Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 78 (8960 total)
152 online now:
DrJones*, dwise1, GDR, jar, PaulK, ringo (6 members, 146 visitors)
Newest Member: Mikee
Post Volume: Total: 869,466 Year: 1,214/23,288 Month: 1,214/1,851 Week: 338/320 Day: 38/72 Hour: 0/12


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Why Doesn't the Moon Have Life?
kuresu
Member (Idle past 898 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


Message 67 of 97 (425375)
10-02-2007 12:03 AM
Reply to: Message 66 by Scoopy
10-01-2007 10:40 PM


Actually, given that you made the first claim in the newly restarted discussion/debate, you should be the first to cite your sources.

That would be proper debate etiquette.

If your source does claim something similar to "if the earth moves a mile closer or further from the sun all life will die" then it is science fiction because science doesn't claim that. That would be a logical conclusion--another part of debating that really doesn't need sources. Here's his logical construction (as I understand it):
Scoopy's 'science' source says X.
Science doesn't actually claim X.
Therefore, Scoopy's source isn't science.

Scoopy's source claims to be scientific.
Scoopy's source is in fact not scientific (see first conclusion).
Therefore, Scoopy's source is fictitious (i.e. not real, not true).

Scoopy's source isn't science.
Scoopy's source is fiction.
Therefore, Scoopy's source is science fiction.

Taz doesn't need any sources to claim your source is science fiction. You made a claim, so it is on you to support your claim. Until then, you cannot disprove the counter-claim.

So who's your source?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by Scoopy, posted 10-01-2007 10:40 PM Scoopy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 71 by Scoopy, posted 10-02-2007 10:38 AM kuresu has not yet responded

  
kuresu
Member (Idle past 898 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


Message 77 of 97 (425457)
10-02-2007 11:36 AM
Reply to: Message 74 by Scoopy
10-02-2007 10:53 AM


Re: Precession and Axial Tilt
I know that the earth tilts back and forth causing the seasons we have

Um, no. That's not why we have seasons.
We have seasons because the earth is at a roughly 23 degree angle tilt. It keeps that same tilt (generally speaking).

S
U................../Earth (northern hemisphere has winter)
N

...................................................................S
/Earth (northern hemisphere has summer) U
...................................................................N

Notice how the tilt is the same in both seasons?
What's changed is what part of the earth is getting the most direct sunlight. In our winter, the southern hemisphere gets more sunlight. The opposite is true for summer.

We do not have seasons because the earth tilts back and forth.
We have seasons because the tilt changes which part of the earth gets more direct sunlight at one point in the revolution than another.

You're an aerospace engineer? Hard to believe you're making this kind of basic error.

Edited by kuresu, : stupid formatting. does bDoard not like empty space?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by Scoopy, posted 10-02-2007 10:53 AM Scoopy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 78 by Scoopy, posted 10-02-2007 11:41 AM kuresu has responded

  
kuresu
Member (Idle past 898 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


Message 81 of 97 (425466)
10-02-2007 12:10 PM
Reply to: Message 78 by Scoopy
10-02-2007 11:41 AM


Re: Precession and Axial Tilt
No, you said the earth tilts back and forth and that this causes the seasons.
I know that the earth tilts back and forth causing the seasons we have

There's a difference between saying the earth is at a tilt and that this causes the seasons and saying that the earth tilts back and forth and that this causes the seasons.

The difference? The earth really doesn't tilt back and forth. When it does change its tilt it's due to a wobble. The end effect, though, is that the earth is tilted at 23.5 degrees during our summer and 23.5 degrees during our winter.

From you statement, it would seem like we're at 23.5 degrees during our summer and -23.5 degrees during our winter.

Gotta be careful with words and word choice. You're a mathemetician, so you should understand the need to be precise.

As to the areospace engineer bit--I'm confusing you with someone else in this thread who claimed they were. On a second (and more) lookthrough, I see you only claim to be a mathemetician. So I revise my statement.
You're a mathemetician? Hard to believe you're getting this basic thing wrong.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by Scoopy, posted 10-02-2007 11:41 AM Scoopy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 83 by Scoopy, posted 10-02-2007 12:48 PM kuresu has not yet responded

  
kuresu
Member (Idle past 898 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


Message 84 of 97 (425477)
10-02-2007 12:49 PM
Reply to: Message 82 by Scoopy
10-02-2007 12:39 PM


Re: Precession and Axial Tilt
And the fact that the northern hemisphere is closer to the sun during its winter somehow escapes you?

The earth is closer to the sun by more than 1000 miles during the northern hemisphere winter than during the northern hemisphere summer.

Or did you mean that a different tilt would put the north pole 1000 miles further away from the sun? Since you're the mathemetician (and more importantly, because its your claim), go find out what that new tilt would be.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by Scoopy, posted 10-02-2007 12:39 PM Scoopy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 85 by Scoopy, posted 10-02-2007 12:53 PM kuresu has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2020