide or neutrons, or radio waves? Does that mean that the branches of chemistry and physics that studies those things are some other kind of science than the one that tells you about how to freeze ice cream?Of course not. Your opening post is fraudulent. What you describe here is not the reason why you dismiss astronomy. Instead we are getting your your post dismissal rationalization of your refusal to accept some of the things that are established beyond all reasonable doubt using the scientific method.To be clear, it is true that we can know less about distant stars and/or solar systems than we do about our own sun and solar system, but it is possible to know more than enough about distant astronomical objects to poke fun at your understanding of the subject.Perhaps I'll bother taking on the other half of your object, namely the use of indirect evidence to study the past, but I'm sure someone else will do just as well with it as I. More of the same old atheist conspiracy theory nonsense. I'm not an atheist.

As the many examples given have illustrated, the number of human senses involved is not relevant at all. The issue for you is the conflict with your beliefs.There is nothing vague about the distance to SN1987A being determined by multiple methods to being approx 170,000 light-years away. What is vague is your articulation of any reason other than your interpretation of the Bible for you dispute what scientist say about it.Your post here gives your entire agenda away to anyone who was not familiar with it before you posted.Your claim is that there are two kinds of science. And that phoney science is used for studying stars "hundreds of light-years away".
So tell me what difference between the techniques used for studying Alpha Centauri, a mere 4.3 light years away and those used for studying Betelgeuse which is 650 light years away makes the latter studies unscientific.ABE:
It's clear that there is no qualitative difference and that your position here collapses to objecting to science that disagrees with your beliefs and politics.More importantly, why didn't you come up with a position before you started this thread? Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.Edited by NoNukes, : change years to light years

I submit that the above quotes demonstrate that you have no knowledge of what has or has not been falsified by scientists, so that your opinion that ID has been given short shrift is completely uninformed. Even a brief study of cosmology will turn up the discarded steady state universe ideas held by Einstein and Hoyle, and the developments in astronomy that Galileo and Copernicus could not have imagined, such as the existence of galaxies. Most recently scientists have concluded that the universes expansion is increasing in speed rather than slowing down.Yet you could not find any of completely obvious stuff despite claiming to have searched for it.Serious opponents of global warming don't ask if there are models indicating a human contribution to global warming; they instead discuss the flaws the believe exist in those models. You, though know nothing about the topic at hand, have to ask others to do your homework.You simply don't know enough science so that your opinion about relative treatment of ID and deep space astronomy is not worth the virtual paper it is written on.Like many people here, I find your flailing about to be highly entertaining. I hope you will contain accusing people of lying when they haven't, that you will continue demonstrating your complete lack of knowledge of science, and that you'll keep complaining about atheist Catholics etc. But I know that you will wilt under the inevitable beatdown and leave in short order complaining about bad treatment when your own manners are far short of impeccable.

Not blind with rage, no... But I have been known to squint my eyes when I'm letting loose loud guffaws.

From the wikipedia article:SN 2014J - Wikipedia

quote:

---

At 19:20 GMT on 21 January 2014, Fossey and his students noticed a bright new star in their images of the galaxy Messier 82, also known as the Cigar Galaxy.[3] After comparing their image to archival ones of the same galaxy, they used observations with a second telescope to eliminate the possibility of an instrumental artefact.[5] Their discovery was reported to the International Astronomical Union's Central Bureau for Astronomical Telegrams, who confirmed that they were the first to spot the supernova and assigned it the name SN 2014J.

---

I thought I would use this example to highlight the inanity of some of the arguments presented here.Presumably this discovery avoids the controversy surrounding the US constitution due to the fact that it was discovered by college students in London who can be demonstrated to have no motive whatsoever to find a distant super nova.

quote:

---

The discovery was serendipitous, because Fossey was not searching for supernovae and wanted to take advantage of a short gap in the cloud cover. He later said that "The weather was closing in, with increasing cloud, so instead of the planned practical astronomy class, I gave the students an introductory demonstration of how to use the CCD camera on one of the observatory’s automated 0.35—metre telescopes.

---

Yet, despite their lack of motive, this particular stellar event was discovered in a galaxy that is over one million light years away. Given that the super nova itself is a type 1A, measurements of the super nova itself will provide an independent determination of the distance to the Messier 82 galaxy.On the other hand, what can we say of any American scientist that studies this phenomenon. That they are not doing science, but atheism? That they are going against the founding fathers who were all united in opinion and motivation? That the London scientists are just puppets of the US based National Center for Science Education? Get rid of the EPA?

useless rant removedEdited by NoNukes, : No reason given.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Note the final 'or' clause in Marc9000's statement.Marc9000 says that if it conflicts with his beliefs then it may become too vague for you to use the scientific method. So, no you probably cannot do science in Finland until Marc gets some new beliefs. Conflicting with U.S. foundings or being in deep space, or not being able to use your sense of smell would be independent reasons not to pursue a scientific investigation.Besides, how many senses can you use to detect radioactive decay?Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Or one might choose not to pay Mr 9k any attention. Remember, this is the same guy who thinks that his water pipes freezing proves there is no human induced climate change.