Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Falsifying a young Universe. (re: Supernova 1987A)
starman
Inactive Member


Message 646 of 948 (823452)
11-10-2017 12:10 PM
Reply to: Message 643 by jar
11-09-2017 11:58 PM


Re: A bridge to the stars
? You think you know dates for each chapter of Genesis? What we take your word for it?
To anyone having some actual point of discussion or debate....I will check my blog.
I am suspending EVC from my posts for a few weeks or maybe forever, we'll see.
end transmission
Edited by starman, : No reason given.

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 643 by jar, posted 11-09-2017 11:58 PM jar has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 656 by Aussie, posted 11-21-2017 1:47 PM starman has not replied

  
Stile
Member
Posts: 4295
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004


(1)
Message 647 of 948 (823461)
11-10-2017 12:43 PM
Reply to: Message 645 by starman
11-10-2017 12:07 PM


Re: The Win-Win situation for Science
starman writes:
You admit all you do is believe the forces and laws were the same.
Almost, but you're missing the important part.
What I'm doing is acting as if the forces and laws were the same.
Then, we make progress.
If there are any issues... then the actions will show them. Then, perhaps this idea includes an error. In which case, we adjust the beliefs.
If there are no issues... then perhaps this idea is valid. In which case, we continue to make progress.
Science has been acting on the idea that the stars are far away for hundreds of years.
Much progress has been made.
More progress is ongoing.
No issues have been identified yet.
As long as there are no issues while acting like the stars are far away, science will continue to act as if the stars are far away.
As long as there are no issues while acting like your computer runs software, science will continue to act as if your computer runs software.
How long do you work with something before you simply accept that it's true?
You seem to be able to do this with software running on your computer, but not with stars being far away.
Science has been accepting that stars are far away much longer than science has been accepting that software runs on your computer.
Still no issues.
Perhaps you could be the first to identify an issue, though. Feel free to try.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 645 by starman, posted 11-10-2017 12:07 PM starman has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 648 by Percy, posted 11-10-2017 2:01 PM Stile has replied
 Message 649 by RAZD, posted 11-10-2017 2:05 PM Stile has seen this message but not replied
 Message 664 by creation, posted 01-14-2018 11:13 PM Stile has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22388
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 648 of 948 (823467)
11-10-2017 2:01 PM
Reply to: Message 647 by Stile
11-10-2017 12:43 PM


Re: The Win-Win situation for Science
If I could quibble a bit with your wording:
Stile writes:
Science has been accepting that stars are far away...
It's just about the word "accepting." We have hard evidence for how far away stars are, with the error ranges growing with increasing distance. There's also something called the cosmic distance ladder. It starts with the distances to close stars established through the parallax of Earth's orbit (e.g., Alpha Centauri) as a basis for establishing the distance to more distant stars, and moves outward from there using a variety of techniques.
I'd have the same quibble with the word "accepting" in the other half of your sentence:
...much longer than science has been accepting that software runs on your computer.
I think we have pretty solid evidence that software runs on computers. Unless he's in some facet of the computer industry, my guess is that Starman accepts that software runs on his computer because that's what everyone else thinks, not because he has any personal experience with the details behind writing/compiling/loading software.
Starman wasn't investing any time understanding people's posts. There was no discussion. He was mostly just tossing off one and two sentence content-free responses.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 647 by Stile, posted 11-10-2017 12:43 PM Stile has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 650 by Stile, posted 11-10-2017 2:14 PM Percy has replied
 Message 666 by creation, posted 01-14-2018 11:19 PM Percy has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 649 of 948 (823468)
11-10-2017 2:05 PM
Reply to: Message 647 by Stile
11-10-2017 12:43 PM


Re: The Win-Win situation for Science
Perhaps you could be the first to identify an issue, though. Feel free to try.
starman has run away from the debates.
So don't hold your breath.
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 647 by Stile, posted 11-10-2017 12:43 PM Stile has seen this message but not replied

  
Stile
Member
Posts: 4295
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004


(3)
Message 650 of 948 (823470)
11-10-2017 2:14 PM
Reply to: Message 648 by Percy
11-10-2017 2:01 PM


Re: The Win-Win situation for Science
Percy writes:
Stile writes:
Science has been accepting that stars are far away...
It's just about the word "accepting."
Ha ha
Yes, Science certainly holds stars being far away as a now-mundane evidentially validated fact as much as software running on a computer is a now-mundane evidentially validated fact.
Same with RAZD's nice expansion on the Scientific Method I previously dumbed down to "running on assumptions."
I was trying to use words that would appeal to starman while also at least touching on "the spirit" of scientific concepts.
Starman wasn't investing any time understanding people's posts. There was no discussion. He was mostly just tossing off one and two sentence content-free responses.
Oh, for sure.
I'm not actually trying to appeal to starman.
More like... using starman's posts as a jumping-off point and then attempting to form some sort of description that would appeal to "someone similar to starman, but looking to learn."
I think there's value in replying to starman's posts.
I don't think there's any value in replying to starman

This message is a reply to:
 Message 648 by Percy, posted 11-10-2017 2:01 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 651 by Percy, posted 11-10-2017 4:58 PM Stile has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22388
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


(1)
Message 651 of 948 (823483)
11-10-2017 4:58 PM
Reply to: Message 650 by Stile
11-10-2017 2:14 PM


Re: The Win-Win situation for Science
Stile writes:
Oh, for sure.
I'm not actually trying to appeal to starman.
More like... using starman's posts as a jumping-off point and then attempting to form some sort of description that would appeal to "someone similar to starman, but looking to learn."
I think there's value in replying to starman's posts.
I don't think there's any value in replying to starman
Yeah, that sums it up pretty well. That's a good approach with some people. You know you're not going to convince them, or even get them to engage, but it sure is fun lining up all the ducks of an argument for the benefit of others.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 650 by Stile, posted 11-10-2017 2:14 PM Stile has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 652 by Tangle, posted 11-10-2017 6:32 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 652 of 948 (823489)
11-10-2017 6:32 PM
Reply to: Message 651 by Percy
11-10-2017 4:58 PM


Re: The Win-Win situation for Science
Percy writes:
but it sure is fun lining up all the ducks of an argument for the benefit of others.
Is it? Really? Maybe the first few times, but over and over again, often with the same immature ignoramouses spraying crap on the forum then leaving for 6 months then returning to do it again?
I wonder. The excuse for feeding the obvious troll is that it's for the benefit others. I seriously doubt that. I think it's really for the benefit of the writer. It's to demonstrate their overall superiority of argument. 'To hone my skills' as admitted by one poster.
Overall it seems a preposterous waste of time, no meeting of minds, no development of argument, no increase of understanding or knowledge, just endless, repetitive posturing on both sides.

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 651 by Percy, posted 11-10-2017 4:58 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 653 by jar, posted 11-10-2017 7:53 PM Tangle has replied
 Message 654 by Dogmafood, posted 11-10-2017 9:28 PM Tangle has not replied
 Message 661 by ringo, posted 11-22-2017 2:37 PM Tangle has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 393 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 653 of 948 (823492)
11-10-2017 7:53 PM
Reply to: Message 652 by Tangle
11-10-2017 6:32 PM


Re: The Win-Win situation for Science
The other option is to allow the utter nonsense that is Young Earth or Creationism or Biblical Christianity to stand as though it had any value or worth.

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 652 by Tangle, posted 11-10-2017 6:32 PM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 655 by Tangle, posted 11-11-2017 3:38 AM jar has not replied
 Message 665 by creation, posted 01-14-2018 11:14 PM jar has not replied

  
Dogmafood
Member (Idle past 348 days)
Posts: 1815
From: Ontario Canada
Joined: 08-04-2010


Message 654 of 948 (823494)
11-10-2017 9:28 PM
Reply to: Message 652 by Tangle
11-10-2017 6:32 PM


Re: The Win-Win situation for Science
Overall it seems a preposterous waste of time, no meeting of minds, no development of argument, no increase of understanding or knowledge, just endless, repetitive posturing on both sides.
You are getting cynical in your old age Tangle, there is no end to the battle for truth in advertising and we must persevere.
The mind that is informed by reason above emotion will surely prevail but we need as many of those as we can get and you get them by pointing out the evidence.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 652 by Tangle, posted 11-10-2017 6:32 PM Tangle has not replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


(2)
Message 655 of 948 (823503)
11-11-2017 3:38 AM
Reply to: Message 653 by jar
11-10-2017 7:53 PM


Re: The Win-Win situation for Science
Jar writes:
The other option is to allow the utter nonsense that is Young Earth or Creationism or Biblical Christianity to stand as though it had any value or worth.
That's not the only option. You make the arguments fully once, twice, maybe three times then when it becomes absolutely obvious that you're dealing with a hopeless troll you just ignore him. It'd be a few hundred pages less crap on the forum.
These idiots all disapear eventually, normally by getting banned. Starman will return again in 6 months and we'll do it all again. Pointless.

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 653 by jar, posted 11-10-2017 7:53 PM jar has not replied

  
Aussie
Member
Posts: 275
From: FL USA
Joined: 10-02-2006


Message 656 of 948 (824027)
11-21-2017 1:47 PM
Reply to: Message 646 by starman
11-10-2017 12:10 PM


Re: A bridge to the stars
I am suspending EVC from my posts for a few weeks or maybe forever, we'll see.
Translate: I'm running away.

"...heck is a small price to pay for the truth"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 646 by starman, posted 11-10-2017 12:10 PM starman has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 657 by RAZD, posted 11-21-2017 2:49 PM Aussie has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(1)
Message 657 of 948 (824029)
11-21-2017 2:49 PM
Reply to: Message 656 by Aussie
11-21-2017 1:47 PM


Re: A bridge to the stars
Translate: I'm running away.
Probably claiming victory somewhere, because, hey, nobody would debate him ...
LOL

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 656 by Aussie, posted 11-21-2017 1:47 PM Aussie has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 658 by Aussie, posted 11-21-2017 4:41 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

  
Aussie
Member
Posts: 275
From: FL USA
Joined: 10-02-2006


Message 658 of 948 (824035)
11-21-2017 4:41 PM
Reply to: Message 657 by RAZD
11-21-2017 2:49 PM


Re: A bridge to the stars
Yeah, I posted my running away observation before I read your response, but I find it exceedingly likely he is claiming victory. And the ones listening to him claim victory will in all likelihood not bother to fact check said claim to victory, but believe it outright. And the cycle continues...

"...heck is a small price to pay for the truth"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 657 by RAZD, posted 11-21-2017 2:49 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 659 by Pressie, posted 11-22-2017 7:48 AM Aussie has not replied

  
Pressie
Member
Posts: 2103
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


(1)
Message 659 of 948 (824065)
11-22-2017 7:48 AM
Reply to: Message 658 by Aussie
11-21-2017 4:41 PM


That's how they work.
Creationism through stealth. For example, more and more people in the world know know that Steve Austin wrote under the name of Stuart E. Nevins well before the 1980 Mount St. Helens eruption.
He runs away screaming like a scared little 2-year old girl when confronted with that fact. Yet, he continues pretending otherwise.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 658 by Aussie, posted 11-21-2017 4:41 PM Aussie has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 660 by dwise1, posted 11-22-2017 10:30 AM Pressie has not replied

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5930
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.8


(4)
Message 660 of 948 (824067)
11-22-2017 10:30 AM
Reply to: Message 659 by Pressie
11-22-2017 7:48 AM


I read some of his Nevins stuff. Like "this formation is this many feet thick and was supposed to have formed over this many years, so geologists believe that it formed at a uniformly constant rate of a hundredth of an inch per year." An outright lie since any geology student after the first year would know better and here he was a graduate student already. He knew better, so he was lying deliberately. Typical creationist.
Since then, he knows what conditions will cause problems for radiometric dating, so those are the samples that he seeks out. Again, lying deliberately. Typical creationist.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 659 by Pressie, posted 11-22-2017 7:48 AM Pressie has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024