Jump to content


Photo

New Theory On Starlight


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
68 replies to this topic

#61 ikester7579

ikester7579

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Interests:God, creation, etc...
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I'm non-denominational

Posted 09 September 2010 - 04:15 PM

You know Cassiterides, you're free to believe whatever you want, but if you cant do better than the equivalent of shoving your fingers in your ears and shouting "LALALALALA I'M NOT LISTENING," dont expect anyone to take you seriously. This point has been thoroughly addressed by me and others, and you continue to just say the same thing over and over without even attempting to respond to our arguments. You could understand this point if you did even the slightest bit of independent research. Not even AIG tries to claim the sun is 32 miles wide. Do you also think the sun goes around the Earth? Again, you're free to believe whatever you believe, but dont expect any respect for it.

View Post


And I would say to that: LALALALA, you are now suspended for 7 days.

Suspended for one liners and personal attacks.


#62 Cassiterides

Cassiterides

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 631 posts
  • Age: 20
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • uk

Posted 09 September 2010 - 09:48 PM

Were celestial objects once far closer to the earth?

In ancient China sunspots were casually observed by the naked eye.

Yet hundreds of years later and in modern times they are virtually impossible to spot without the aid of a telescope.

In ancient China and Greece, astronomers had seen with their naked eye the smaller companion to Jupiter (Ganymede). Yet today this also is virtually impossible without the aid of a telescope.

Furthermore the ancient Chinese astronomer Gan De (4th century BC) accurately described the colour of the surface of Jupiter's companions - just with his naked eye.

#63 The Debatinator

The Debatinator

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 198 posts
  • Age: 20
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Chicago, Illinois

Posted 10 September 2010 - 01:09 AM

Where did you get that info, cass?

#64 skeptic

skeptic

    Junior Member

  • Advanced member
  • PipPip
  • 84 posts
  • Age: 35
  • no affiliation
  • Agnostic
  • Heidelberg, Germany

Posted 10 September 2010 - 01:30 AM

Hi Cassiterides,

It´s not quite right what you say. You could see sunspots with the naked eye today as in ancient times. It is not very advisable, because you risk burns of your retina. It is healthier to see them at dusk, when most of the brightest light is filtered out, but I wouldn´t recommend it either.

Ganymede could also be seen today without a telescope. You need a starry moonless night with no light sources near you and you have to occlude Jupiter, something that could be done today as in ancient china. You could even see all four biggest companions of Jupiter if you are lucky.

Gan De reported a small reddish star next to Jupiter. Non of the bigger moons of Jupiter is really reddish. Io is yellow because of a lot of sulfur. Europa is greyish with slight aereas of red iron oxide not observable from earth with the naked eye. Ganymed and Callisto are grey. Nobody knows what Gan De has seen there.

And I don´t know what you mean by "estimates". Every measurement has an error range but you could measure the distance to the moon, sun and the stars by easy trigonometry. You don´t need to travel a distance to measure it. How do you think people from the road construction office measure the distances? They also use simple trigonometry.

We haven´t travelled the full distance to the sun but we sent satellites to the Lagrange point 1 and some out of the solar plane "above" the sun.

#65 falcone

falcone

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 497 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 36
  • no affiliation
  • Agnostic
  • Scotland

Posted 10 September 2010 - 02:37 AM

Ok, you think the diameter of the sun is 32 miles because an unnamed scientist in 1899 said so. Thanks.

Why not read what he wrote?

Because you don't site your sources so I don't know who he is.

Why come to this forum to debate issues if you think you know eveything about everything already?

Personal attacks are against the forum rules

Go to maps.google.co.uk and plug in your home address as the starting location and 272 St Vincent Street Glasgow as the destination. Go via a friend's house if you like. It will tell you the distance despite the fact that no-one has travelled it before. Do you think it is accurate? Why or why not?

You are putting all your faith in satellite technology. How do you know there aren't faults or errors with the satellites?

Because I've used Google Maps to travel numerous locations, and according to my car's milometer it works. Therefore, when I map out a new route, I am confident it is accurate. Actaully, I use sat nav these days. That works as well.

Are you now going to argue that these distances are gueses and can't be validated I until actually travel them?

If I refer you back to the link in my earlier post, you'll see that probes have been sucessfully sent to all the planets and various other solar object. All based on guessing how far away these objects are. Would you say these were good guesses? If not, then why not? And if so, then what reason do you have to think that the current estimate* of the sun's distance is a poor one.

*Note my use of the word estimate. Within the context of this conversation 92,955,807 miles is an estimate.

#66 falcone

falcone

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 497 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 36
  • no affiliation
  • Agnostic
  • Scotland

Posted 10 September 2010 - 02:46 AM

[tea break]
Kirk: Mr. Spock, have you accounted for the variable mass of whales and water in your time re-entry program?
Spock: Mr. Scott cannot give me exact figures, Admiral, so... I will make a guess.
Kirk: A guess? You, Spock? That's extraordinary.
Spock: [to Dr. McCoy] I don't think he understands.
McCoy: No, Spock. He means that he feels safer about your guesses than most other people's facts.
Spock: Then you're saying,
[pause]
Spock: It is a compliment?
McCoy: It is.
Spock: Ah. Then, I will try to make the best guess I can.
:lol:
[/tea break]

#67 menes777

menes777

    Junior Member

  • Advanced member
  • PipPip
  • 91 posts
  • Age: 33
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Wichita, KS

Posted 10 September 2010 - 10:47 AM

I kind of feel like I am feeding the troll at this point but whatever...

A football field you can estimate to be around 100 yards, but you won't get the precise figure, it could be 97, 98 or 101 yards. With things that are far bigger, and further away you can't use this sort of reasoning or analogy because your estimates will be out by hundreds of thousands or even millions of miles. Note the following estimates for the distance of the sun to the earth:

Copernicus 3, 391, 200 miles
Kepler 12, 376, 800 miles
Ric-ciola 27, 360,000 miles
Newton 28,000,000 miles
Martin 82,000,000 miles
Dilworth 93, 726, 900 miles
Mayer 104, 000, 000 miles

There is a gap here of 101 millions miles. That's not the same as 2 or 3 yards of a football pitch. The point is astronomers can only estimate the distance from us to the sun because it is so far away and no one has ever traveled it. These estimates have the risk of being so far off, as i said millions of miles.


Again with the tired old argument, no one has traveled it, so we can never know how far it really is. Do you honestly have any other argument than that? At this point you should have been modded.

You started this thread with a false and a poorly thought out hypothesis. With absolutely no facts to support it, only assertions from a bygone era. A few thousand miles away is barely even out of the earth's atmosphere (The exosphere), much less past the orbit of the moon.

You give the same weight to Copernicus' measurements as you do modern astronomical tools. While that speaks volumes of your admiration of the man, it's hardly logical or reasonable to do so. The reasons measurements change like that more often than not are because the instruments become more precise. If I didn't know any better I would think you were simply arguing to save face at this point.

Yes there is a margin of error in just about any huge estimate. Yet that margin of error isn't based on previously inaccurate measurements. It's based on the inaccuracy of the instruments being used. Yes the distance between the earth and sun has a + or - of 0.02 AU. Guess how much that is though? A 2% variance, or 1.86 Million miles. In the grand scheme of things that's really pocket change. How about you give me all your money and keep 5 cents (because I am so generous and doubling the above) on every dollar and tell me how much you were left with?

That's the problem here. You don't question anything and just blindly follow what you find on the internet. Say the internet did not exist, and you didn't read anyone else's estimate, how far would you calculate the distance of the sun from us?


First you have made a huge judgment call about me that is completely unfounded. How do you know I haven't questioned it before? Because I am not agreeing with you now? You know absolutely nothing about me but you are assured that I am blindly following something.

Word to the wise, I spent most of my life studying science before well Windows 3.11 was around, much less before the internet became popular. Have you forgotten that some of us have a college education? I have also gotten books from Borders (Barnes & Nobles, etc...) on this subject as well as the local library. I watch documentaries on these subjects. I suppose that those are all lying to me as well? I suppose it's all some big conspiracy to put the sun farther away than it really is right?

If I had to measure the distance to the sun myself? I admit that I would probably have no idea even if I invested the time (and what money I could) to this venture. Of course that applies to proving to you that atoms have a nucleus of protons and neutrons. That bacteria is in GI tract helping me to digest food. That the ozone layer is really up there blocking UV radiation. There are just some things in life you have to rely on others for. Do I always accept others blindly? Of course not, but when multiple sources tell me the same thing over and over again they receive a little bit more credibility.

What empirical observations?


1. Distancing with radar: If you and were both to learn how to do this, we could both use the same radar instrument to get the same data of a test location.
2. Trigonometry: Both of us can do a trigonometric problem and both get the same result. Assuming we both do the right math.

Why does it make more sense?

In fact the opposite is true. Common sense actually argues that the sun is a small object in the sky which moves around the earth, since this is what we personally observe with our own eyes everyday.


Good, you can tell all those people who rely on common sense that they are wrong.

I don't wish this to develop into a heliocentric or geocentric debate.


You quoted from those circles of logic, so you must consider the entire belief in your arguments. Unless are admitting that you are quote mining.

My point was simply that there is no way to know the distance of the sun from earth. All we can do is guess or make estimates.

View Post


My point is that this whole thread began with the assertion that the stars started out only a few thousands of miles away. I countered with the point that not even our sun is that close to us. In fact other creationists have used the idea that if the earth were a hair closer to the sun the earth would be too hot for life. Are you calling them wrong too? 93 million miles or even 90 or even 50 million miles is an extremely large margin of error from a few thousand miles. Your initial hypothesis had more holes in it than Swiss cheese. Yet you have only back pedaled and used the same argument over and over again. Which really has boiled down to you saying, what if this or that is wrong? Providing no proof or logic of your own on why and how those things are wrong and gotten away with it. Then you went on to attack my character (which also has gone ignored) about how I just blindly follow what I am told.

FYI - Just because someone quotes something from the internet or links to a location (really the only way to provide proof in such a medium) doesn't mean it's their only source. It's simply out of convenience to you and the provider. Sure I could reference books or tell you to take a college class but seriously are you going to look it up or attend one? I highly doubt it (no matter how much you say you will).

#68 Cassiterides

Cassiterides

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 631 posts
  • Age: 20
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • uk

Posted 10 September 2010 - 12:20 PM

Please no one further respond to this thread. I will ask ikester or another mod to close it.

It was clearly my mistake thinking i could start a clean discussion on astronomy without atheists resorting to personal attacks.

#69 Guest_tharock220_*

Guest_tharock220_*
  • Guests

Posted 10 September 2010 - 01:39 PM

Were celestial objects once far closer to the earth?

In ancient China sunspots were casually observed by the naked eye.

Yet hundreds of years later and in modern times they are virtually impossible to spot without the aid of a telescope.

In ancient China and Greece, astronomers had seen with their naked eye the smaller companion to Jupiter (Ganymede). Yet today this also is virtually impossible without the aid of a telescope.

Furthermore the ancient Chinese astronomer Gan De (4th century BC) accurately described the colour of the surface of Jupiter's companions - just with his naked eye.

View Post


A sunspot

Posted Image

Ganymede is visible under good conditions not because it's far away but because there's a big, bright planet there whose glare makes it hard to see.

Gan De also had the advantage of observing Jupiter where there was no light pollution.

What would be implied by the rest of the cosmos being closer to the Earth then moving away??? The light from where they currently are still has to travel to Earth at c.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users