Real Science Friday: A Horse is a Horse Of Course

[Stripe]

We're not even at the center of our own galaxy, how could we be at the center of the universe?

:chuckle:

The claim is not that we are "at" the center. Just that we are near it. I.e. our galaxy is near the center of the universe.

Interestingly enough, if the Milky Way is near the center of the universe then that might explain why light can reach us from vast distances when there is not enough time for it to reach us assuming no center to the universe.

 

[The Barbarian]

The claim is not that we are "at" the center. Just that we are near it. I.e. our galaxy is near the center of the universe.

Presumably, in your view, God did the best He could to put it in the center, but was a bit off. Maybe 8,000 light years off.

Interestingly enough, if the Milky Way is near the center of the universe then that might explain why light can reach us from vast distances when there is not enough time for it to reach us assuming no center to the universe.

Unfortunately, as you see from the data, there's no reason to believe that we are anywhere near the "center" or even that there is one.

 

[Jukia]

Presumably, in your view, God did the best He could to put it in the center, but was a bit off. Maybe 8,000 light years off.



Unfortunately, as you see from the data, there's no reason to believe that we are anywhere near the "center" or even that there is one.

Data? Data? Stripe don't need no stinkin' data.

 

[Stripe]

Presumably, in your view, God did the best He could to put it in the center, but was a bit off. Maybe 8,000 light years off.

:squint:

You're weird.

Unfortunately, as you see from the data, there's no reason to believe that we are anywhere near the "center" or even that there is one.

Be that as it may, if you're wrong it still presents an interesting possibility.

And, lucky for us, there is no reason to treat your blind faith in "the data" with any sort of reverence.

:mock: Barbarian.

 

[Jukia]

:squint:

You're weird.


Be that as it may, if you're wrong it still presents an interesting possibility.

And, lucky for us, there is no reason to treat your blind faith in "the data" with any sort of reverence.

:mock: Barbarian.

I repeat "Stripe don't need no stinkin' data"

 

[The Barbarian]

Be that as it may, if you're wrong it still presents an interesting possibility.

Yes, and if it rained chocolate, we'd not have to buy Hershey bars.

And, lucky for us, there is no reason to treat your blind faith in "the data" with any sort of reverence.

Data is the antithesis of "blind faith." No reverence needed. Just a willingness to accept whatever the truth is. If you are a Christian, you should never be afraid of the truth.

 

[Alate_One]

And, lucky for us, there is no reason to treat your blind faith in "the data" with any sort of reverence.

Not something a scientist would say, Stripe. For someone claiming to be a "scientist" you don't seem to have the first clue as to what it is about.

Scientists base their interpretations on The DATA. It isn't "reverence", simply a functional relationship. If the world around us is God's creation you should be willing to accept the conclusions that study of it gives us.

 

[Stripe]

Yes, and if it rained chocolate, we'd not have to buy Hershey bars.

Yer not a very curious person, are you? :noid:

Data is the antithesis of "blind faith." No reverence needed. Just a willingness to accept whatever the truth is. If you are a Christian, you should never be afraid of the truth.

True. Except being able to use the word, "data" doesn't make your assertions any more convincing.

 

[Jukia]

Yer not a very curious person, are you? :noid:



True. Except being able to use the word, "data" doesn't make your assertions any more convincing.

Except if there is "data" you can look at it.
Using the word "Bible" however does make your assertions more convincing?

 

[rainee]

Yes, and if it rained chocolate, we'd not have to buy Hershey bars.

Hello dear Master!

Were you signaling for me?

If I could rain chocolate, well, it is a frightening thing to think about, really... I would probably explode.
I guess it is a good thing you couldn't give me that ability...

Anyway just wanted to give y'all a heads up about Venus and Mars
this week: "The solar system's innermost planets are about to put on a beautiful show."

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2010/31mar_sunsetplanets.htm?list166871


Have a good one!

 

[The Barbarian]

Barbarian chuckles:
Yes, and if it rained chocolate, we'd not have to buy Hershey bars.

Yer not a very curious person, are you?

You've clearly conflated "curious", and "gullible." Wondering about the world, is a different issue than making up stories with no data to support them.

Barbarian suggests:
Data is the antithesis of "blind faith." No reverence needed. Just a willingness to accept whatever the truth is. If you are a Christian, you should never be afraid of the truth.

Having data is what makes scientific theories better than your fairy tales.

 

[The Barbarian]

Hey, rainee. There is some data to support the idea that chocolate consumption causes brain changes that makes people happier. Seems more common in women. My youngest daughter has a T-shirt that says "Give me the chocolate and no one gets hurt."

Anyway just wanted to give y'all a heads up about Venus and Mars this week: "The solar system's innermost planets are about to put on a beautiful show."

Yep. It will be years before Mars is this good for viewing, again.

 

[Stripe]

You've clearly conflated "curious", and "gullible."

Not at all. I think it is perfectly reasonable to consider the idea that we might be near the center of the universe.

Why would that not be a reasonable scientific assumption to make and look to falsify?

Wondering about the world, is a different issue than making up stories with no data to support them.

There is data to support the idea. You're just unilaterally opposed to considering rationally anything put forward by a man you know to be YEC.

 

[Alate_One]

Not at all. I think it is perfectly reasonable to consider the idea that we might be near the center of the universe.

Its funny, every time you take the time to say something is "perfectly reasonable", it almost never is. :rotfl:

Why would that not be a reasonable scientific assumption to make and look to falsify?

Except the data Barbarian already posted disproves that assumption.

There is data to support the idea. You're just unilaterally opposed to considering rationally anything put forward by a man you know to be YEC.

YECs make up stories instead of actually doing science. It isn't about who they are, its about what they come up with. The Big Bang was initially scorned because it seemed "too religious" and was originally proposed by a Catholic priest, but when the evidence backed it up it became accepted.

So all you need is evidence. . . .where is it for your proposal?

 

[Stripe]

Its funny, every time you take the time to say something is "perfectly reasonable", it almost never is. :rotfl:

And it is unreasonable to assume the earth is near the center of the universe and test that assumption, how, exactly?

Except the data Barbarian already posted disproves that assumption.

I doubt Barbarian has the foggiest idea of what he is talking about. He's probably relying upon the fact that big bang supporters have already rejected the idea.

YECs make up stories instead of actually doing science. It isn't about who they are, its about what they come up with. The Big Bang was initially scorned because it seemed "too religious" and was originally proposed by a Catholic priest, but when the evidence backed it up it became accepted.

And perhaps it's wrong. Should we stop investigating alternative ideas?

So all you need is evidence. . . .where is it for your proposal?

Try opening your eyes. It's not my proposal and the data has been presented. Who knows, perhaps your conclusions are correct, but it's hardly very useful or entertaining upon hearing an idea to jump up and down on it based on your dislike of creationists.