The Drake Equation Fallacy

a reply to: cooperton

How is that relevant to anything we were talking about? You really just jump from red herring to red herring regardless of the topic.

a reply to: Barcs

It was an attempt to put a religious spin on the big bang theory, or whatever you call the "blanket expansion of space".

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous
Actually he did use experiments. His model was compared again and again with the actual motion of the planets and was always found to be perfectly accurate. Mariners could use his predictions to navigate the ocean (which is really all the purpose the model had for any living human at the time anyway).

That is not experiment supporting geocentrism. That is making predictions based on past observation of celestial motion.

It's a bit circular to say that geocentrism, which is based on the motion of celestial bodies, accurately predicts the motion of celestial bodies which is it based on. Geocentrism failed because it could never explain retrograde orbit of the planets. People have been observing those same motions for millennia. They didn't validate geocentrism, just the pattern of motion in itself.

The Coppernican model is actually the one that ignored experimentation.

They both did until the modern age of science.

BREAKING: Scientists claim to have found first known ET protein in Meteorite

Scientists Claim to Have Found The First Known Extraterrestrial Protein in a Meteorite

A new discovery could be a clue for us to see if life could emerge elsewhere in the Solar System. Using a new analysis technique, scientists think they have found an extraterrestrial protein, tucked inside a meteorite that fell to Earth 30 years ago.

If their results can be replicated, it will be the first protein ever identified that didn't originate here on Earth.

"This paper characterises the first protein to be discovered in a meteorite," the researchers wrote in a paper uploaded to preprint server arXiv. Their work is yet to be peer reviewed, but the implications of this finding are noteworthy.

Over the last few years, meteorites from the wider Solar System have been yielding some building blocks for life as we know it. Cyanide, which could play a role in building molecules necessary for life; ribose, a type of sugar that is found in RNA; and amino acids, organic compounds that combine to form proteins.

Researchers have now revisited the meteorites that yielded the latter. Led by physicist Malcolm McGeoch of superconductor X-ray source supplier PLEX Corporation, the team focussed their search for something more.

Using "state-of-the-art" mass spectrometry, they found what they believe to be protein in a meteorite called Acfer 086, found in Algeria in 1990.

While not proof of extraterrestrial living creatures, this protein discovery makes for yet another of life's building blocks to be found in a space rock. There are many processes that can produce protein, but life, as far as we know, can't exist without it.

This is why science is great. They rechecked tests and data from years ago with new technology and found something new. It's still pending verification, and restesting, but this would be the first find of this type. It's only a matter of time before a living organism or remnants of one is found outside of earth. It's going to be funny when creationists suddenly stop the 'life only exists on earth' argument and move the goalposts to a god that creates life anywhere and abandon the absurd 'earth is special' argument.

Drake Equation: 1
Creationists: 0

a reply to: Barcs

Good so you agree with myself, dictionary and Brittanica that geocentrism is a scientific theory. Glad you can finally admit to being wrong.

a reply to: Barcs

Predictions which are then matched to measurement is the very definition of experimentation.

The experiments where to measure the locations and movements of celestial bodies and then match them to mathematically calculated equations which then fit observation.

To be honest I’m gonna give up with this thread. I see you promoting Greta Thunberg and the Democratic Party on other threads which fits perfectly with you attitude in here.

There’s only so much ignorance one person can exhibit before giving up on them.

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: Barcs

Predictions which are then matched to measurement is the very definition of experimentation.

The experiments where to measure the locations and movements of celestial bodies and then match them to mathematically calculated equations which then fit observation.

To be honest I’m gonna give up with this thread. I see you promoting Greta Thunberg and the Democratic Party on other threads which fits perfectly with you attitude in here.

There’s only so much ignorance one person can exhibit before giving up on them.

Almost but not quite. Measurement is compared to projected figures and if the data cannot be reconciled then it's back to the drawing board to play with the numbers and compile a new model.

a reply to: TzarChasm

In this case the data matched observation pretty well. Good enough for accurate calendars and navigational star charts.

Every voyage using Ptolemys work as the basis for navigation was an experiment.

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: TzarChasm

In this case the data matched observation pretty well. Good enough for accurate calendars and navigational star charts.

Every voyage using Ptolemys work as the basis for navigation was an experiment.

Obviously the technology they used for observation missed a few details. This is why even today our tools are constantly being tweaked and upgraded. You never know what they will catch on camera these days. Could be we will triangulate all these weird ET phenomena and pinpoint their origin. But beware of doors that can't be closed once they are opened...

a reply to: TzarChasm


Absolutely, as a man of science I totally agree.

My main issue is with the idea that Ptolemy was anything other than a scientist. In Reality he was a pioneer in the scientific field of Astronomy. Pretty good mathematician and geologist to boot.

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: TzarChasm


Absolutely, as a man of science I totally agree.

My main issue is with the idea that Ptolemy was anything other than a scientist. In Reality he was a pioneer in the scientific field of Astronomy. Pretty good mathematician and geologist to boot.

As I am known to say on occasion, A for effort, D for results. Certain allowances have to be made for materials being insufficient, but honesty is expected when those obstacles are recognized. Saying "I have the right answer" is not nearly as respectable as saying "I am as close to the right answer as resources can get me" and that's something you hear a lot in modern laboratories.

a reply to: TzarChasm

Of course, with 2000 years of scientific advance I’m sure Ptolemy if he was alive today would see the errors of his way and use modern tools and methods to debunk his own ideas.

My argument has always been he was an early scientist and could only use the tools and knowledge available at the time. I guess my point when simplified is that his work was based on observation and measurement, theology had no part in his model.

Early Greek philosophers were hardly primitive, illogical apes as some on here would lead you to believe. In fact their work, especially Plato, Pythagoras, Hipparchus and Aristotle is the foundation of modern science.

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: TzarChasm

Of course, with 2000 years of scientific advance I’m sure Ptolemy if he was alive today would see the errors of his way and use modern tools and methods to debunk his own ideas.

My argument has always been he was an early scientist and could only use the tools and knowledge available at the time. I guess my point when simplified is that his work was based on observation and measurement, theology had no part in his model.

Early Greek philosophers were hardly primitive, illogical apes as some on here would lead you to believe. In fact their work, especially Plato, Pythagoras, Hipparchus and Aristotle is the foundation of modern science.

Theology was the bread and butter of science back in the day. You don't get the king's gold unless you tell the king what he wants to hear, or more precisely, the king's priest. And naturally the king's priest was utterly invested in reinforcing the powers that granted authority in the age of monarchy. What good is a priest if there is no truth to the human inheritance as beloved children of an almighty supreme being?

a reply to: TzarChasm

Except Greece was at that time under Athenian Democracy?

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: Barcs

Good so you agree with myself, dictionary and Brittanica that geocentrism is a scientific theory. Glad you can finally admit to being wrong.

Everything you said went against that. Literally everything. You even explained what a hypothesis is, and it's not a theory. You are cracking me up. Think it's time for you to go back to the drawing board. Maybe take a basic science class and come back later.

a reply to: Barcs

Ok you’re clearly mentally ill. I said Ptolemy was a scientist and geocentrism was a theory.

a reply to: Barcs

Sat plenty of classes to achieve my degree in a scientific discipline then spend 20 years on the job in a scientific field.

What’s your background? I’d bed my life you’re just a kid that plays games all day.

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: Barcs

Ok you’re clearly mentally ill. I said Ptolemy was a scientist and geocentrism was a theory.

Everything you said directly conflicted with that. You didn't source a single experiment and failed to show geocentrism to be anything more than hypothesis. You just repeat the same red herrings LOL.

Sat plenty of classes to achieve my degree in a scientific discipline then spend 20 years on the job in a scientific field.

What’s your background? I’d bed my life you’re just a kid that plays games all day.

LOL @ a self appeal to authority. You were wrong. Get over yourself. I thought we moved past this, but you can't get over yourself. Your ego is HUGE, you can't even admit a simple mistaken in terminology, you instead quadruple down on the the same tireless red herrings.

Funny how you guys all ignored the protein found in the meteor to focus on silly semantics arguments. You are purposely trying to distract from the topic.

originally posted by: Barcs
BREAKING: Scientists claim to have found first known ET protein in Meteorite

They really got their art of spin down, don't they?

a reply to: Barcs

What do alien proteins have to do with Geocentrism?

I'm afraid it's you who can't accept being wrong.

You've spend the last month arguing that Ptolemy wasn't a scientist and Geocentrism isn't a Theory despite Wikipedia, Dictionary, American Institute of Physics and various other reputable sources contradicting your opinion.

Not to mention you're nothing more than an entitled little geek with absolutely no experience working in a scientific field. Playing games all day does not qualify you.

So LOL, ROFL, LMAO and PWN yourself somewhere else.