The Drake Equation Fallacy

a reply to: turbonium1

I'll assume that if the Firmament was proven to exist, you would believe the Earth is flat, and not a ball flying through space, so if that's the case, then we must find a way to prove the Firmament exists, if possible.

Well I believe in Jesus Christ first and I've studied enough to know the
Bible seems to conflict on the subject because I have looked. So there
you go I figure if God reveals it I'll believe it. Til then nothing gets in
the way of what I do believe.



Sleep well

a reply to: Barcs

I didn't ignore anything. This is not direct detection of gravity waves irrespective of the headline. Not even close. Read your own article.

I'm sorry but you're an arrogant idiot who passes off others opinions as your own so i'm not wasting anymore of my time.

"If the beams from both arms arrive back at the crux at the same time, they cancel each other out, and no signal is produced in the system's light detector. This is the normal, expected scenario. But if one of the beams arrives a bit late, a signal is produced, which COULD be evidence of a gravitational wave.

"The LIGO team's claim of direct gravitational-wave detection will very likely undergo intense scrutiny before the scientific community fully accepts the result as sound. There are no other experiments that measure the same kind of gravitational waves that LIGO is sensitive to, so there is currently no way to directly compare the results with another experiment.

The research will be published in an upcoming issue of the Physical Review Letters."

As i'm sure you are aware this does not pass as verified detection of gravity waves. Far from it. Article should be titled "Scientists CLAIM to have directly detected gravity waves". Don't let facts get in the way of your prejudice tho.

originally posted by: ravenshadow13
a reply to: turbonium1

There are so many problems with this.

Just curious if you were home schooled, or went to religious school? If you have any knowledge of chemistry or physics, or do those sciences just fly in the face of God in your mind?????

If someone had real evidence for this firmament then I would certainly consider it. I’m a science. I’ll consider any and all evidence. But some quote on someone’s tombstone is not evidence. Neither are videos that could be altered or come from who knows where. Show me something from a reputable source. Show me, you know, exactly how our satellites got past this firmament. And our space rovers. I’d be really curious about how that works.

Good grief.

The fathers of medicine used to believe in the humors and all sorts of things that are not real and that no one believes anymore unless they literally live in a world deprived of logic and evidence.

Von Braun had no reason to lie, he was dead. It's not solid proof, but you certainly cannot dismiss the world's top authority on rocketry, like it means nothing. Nice try though.

You have never seen, in person, or on film, a single rocket, or satellite launch, fly beyond the blue skies above Earth, and you never will, either.

No film TAKEN FROM EARTH shows any rocket or satellite fly beyond our blue skies, too. Are you aware of that fact? You are now.

Why, knowing this, do you believe rockets and satellites have flown into 'orbit'? There is no valid evidence of it, to confirm it is true.

When you try telling me I have no knowledge of sciences, or so forth, please consider why you hold up something to be true, without any valid evidence of it being true. Otherwise, it ends up looking rather foolish, and hypocritical.

a reply to: turbonium1

Eventually, all of their lies will fall apart, one by one. It is inevitable.

Of course, Because as I like to say, The truth lives forever but lies die with
those who tell them.

originally posted by: turbonium1

originally posted by: ravenshadow13
a reply to: turbonium1

There are so many problems with this.

Just curious if you were home schooled, or went to religious school? If you have any knowledge of chemistry or physics, or do those sciences just fly in the face of God in your mind?????

If someone had real evidence for this firmament then I would certainly consider it. I’m a science. I’ll consider any and all evidence. But some quote on someone’s tombstone is not evidence. Neither are videos that could be altered or come from who knows where. Show me something from a reputable source. Show me, you know, exactly how our satellites got past this firmament. And our space rovers. I’d be really curious about how that works.

Good grief.

The fathers of medicine used to believe in the humors and all sorts of things that are not real and that no one believes anymore unless they literally live in a world deprived of logic and evidence.

Von Braun had no reason to lie, he was dead. It's not solid proof, but you certainly cannot dismiss the world's top authority on rocketry, like it means nothing. Nice try though.

You have never seen, in person, or on film, a single rocket, or satellite launch, fly beyond the blue skies above Earth, and you never will, either.

No film TAKEN FROM EARTH shows any rocket or satellite fly beyond our blue skies, too. Are you aware of that fact? You are now.

Why, knowing this, do you believe rockets and satellites have flown into 'orbit'? There is no valid evidence of it, to confirm it is true.

When you try telling me I have no knowledge of sciences, or so forth, please consider why you hold up something to be true, without any valid evidence of it being true. Otherwise, it ends up looking rather foolish, and hypocritical.

So amuater astromoners, professional astromeners, scientists, astronauts etc etc are all lying! Next you will be saying the earth is flat lolololoool

You are coming up with these stupid theories to suit your stupid beliefs, simple as that. You are the type of person that will cry demons if we found intelligent life in the universe. So glad that people like you are a dying breed!

a reply to: Jay-morris

I don't think it's fair to call anyone's opinions stupid, I'm sure they have their reasoning for it.

However personally the whole flat Earth thing is just too far of a stretch for me. I mean there are some compelling arguments but these can generally be de-bunked easily. The only thing i will say is that NASA definitely fake some of their footage from the ISS. The videos showing people pulling wires, clear CGI, the female hair (medusa lady) all scream fake. The reason for faking it, i have no idea but i don't think it's to hide the Earths shape. I've looked through many a telescope and seen with my own eyes other planets which are spherical and follow orbits around the sun which you can calculate. I dabbled with the notion of Geocentrism years ago but my research led me to believe the solar system is indeed heliocentric.

The cosmological axis of evil is a true anomaly which i don't think science can explain properly. Certainly gives some backing to the concept of Earth holding a special place in the universe. (PLEASE RESEARCH THIS IDEA BEFORE ATTACKING IT)

Lawrence Krauss is quoted as follows in a 2006 Edge.org article:

"But when you look at CMB map, you also see that the structure that is observed, is in fact, in a weird way, correlated with the plane of the earth around the sun. Is this Copernicus coming back to haunt us? That's crazy. We're looking out at the whole universe. There's no way there should be a correlation of structure with our motion of the earth around the sun – the plane of the earth around the sun – the ecliptic. That would say we are truly the center of the universe."

originally posted by: turbonium1
Like someone who blindly believes in unsubstantiated claims like 'gravity' exists, and 'gravity waves have been detected', because it comes from your Gods of Science, the Supreme Beings of All Knowledge?

Blindly? The research is peer reviewed and publicly published by EXPERTS and anybody else who wants to fact check or retest. That's like saying when you go to the dentist, you blindly believe his claims about your teeth. He is your god of teeth and a mechanic is your god of car. Why trust them? Why EVER trust an expert about anything?

People who work at the 'Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory' (LIGO) claimed to have detected 'gravity waves' trillions of miles away, in 'space'- the perfect place, because nobody can ever prove that you're making up countless bulls%^* claims, and being 'scientists', Gods of All Knowledge, people just blindly accept all of your claims as being 100% true.

Did you even read the article? It explained the methodology. And I'm sorry but gravity is absolutely measurable and calculable.

Your Gods proclaim to have finally found 'gravity waves', when two 'black holes' merged together "about 1.3 billion years ago"!

You believe it is a 'fact' - one of countless other 'facts', which were told to you, by these all-knowing, all-seeing Gods!

So you know more than these experts? Go ahead and refute their methods. This is just one of the many predictions that general relativity makes, that has been verified empirically. LOL @ pretending they just made it up.

You have completely drank the koolaid. You literally think that all science is a conspiracy against god. It must be sad to be so paranoid and distrusting of experts, many of whom believe in god and support these findings.

originally posted by: carsforkids
There is dissension among peers. And what James Tour said
is epic to the credibility of science in general. All of science
But they can only trust what men say. IDIOTS

Comical that you bring up James Tour, a guy that lies to promote religion and talks about things that aren't even related to his expertise. You admitted to being ignorant, yet you UNDERSTAND Tour's argument? Break it down for us. (oh wait, we all know that won't happen).

So messed up because these people have no idea what they're
doing bringing up their kids as atheists. Influencing relatives
with their neg crap lies. If I ever heard the slightest whisper
saying one of my kids might end up in some place called hell?

The vast majority of atheists in the US today were brought up religious. Just an FYI. Nothing wrong with not forcing a religion or belief system down a kid's throat before the age of reason. There is nothing negative at all about it, you just have been programmed to hate atheists and thus you constantly project this kind of nonsense about them.

originally posted by: Jay-morris
a reply to: carsforkids

It is evidence Einstein! Just because you keep repeating
that it isn't evidence doesn't make you correct.

If I leave my finger prints at the scene of a crime what do they
call that in court?

Seriously! You are not that bright! Please post evidence that this means your God is real? It's a question you have been dodging since I first posted it!

You didn't know that he has directly measured god's finger print and compared it to the universe and proved it objectively to match?

How, you ask? Well, that's just him working in mysterious ways. You must accept it because some things are complex and because he said so.

originally posted by: Grenade
I didn't ignore anything. This is not direct detection of gravity waves irrespective of the headline. Not even close. Read your own article.

Define "direct." Funny how all you can do is dismiss something on semantics.

I'm sorry but you're an arrogant idiot who passes off others opinions as your own so i'm not wasting anymore of my time.

False. I back up my claims.

"The LIGO team's claim of direct gravitational-wave detection will very likely undergo intense scrutiny before the scientific community fully accepts the result as sound. There are no other experiments that measure the same kind of gravitational waves that LIGO is sensitive to, so there is currently no way to directly compare the results with another experiment.

You realize that since then, gravity waves have been detect several more times, some even this year. You don't seem to understand that nothing is ABSOLUTE PROOF in science. This merely increases the probability of general relativity being valid (not that it needs it).

As i'm sure you are aware this does not pass as verified detection of gravity waves. Far from it. Article should be titled "Scientists CLAIM to have directly detected gravity waves". Don't let facts get in the way of your prejudice tho.

Yeah, you've been bamboozled. LOL @ making up terms like "does not pass as verified detection." Again, this is a prediction of relativity that matches reality. Sorry you don't like it.

a reply to: Barcs

Comical that you bring up James Tour, a guy that lies to promote religion and talks about things that aren't even related to his expertise. You admitted to being ignorant, yet you UNDERSTAND Tour's argument? Break it down for us. (oh wait, we all know that won't happen).

That's right Einstein, cause it wouldn't make a lick of sense to do so. If you won't
even watch the vid why in the hell would I break it down for a pack a squirrels?
Get real.

And you pal do you care to go back thru this thread and see just who's displayed
all the psychopathic hate ? See that's the advantage of text miho.
You can't just lie about shlt and get away with it. It'll bite you in the ass every
time. So remember that next time you feel you need to lie your silly ass off.

a reply to: Barcs

OK I'll re-word my argument.

Gravity cannot be measured by any instrument as we don't even have a viable explanation for its force or how it interacts with mass. It is a ficticious force according to general relativity in that it is directly proportional to an objects mass rather than being it's own force.

As we are unable to find a related elementary particle to mediate for the Gravity then all arguments are hypothetical. We have never found or detected this particle.

It's not even a force. More the curvature of space time.

We can see the effects of gravity on mass however we cannot explain the interaction nor can we observe gravity without invoking other forces and scientific principles. Ever seen a gravity detector?

You really should do more research.

If you had you would have known the detection of gravity waves is still in question.

Please see the following article in newscientist. I realise your never going to compromise so probably wasting my breath but contrary to what you might think I know more about physics than the average Joe.

www.google.com...

Also sInce your clearly a scholar can you please provide an explanation for the cosmological axis of evil?

originally posted by: whereislogic
...
Evolutionists readily acknowledge that the origin of life remains a mystery​—although there are many conflicting theories. A leading new atheist, Richard Dawkins, claims that by virtue of the vast number of planets that must exist in the universe, life was bound to appear somewhere. But many reputable scientists are not so sure. Cambridge Professor John Barrow says that the belief in “the evolution of life and mind” hits “dead-ends at every stage. There are just so many ways in which life can fail to evolve in a complex and hostile environment that it would be sheer hubris to suppose that, simply given enough carbon and enough time, anything is possible.”
...

Something to consider before assuming a planet is habitable or has favorable conditions for the chemical evolution of life from nonliving matter...

Space is a dangerous place where lethal radiation is common and meteoroids are an ever-present danger. Yet, our blue planet seems to fly through this galactic “shooting gallery” with relative impunity. Why? Because earth is protected by amazing armor​—a powerful magnetic field and a custom-made atmosphere.

Earth’s magnetic field: The center of the earth is a spinning ball of molten iron, which causes our planet to have a huge and powerful magnetic field that stretches far into space. This shield protects us from the full intensity of cosmic radiation and from potentially deadly forces emanating from the sun. The latter include the solar wind, which is a steady stream of energetic particles; solar flares, which in minutes release as much energy as billions of hydrogen bombs; and explosions in the outer region, or corona, of the sun, which blast billions of tons of matter into space. You can see visible reminders of the protection you receive from the earth’s magnetic field. Solar flares and explosions in the sun’s corona trigger intense auroras, colorful displays of light visible in the upper atmosphere near earth’s magnetic poles.

Earth’s atmosphere: This blanket of gases not only keeps us breathing but also provides additional protection. An outer layer of the atmosphere, the stratosphere, contains a form of oxygen called ozone, which absorbs up to 99 percent of incoming ultraviolet (UV) radiation. Thus, the ozone layer helps to protect many forms of life​—including humans and the plankton we depend on to produce much of our oxygen—​from dangerous radiation. The amount of stratospheric ozone is not fixed. Rather, it changes, growing as the intensity of UV radiation rises. So the ozone layer is a dynamic, efficient shield.

The atmosphere also protects us from a daily barrage of debris from space​—millions of objects ranging in size from tiny particles to boulders. By far the majority of these burn up in the atmosphere, becoming bright flashes of light called meteors. However, earth’s shields do not block radiation that is essential to life, such as heat and visible light. The atmosphere even helps to distribute the heat around the globe, and at night the atmosphere acts as a blanket, slowing the escape of heat.

Earth’s atmosphere and magnetic field truly are marvels of design that are still not fully understood.

Is it only a coincidence that our planet is protected by two dynamic shields?

And is this subject ever considered in any proposed estimated amount of so-called "habitable planets" in any variation of any sort of Drake-like equation? Without similar shielding, you can't really think of it as a "habitable planet". There are other factors often overlooked in discussions about supposed habitable planets elsewhere in the universe.

originally posted by: carsforkids
That's right Einstein, cause it wouldn't make a lick of sense to do so. If you won't
even watch the vid why in the hell would I break it down for a pack a squirrels?
Get real.

Your assumptions are killing you. What makes you think I haven't looked into Tour's claims? Why do you think I asked you to break it down and give me his best argument? Because his arguments are mostly personal opinion, not based on any research at all.

And you pal do you care to go back thru this thread and see just who's displayed
all the psychopathic hate ? See that's the advantage of text miho.
You can't just lie about shlt and get away with it. It'll bite you in the ass every
time. So remember that next time you feel you need to lie your silly ass off.

Where did I lie again? Oh wait, you just keep making # up. It gets old. You are acting like the kids in your avatar. You make wild claims like saying evolution or natural origin of life is impossible and offer no supporting data. You claim I lie, but haven't demonstrated a single one. Do you really think repeating yourself is a valid argument?

originally posted by: Grenade
Gravity cannot be measured by any instrument as we don't even have a viable explanation for its force or how it interacts with mass. It is a ficticious force according to general relativity in that it is directly proportional to an objects mass rather than being it's own force.

Mass bending space-time is a viable explanation that has made several accurate predictions. It's the best theory we have and detecting gravity waves was a big step forward. We know exactly how gravity interacts with mass, we can determine the exact gravitational force that one object exerts on another. If we didn't we wouldn't have space craft capable of escaping the earth's gravity, nor would we be able to do complex maneuvers like sling shot, where you use the planet's gravity to increase your speed.

As we are unable to find a related elementary particle to mediate for the Gravity then all arguments are hypothetical. We have never found or detected this particle.

False. There might not be an elementary particle.

It's not even a force. More the curvature of space time.

This is true, but again the effects are measurable and act like force.

We can see the effects of gravity on mass however we cannot explain the interaction nor can we observe gravity without invoking other forces and scientific principles. Ever seen a gravity detector?

Ever floated off into space by jumping?

Again, having doubts isn't a refutation. Part of a scientist's job is to doubt findings and try to disprove them. Regardless of the exact specifications we know gravity is real and all available evidence points to the bending of space-time as the cause of it. There is no better explanation at this point, and denial of gravity is pretty silly. It's not a scientific theory because it's fun. It's made many accurate predictions and everything we have observed thus far only confirms it. Otherwise it would be a hypothesis, not a theory.

Also sInce your clearly a scholar can you please provide an explanation for the cosmological axis of evil?

What is a "cosmological axis of evil?"

a reply to: Barcs

Why don't you quit squawking at everyone and refute Tours claims?
I mean your anger is really horrible. All I'm doing is calling em like I
see em. I'm not gonna help you do shlt. You think you can act the way
you do, call people silly names. And force a bunch nonsense on others
who are smart enough to see right thru it. I'm never gonna take you
seriously. There's nothing in what you have to offer that isn't completely
and more so ridiculous. Than your spaghetti monster you people love
to toss around. Frankly I think you're little off for try'n to sell what
i'm not buy'n. You remind me of spoiled child.

You wanna refute Tours claims go for it. Do something other than act
like a jerk for once.

Where did I lie again? Oh wait, you just keep making # up.

LOL you taught me well brotha!

originally posted by: Grenade
Also sInce your clearly a scholar can you please provide an explanation for the cosmological axis of evil?

If you don't mind, I'd like to add my 2 cents. If you are talking about the apparent alignment of the solar system with some of the structures in the CMB, then in my opinion, that alignment is likely to be a coincidence.

I say this because the galaxy is a chaotic place. Gravitational effects on passing stars and other objects jostle protoplanetary disks around, making their orientations rather random.

That's not to mention the galactic mergers that have happened, and will happen again, that can further affect the orientation of solar systems.

An example from the past is the Sagittarius Dwarf Galaxy. The Milky Way's shape likely changed substantially 2 billion years ago (a time that the solar system existed) when it merged with the Sagittarius Dwarf galaxy. That major re-organizing of the Milky way is believed to have created the spiral arms, and it likely re-oriented solar systems like ours. An example in the future would be that when the Andromeda Galaxy and the Milky Way merge in about 4 or 5 billion years, the resulting gravitational forces will likely re-orient our solar system.

That is to say, in the long term life of the universe the CMB would have remained relatively constant while the orientation of our solar system would likely not. With that in mind, it seems the current orientation aligning with CMB structures is temporary -- and a coincidence.

a reply to: Box of Rain

Hey very nice retort thank you for posting!

Don't be shy at all. I'm sure you know things are little heated in
here lol but I am hoping to cool things down amigo.

a reply to: Barcs

Looks like I lied again Barcs I'll help you out this much short
and sweet and right here at your disposal.




Refute away! Just another liar right?

a reply to: carsforkids

Refute away! Just another liar right?

Yep, just another liar!