|
|
|
ktesibios
SFN Regular
USA
505 Posts |
 Posted - 10/26/2004 : 13:33:26 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
Are you referring to the expansion model of very old (13 billion + years) light?
I think the point there is that the speed of light hasn't changed, the distances have.
No, I pointed out that the fact that we can recognize the spectra of familiar elements in the light from other galaxies implies that niether the periodic table nor the physical laws which govern the emission and absorbtion spectra of the elements haven't changed in a loooonnnng time.
It turns out that it was Dave W. who provided the insight that creationists would rather multiply entities endlessly with "could be"s than acccept the inference of constancy in physics (sorry Dave- I must be getting a bit senile), and that since we can't absolutely prove (in the geometry class sense) even that the Earth orbits the Sun they can find an infinite number of outskis.
The post can be found here.
I think my premise that when people demand deductive certainty where only inductive reasoning can apply there's simply no communicating with them still stands.  |
"The Republican agenda is to turn the United States into a third-world shithole." -P.Z.Myers |
 |
|
|
Ricky
SFN Die Hard
USA
4907 Posts |
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9696 Posts |
Posted - 10/26/2004 : 16:00:55 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by mountain_hare
Go and look at The Distance to Supernova SN1987A and the Speed of Light
This is a supernova observed in 1987, acted EXACTLY as our general knowledge of radiation would expect.
Not only radiation, but the speed of light...
Simple trigonometry can be used to address the uniform speed of light.
When the supernova went off, the light started to travel toward us. At the same time it also started to travel in perpendicular direction from us. Along the way, that light illuminated gas, at an increasing distance from the supernova. Reflections from the gas enable us measure the speed of light "over there", all those 170000 years ago.
If the light did indeed travel faster, then the angular speed would have to be higher than we observe, or the supernova was much much farther away, making the resulting in the same angular speed. But then the speed of light had to even higher than that in order to reach us in time.
If someone can figure out a way to solve this problem, I would be very interested in how it is done.
|
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
mountain_hare
New Member
13 Posts |
Posted - 10/26/2004 : 16:53:35 [Permalink]
|
SkepticFriends is back up for me, guys.
|
"This may sound really off the wall, but listen to me. You've got to believe me. I've not gone crazy, and I'm not fooling around. At first I thought I was losing my mind. But now I know I'm not. It's not me. The scientific community. It's being invaded by Creationism. Someone's ignorant delusions come to life. Little by little, the
invasion is spreading. Trying to swallow up everything in ignorance."
The words of Dr. Harry to the disbelieving scientific community, who were amazed that such idiotic ideals as "Creationism" would ever be taken seriously.
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26031 Posts |
Posted - 10/26/2004 : 16:55:03 [Permalink]
|
ktesibios wrote:quote:
(sorry Dave- I must be getting a bit senile)
If so, I share your decrepitude - I thought it was someone else, also. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 10/27/2004 : 06:02:53 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by ktesibios
quote:
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
Are you referring to the expansion model of very old (13 billion + years) light?
I think the point there is that the speed of light hasn't changed, the distances have.
No, I pointed out that the fact that we can recognize the spectra of familiar elements in the light from other galaxies implies that niether the periodic table nor the physical laws which govern the emission and absorbtion spectra of the elements haven't changed in a loooonnnng time.
It turns out that it was Dave W. who provided the insight that creationists would rather multiply entities endlessly with "could be"s than acccept the inference of constancy in physics (sorry Dave- I must be getting a bit senile), and that since we can't absolutely prove (in the geometry class sense) even that the Earth orbits the Sun they can find an infinite number of outskis.
The post can be found here.
I think my premise that when people demand deductive certainty where only inductive reasoning can apply there's simply no communicating with them still stands.
Ah, yes. OK. I agree that one does have to accept certain basics such as our senses accurately return data to our brain barring any injury or inebriation. (Logical extreme to existentialist arguement posited by Creationism.)
|
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
Peptide
Skeptic Friend
USA
69 Posts |
Posted - 10/27/2004 : 08:48:21 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse
Not only radiation, but the speed of light...
Simple trigonometry can be used to address the uniform speed of light.
When the supernova went off, the light started to travel toward us. At the same time it also started to travel in perpendicular direction from us. Along the way, that light illuminated gas, at an increasing distance from the supernova. Reflections from the gas enable us measure the speed of light "over there", all those 170000 years ago.
If the light did indeed travel faster, then the angular speed would have to be higher than we observe, or the supernova was much much farther away, making the resulting in the same angular speed. But then the speed of light had to even higher than that in order to reach us in time.
If someone can figure out a way to solve this problem, I would be very interested in how it is done.
I will definitely use this in the rebuttal. Even a creationist can't argue against trig and geometry. Do you have online references? |
|
|
|
Plyss
Skeptic Friend
Netherlands
231 Posts |
Posted - 10/27/2004 : 09:27:25 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Peptide
Even a creationist can't argue against trig and geometry.
I wouldn't be to sure. The whole Pi=3 thing doesn't seem to bother them too greatly either  |
Miss Tick sniffed. 'You could say this piece of advice is pricesless', she said. 'Are you listening?'
'Yes' said Tiffany.
'Good now...If you trust in yourself.."
'Yes..?'
'..and believe in your dreams...'
'yes?'
'...and follow your star..' Miss Tick went on.
'Yes?'
'You'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things and weren't so lazy. Goodbye.' |
|
|
|
Peptide
Skeptic Friend
USA
69 Posts |
Posted - 10/27/2004 : 10:22:25 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Plyss
I wouldn't be to sure. The whole Pi=3 thing doesn't seem to bother them too greatly either
To tell you the truth, that biblical inconsistency never bothered me. Firstly, no author would say that it was "10 cubits in diameter and 31.4 cubits around". That sounds pretty lame and too exact for what the author was trying to convey. Secondly, I would actually expect it to be greater than 31.4 cubits since making a perfect circle is pretty hard to do with bronze age technology. More than likely it was slightly elliptical which would increase the circumference. Thirdly, if you measured the diameter from the outside edges of the container and measured the circumference from the inside edge then it might actually be close to accurate. All in all, I really don't count this as a biblical innacuracy. The Genesis story and Noah's Flood, however, . . . |
|
|
|
BigPapaSmurf
SFN Die Hard
3192 Posts |
Posted - 10/27/2004 : 11:28:16 [Permalink]
|
| The devil is in the details... what a crappy saying forget I said it. |
"...things I have neither seen nor experienced nor heard tell of from anybody else; things, what is more, that do not in fact exist and could not ever exist at all. So my readers must not believe a word I say." -Lucian on his book True History
"...They accept such things on faith alone, without any evidence. So if a fraudulent and cunning person who knows how to take advantage of a situation comes among them, he can make himself rich in a short time." -Lucian critical of early Christians c.166 AD From his book, De Morte Peregrini |
|
|
|
Plyss
Skeptic Friend
Netherlands
231 Posts |
Posted - 10/27/2004 : 12:03:35 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Peptide
To tell you the truth, that biblical inconsistency never bothered me. Firstly, no author would say that it was "10 cubits in diameter and 31.4 cubits around". That sounds pretty lame and too exact for what the author was trying to convey. Secondly, I would actually expect it to be greater than 31.4 cubits since making a perfect circle is pretty hard to do with bronze age technology. More than likely it was slightly elliptical which would increase the circumference. Thirdly, if you measured the diameter from the outside edges of the container and measured the circumference from the inside edge then it might actually be close to accurate. All in all, I really don't count this as a biblical innacuracy. The Genesis story and Noah's Flood, however, . . .
To be honest, if i were still a christian i wouldn't be[1] bothered with any of these innacuracies or contradictions because i would treat them as metaphors or examples or just stories. The whole Pi=3 thing doesn't become problematic until you want to claim that the bible is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
[1] Indeed, they didn't bother me when i was still a christian. |
Miss Tick sniffed. 'You could say this piece of advice is pricesless', she said. 'Are you listening?'
'Yes' said Tiffany.
'Good now...If you trust in yourself.."
'Yes..?'
'..and believe in your dreams...'
'yes?'
'...and follow your star..' Miss Tick went on.
'Yes?'
'You'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things and weren't so lazy. Goodbye.' |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9696 Posts |
Posted - 10/27/2004 : 20:05:02 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Peptide
quote:
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse
Not only radiation, but the speed of light...
Simple trigonometry can be used to address the uniform speed of light.
When the supernova went off, the light started to travel toward us. At the same time it also started to travel in perpendicular direction from us. Along the way, that light illuminated gas, at an increasing distance from the supernova. Reflections from the gas enable us measure the speed of light "over there", all those 170000 years ago.
If the light did indeed travel faster, then the angular speed would have to be higher than we observe, or the supernova was much much farther away, making the resulting in the same angular speed. But then the speed of light had to even higher than that in order to reach us in time.
If someone can figure out a way to solve this problem, I would be very interested in how it is done.
I will definitely use this in the rebuttal. Even a creationist can't argue against trig and geometry. Do you have online references?
Try this... It doesn't have any fancy pics in it though. I'll look for others.
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/dave_matson/young-earth/additional_topics/supernova.html |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9696 Posts |
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
Posted - 10/29/2004 : 07:31:11 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Peptide
I will definitely use this in the rebuttal. Even a creationist can't argue against trig and geometry. Do you have online references?
Hey, Peptide, if I'm not mistaken, today's the day to post your rebuttal. How's it going?
Let us know when it's up (and perhaps post a copy to this website...)! |
|
|
|
Peptide
Skeptic Friend
USA
69 Posts |
Posted - 10/29/2004 : 11:07:38 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Cuneiformist
quote:
Originally posted by Peptide
I will definitely use this in the rebuttal. Even a creationist can't argue against trig and geometry. Do you have online references?
Hey, Peptide, if I'm not mistaken, today's the day to post your rebuttal. How's it going?
Let us know when it's up (and perhaps post a copy to this website...)!
It's going well, but a little rushed. A bit of procrastination on my part. So far I have used supernova 1987A and millisecond pulsars to support uniformitarianism. I have also used helium escape to refute another argument. I will be using carbon dating to show the presence of humans before 4,000 BC, since carbon dating was used to date the written documents I will use it to show older cultures. I might also add the Lake Sigetsu varve data to show the calibration curve for carbon dating (which goes back for 45,000 years). That, and and there are current cultures in secluded places that don't use written language now, so writing is an inaccurate measure for demonstrating the age of humanity. |
|
|
 |
|
Topic Locked
