Classic failed science predictions and a faulty cosmological model exposed

[gnostic]

It doesn't matter how many times you repeat your crank ideas. They are not even part of the debate and have never been.
If you believe light travels differently in deep space you need to provide evidence. If you believe spacetime is any different than our local spacetime then you need to provide evidence. That's just to begin a debate. Then we can assess the probablity and the evidence.
Then you would also need to explain why when we look into the universe it looks like light and spacetime are exactly like they are here. Why the physics we see in deep space looks exactly like the physics we have in our solar system. Why everything in deep space behaves exactly how our local laws of physics predicts it should. Galaxy clusters, black holes, star formation, everything works the same.
You would have to explain why these "different laws of physics" send photons to us from deep space and the images we see strangely make everything look as if the laws of physics are exactly the same as our laws. Even things we cannot see like gravity waves. Our laws of physics made a prediction down to trillionths of a degree and using those laws we were able to detect a gravity wave. Which again shows the gravity wave is following the exact same laws we are.
I told you in one of the first posts you are not here to debate honestly, just waste time. No evidence, just over and over and over with "fishbowl" or "different laws".
Cosmological theories are not religion because they use the available evidence and because they continue to change as new information is found. In the 1940s the debate was steady state universe vs big band model. The version that provided evidence won. If new evidence comes in then the model can be updated.
When new information comes in about your ancient myths you use denial and hide your head in the sand and call scholars heretics. So your not even honest about calling science religion.

Go ahead, prove cosmology doesn't use evidence. Demonstrate that light changes when it enters the solar system. Explain why it magically gives the illusion that everything in deep space is using the same laws but it's actually an illusion. Why our local group of galaxies look to be around the same age even though you say they are not and time is different in deep space?
Why proto-galaxies that we see that are around 12 billion years old look like a 1 billion year old galaxy should. Why this "illusion" light comes to us and makes everything look so perfect and fits our version of how the universe developed? But it's really an illusion?
Why neutron stars spin at the exact correct rate the theory predicts? Why light from a supernova hits us from 40 light years away and then we look and see a 40 year old supernova?
You haven't offered one single explanation to suggest this evidence is not good evidence that the laws of physics is the same everywhere as is spacetime.
You haven't given evidence as to why would time run different. General relativity deals with time dilation and gravity. The objects in space are all following the rules of GR exactly as is predicted. Across the entire universe. So time would be as well.
Or does it just look that way because of the Yahweh illusion? Provide evidence for this illusion. And why would Yahweh create an illusion that the universal laws are all working the same? Why not just make the universe the same? No evidence. No sense. Nothing? Even Yahweh is like "Dude, what are you talking about??"

You just continue with the same response....... "oh light from the Hubble....different laws......blah blah.....It is the biggest debate fail I have ever seen.

Dad has ability to twist everything, by calling his religious belief “scientific” and “logical”, while science are “religious belief” and “faith”...up becomes down, left becomes right.

The hubris to think that everything scientists are wrong, and that he is never wrong about anything. It is quite amazing since he has never studied science and don’t understand maths and logic.

 

[dad]

Did you ever find that single geological flood layer all over all continents and islands and ocean floor, all parts of it dating to the same year?

That depends on the beliefs used for the dating. The KT layer might fit the bill, still looking at that.

How about that genetic bottleneck in every species of land animal, all the bottlenecks dating to the identical period at some time in the last ten thousand years?

Nonsense. That is a belief based on assuming nature (genetics) always worked the same. Prove it or lose the assumption. The only reason any imagined bottleneck exists is because of that belief. In reality, the genetics in Noah's day worked fine.

And where did that missing billion or more cubic miles of water end up, did you find?

Where did it come from? It seems to have been transported from the far side of what we call the universe, where the stars are via a sort of wormhole. Why would not these windows of heaven not also be able to suck it back up? Who knows? It seems we also may have a lot of the water (presumably from below the earth that shot up in the fountains of the deep) that (along with maybe some ice and debris, smashed up the moons and planets of this solar system. (What, you thought theyy were created that way?)

Maybe you've located one of those magic floodgates you mentioned and now can tell us how it works, exactly?

They are not here now. If you saw a remnant of one you might assume it was a crater or some such. Ha.

And while you're up and busy, check out a few other things ─ no, the earth isn't flat, no, it's not immovably fixed at the center of everything

, It is a lie to claim the bible says earth is flat. It is fixed in that it is eternal.

no, the sun, moon stars and other heavenly bodies don't revolve around it,

They might one day and who knows how things worked in Adam's day!? Ha

no, the sky is not a hard dome you can walk on and no the stars are not attached to the dome such that if they come loose they'll fall to earth. Even though the bible says all those things are true.

Foolish strawman to claim the bible suggests birds or anything else walks on the sky. Foul deception.

And maybe, given the time you've had to think about it, you can tell us why you'd expect the bible to report scientific views appropriate to the 21st century instead of appropriate to the times and places where its various books were written?

This temporary state will pass as the bible says! Science doesn't know that! When it comes to the big picture, future and past, science is virtually idiotic.

 

[dad]

Dad has ability to twist everything, by calling his religious belief “scientific” and “logical”, while science are “religious belief” and “faith”...up becomes down, left becomes right.

The hubris to think that everything scientists are wrong, and that he is never wrong about anything. It is quite amazing since he has never studied science and don’t understand maths and logic.

Amazing you pretend any math or logic supports your religion.

 

[gnostic]

Amazing you pretend any math or logic supports your religion.

Typical strawman argument.

I don’t have a religion.

I used to believe in the Bible. There have been too many errors and inconsistencies in the Bible that I couldn’t ignore them any longer.

And me no longer accepting the Bible as universal truth, have more to do with what gospel authors have to say about Jesus and the messianic signs or prophecies than with Genesis Creation vs science.

It was Matthew 1:22-23 and Isaiah 7:14 interpretations that started my path in agnosticism, in 2000, not science, and certainly not Evolution.

Before 2003, I have not heard of words like “creationism”. Sure I know about Genesis Creation and Flood, because I used to believe that happened, but creationism and creationists are words that I didn’t know existed before 2003.

And I was never biology student, so I never understood Evolution, before 2003. I heard of mutations in movies before but never understood what it mean, and sci-fi movies and tv shows don’t provide education in biology. And before 2003, I didn’t know who Charles Darwin was or that he wrote On Origin Of Species, I also didn’t know about Natural Selection, Common Descents, and fitness.

In 2003, I was already agnostic, and science had nothing to do with me rejecting the gospels interpretations of the OT messianic prophecies. I was 37 in 2003, and I didn’t know about the arguments that raged between creationists and biologists until I joined my first Internet forum in 2003 (Free2Code, not ReligiousForum; I didn’t join RF until 2006).

Science isn’t religion, no matter how many times you have professed it so, because you have been less than honest in this forum, so I don’t trust what you have to say, especially about what you think I believe in.

You are that who cried wolf so many times, that no one here trust what you have to say.

Of course, you are going to ignore what I have to say, when I tell you that I don’t have a religion. And I don’t expect you to learn from your mistakes or I also don’t expect you to honest with me, because that went out the proverbial window a few years ago.

 

[blü 2]

That depends on the beliefs used for the dating. The KT layer might fit the bill, still looking at that.

Nope. In the tale, there are humans around when the Flood happens. The KT layer is tens of millions of years before even genus Homo, let alone H sap sap.

Nonsense. That is a belief based on assuming nature (genetics) always worked the same.

Nope. You've seen the result of it always working the same, in all your studies of evolution as science. Its sameness is legitimately implied by the complete lack of evidence to the contrary, so you need to base your statement on examinable counterevidence acceptable to science or you're just making things up to suit your dreams (again).

Prove it or lose the assumption. The only reason any imagined bottleneck exists is because of that belief. In reality, the genetics in Noah's day worked fine.

You've offered not the slightest reason to think otherwise. Again you make things up and then demand you be disproved. But no question of disproof arises unless and until you present a reasoned evidence-based case.

And that you can't do.

Where did it come from? It seems to have been transported from the far side of what we call the universe, where the stars are via a sort of wormhole.

*Guffaw!* Hilarious! Do you write comics for a living?

Why would not these windows of heaven not also be able to suck it back up?

WHAT windows of heaven? They're more stuff you've just made up ─ golly, they're not even in the original folktale!

Who knows? It seems we also may have a lot of the water (presumably from below the earth that shot up in the fountains of the deep) that (along with maybe some ice and debris, smashed up the moons and planets of this solar system. (What, you thought theyy were created that way?)

Again you make stuff up to suit the tale you're spinning for us ─ not a grain of truth, not a whisker of evidence, anywhere.

, It is a lie to claim the bible says earth is flat.

No, in the cosmology of the bible the earth is unequivocably flat and it's a lie to deny it.

>>Here<< (for what,the fourth or fifth time?) are the quotes from the bible, as reputably translated and without alteration. They say the earth is flat, and immovably fixed at the center of creation, and the sun, moon and stars go round them. They say the sky is a solid dome you can walk on; the stars are affixed to it so that if they come loose they'll fall to earth.

AND ONCE AGAIN you fail to answer the question why you think the bible stories would conform to the science of 2020 CE, instead of the science of the times and places they were variously written; and why, if they don't conform to their times and places of origin (although they do) they should conform to the science of 2020 and not the science of 800 CE or 1492 or 1779 or 3030.

Why do you keep dodging that one? What's the answer?

 

[gnostic]

Where did it come from? It seems to have been transported from the far side of what we call the universe, where the stars are via a sort of wormhole. Why would not these windows of heaven not also be able to suck it back up? Who knows?

I seriously think you have no idea what you are talking about.

 

[joelr]

No. How anything moves in an area of time and space depends on the time there. It would not be a uniform speed across areas of different space and time. You only assumed it was all the same.

Time is measured only by velocity up to light speed. Time itself cannot change without changing the speed of light. Our theories on spacetime and light are universal until shown they can be different. The idea that they could be different in a different location goes against relativity which shows there is no absolute reference frame. With a change in light speed (a ridiculous idea) you could have a reference. As if there is some local boundary where once you cross it light speed is different.
There is no hypothetical model that supports that and the idea itself that there is a magic boundary where light speed changes, for no reason except "because it makes the myth I want to be true" possible is demonstrable evidence that religion ruins peoples minds.

That is the biggest crankity crank I think anyone has ever uttered. You can waste your mind and your life believing nonsense. I prefer reality and science.

 

[joelr]

No, any billions of years in imaginary invented time based on assuming time exists as we know it on earth in all the universe. Face it that is a belief.

HA HA you debunk yourself! According to your crankity crank idea you forgot that time may be EVEN SLOWER instead of faster. So instead of billions of years your idea suggests it could also be TRILLIONS OF YEARS. If time (light speed) can be faster like you wish then you have no way to tell if it's not instead much slower!
That would be hilarious.

OR if light speed changes in one location then maybe it changes every galaxy, sometimes faster sometimes way slower. So it all balances out. Wow, what a waste of time to even think about.

But unfortunately it's crank and the notion of a magic boundary where you pass through and light speed changes is ad hoc nonsense.

 

[joelr]

Dad has ability to twist everything, by calling his religious belief “scientific” and “logical”, while science are “religious belief” and “faith”...up becomes down, left becomes right.

The hubris to think that everything scientists are wrong, and that he is never wrong about anything. It is quite amazing since he has never studied science and don’t understand maths and logic.

All true.

 

[dad]

Typical strawman argument.

I don’t have a religion.

I used to believe in the Bible. There have been too many errors and inconsistencies in the Bible that I couldn’t ignore them any longer.

And me no longer accepting the Bible as universal truth, have more to do with what gospel authors have to say about Jesus and the messianic signs or prophecies than with Genesis Creation vs science.

It was Matthew 1:22-23 and Isaiah 7:14 interpretations that started my path in agnosticism, in 2000, not science, and certainly not Evolution.

Before 2003, I have not heard of words like “creationism”. Sure I know about Genesis Creation and Flood, because I used to believe that happened, but creationism and creationists are words that I didn’t know existed before 2003.

And I was never biology student, so I never understood Evolution, before 2003. I heard of mutations in movies before but never understood what it mean, and sci-fi movies and tv shows don’t provide education in biology. And before 2003, I didn’t know who Charles Darwin was or that he wrote On Origin Of Species, I also didn’t know about Natural Selection, Common Descents, and fitness.

In 2003, I was already agnostic, and science had nothing to do with me rejecting the gospels interpretations of the OT messianic prophecies. I was 37 in 2003, and I didn’t know about the arguments that raged between creationists and biologists until I joined my first Internet forum in 2003 (Free2Code, not ReligiousForum; I didn’t join RF until 2006).

Science isn’t religion, no matter how many times you have professed it so, because you have been less than honest in this forum, so I don’t trust what you have to say, especially about what you think I believe in.

You are that who cried wolf so many times, that no one here trust what you have to say.

Of course, you are going to ignore what I have to say, when I tell you that I don’t have a religion. And I don’t expect you to learn from your mistakes or I also don’t expect you to honest with me, because that went out the proverbial window a few years ago.

NO ONE understands 'evolution' it is only believed! What you can 'understand' is the belief. You can memorize how people believe some imagined little life form became all that we see in the world today.

If you did not know what creation was before that means you were not a believer. You have the opportunity to believe if you chose. Chose life. God was never a liar.

 

[dad]

Nope. In the tale, there are humans around when the Flood happens. The KT layer is tens of millions of years before even genus Homo, let alone H sap sap.

Nope. The imaginary years never existed and are wholly faith beased.

Nope. You've seen the result of it always working the same, in all your studies of evolution as science

Baloney. Your baseless beliefs in a non created creation have precisely zero merit.

. Its sameness is legitimately implied by the complete lack of evidence to the contrary,

The different reality of early man is unfazed by your lack of evidence that the different nature existed..or not.

so you need to base your statement on examinable counterevidence acceptable to science or you're just making things up to suit your dreams (again).

You need to face the fact that you CANNOT examine the nature of yesterday! Therefore you may nor comment on it.

You've offered not the slightest reason to think otherwise.

The ALMIGHTY tells us how it was. You have NO reason to doubt.

Again you make things up and then demand you be disproved.

You made up the same state past and demand we disprove it. But no question of disproof arises unless and until you present a reasoned evidence-based case. You can't.

WHAT windows of heaven?

The ones God told us about. What you have some evidence He lied?? Ha.

They're more stuff you've just made up ─ golly, they're not even in the original folktale!

Ge 7:11 - In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.

Again you make stuff up to suit the tale you're spinning for us ─ not a grain of truth, not a whisker of evidence, anywhere.

Evidence is not available from science either way.

No, in the cosmology of the bible the earth is unequivocably flat and it's a lie to deny it.

Utterly false and absolutely ridiculous and a lie.

>>Here<< (for what,the fourth or fifth time?) are the quotes from the bible, as reputably translated and without alteration. They say the earth is flat, and immovably fixed at the center of creation, and the sun, moon and stars go round them. They say the sky is a solid dome you can walk on; the stars are affixed to it so that if they come loose they'll fall to earth.

Your misunderstanding of what you read is clear. That only demonstrates you have no understanding or wisdom or comprehension or truth.

AND ONCE AGAIN you fail to answer the question why you think the bible stories would conform to the science of 2020 CE,

?? Why would a different past, filled with miracles also conform to puny pagan so called science of the present?? You kidding?

instead of the science of the times and places they were variously written;

The science of a different past would not equate to this present nature 'science'.

 

[blü 2]

Nope. The imaginary years never existed and are wholly faith beased.

So you understand neither science nor faith? That fits the data.

Baloney. Your baseless beliefs in a non created creation have precisely zero merit.

You can't even tell me what a real god is, such that I could determine whether my keyboard is (a real) God or not. You worship a concept, not a real being.

The different reality of early man is unfazed by your lack of evidence that the different nature existed..or not.

Yours is dismissed out of hand for lack of any examinable evidence whatsoever,

You need to face the fact that you CANNOT examine the nature of yesterday! Therefore you may nor comment on it.

You're simply underlining that you have no understanding of science.

The ALMIGHTY tells us how it was. You have NO reason to doubt.
[...] The ones God told us about. What you have some evidence He lied?? Ha.

But as I mentioned, you can't even tell me what real thing (as distinct from imaginary / conceptual thing) you intend to denote when you say 'God'. And humans wrote the bible ─ in the real world God neither says nor does.

Ge 7:11 - In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.

That doesn't refer to any real thing. As you know (because you can't find that single universal geological flood layer, those genetic bottlenecks in the genes of all land animals, or that missing billion cubic miles of water) there never was a Genesis flood.

Utterly false and absolutely ridiculous and a lie.

You have your fingers in your ears and you're shouting Nyah nyah nyah you can't make me re ad what the bible says when it says things I don't want it to say.

Why would a different past, filled with miracles also conform to puny pagan so called science of the present?? You kidding?

All those centuries and all those people and still not a single authenticated miracle ever found anywhere. Magic is only found in the individual imagination, not in the real world.

 

[dad]

So you understand neither science nor faith? That fits the data.
You can't even tell me what a real god is, such that I could determine whether my keyboard is (a real) God or not. You worship a concept, not a real being.
Yours is dismissed out of hand for lack of any examinable evidence whatsoever,
You're simply underlining that you have no understanding of science.
But as I mentioned, you can't even tell me what real thing (as distinct from imaginary / conceptual thing) you intend to denote when you say 'God'. And humans wrote the bible ─ in the real world God neither says nor does.
That doesn't refer to any real thing. As you know (because you can't find that single universal geological flood layer, those genetic bottlenecks in the genes of all land animals, or that missing billion cubic miles of water) there never was a Genesis flood.
You have your fingers in your ears and you're shouting Nyah nyah nyah you can't make me re ad what the bible says when it says things I don't want it to say.
All those centuries and all those people and still not a single authenticated miracle ever found anywhere. Magic is only found in the individual imagination, not in the real world.

Empty defeated blather. hahaha

 

[blü 2]

Empty defeated blather. hahaha

You know no science and you put that fact on display by starting threads like this one.

You don't understand faith, or how it may accommodate, or fail to accommodate, reality.

You have abundant fairytales but (as is usual with fairytales) no evidence to back them.

You refuse to read your own book because it says things you don't want to hear.

But you keep your spirits up by placing your fingers in your ears and pretending to yourself that you're undefeated.

Ah well, that's your style. Have a lovely day.

 

[dad]

You know no science and you put that fact on display by starting threads like this one.

You don't understand faith, or how it may accommodate, or fail to accommodate, reality.

You have abundant fairytales but (as is usual with fairytales) no evidence to back them.

You refuse to read your own book because it says things you don't want to hear.

But you keep your spirits up by placing your fingers in your ears and pretending to yourself that you're undefeated.

Ah well, that's your style. Have a lovely day.

You post no science. If you tried to do so on topic, you might be worth squashing instantly. As it is, your posts lack worth.

 

[dad]

if light speed changes in one location then maybe it changes every galaxy, sometimes faster sometimes way slower..

If time itself were different, then it then light would have to move in that time according to how it was there. In our time it is a certain known miles per hour. In some far part of the unknown universe, who knows?

 

[blü 2]

If time itself were different, [...] then light would have to move in that time according to how it was there. In our time it is a certain known miles per hour. In some far part of the unknown universe, who knows?

Ah, old friend, you're still living back in Newton's day. Einstein points out that because for each observer the speed of light is the constant, time (and not the speed of light) is the variable. So they get different readings about how long it takes other objects to move from A to B relative to them.

Or consider this. Clock A stays home while Clock B flies round the world and returns home. For Newton, the clocks exactly match both before and after. But according to Einstein, and well confirmed by experiment and built into your GPS, Clock A (that stayed home) will be ahead of Clock B. Not by much, but for real.

You might enjoy reading >this<.

 

[cladking]

WHAT windows of heaven? They're more stuff you've just made up ─ golly, they're not even in the original folktale!

From the oldest surviving writing;

468a. To say: Greetings to thee, O daughter of Anubis, who is at the windows, of heaven,

It even looks as though these "windows" can cause rainbows ("nun" is "water");

1078b. apertures of the (heavenly) windows are open,
1078c. the steps of Nun are open,
1078d. the steps of light are revealed

The Pyramid Texts: The Pyramid Texts: 12. The Ferryman and the Deceased King's Ascension, Utterances 300-311

It seems we also may have a lot of the water (presumably from below the earth that shot up in the fountains of the deep) that (along with maybe some ice and debris, smashed up the moons and planets of this solar system. (What, you thought theyy were created that way?)

It is entirely possible that the earth can absorb and release water.

This isn't to say I believe the earth was ever inundated to hundreds or thousands of feet or that the story of the flood is necessarily true, merely that it could be founded in reality. Real science has great difficulty addressing anything outside of experiment, or at bare minimum, empirical evidence. We tend to color in reality that isn't shown by experiment but it isn't real, only belief.

 

[blü 2]

From the oldest surviving writing;

468a. To say: Greetings to thee, O daughter of Anubis, who is at the windows, of heaven,

It even looks as though these "windows" can cause rainbows ("nun" is "water");

1078b. apertures of the (heavenly) windows are open,
1078c. the steps of Nun are open,
1078d. the steps of light are revealed

The Pyramid Texts: The Pyramid Texts: 12. The Ferryman and the Deceased King's Ascension, Utterances 300-311



It is entirely possible that the earth can absorb and release water.

This isn't to say I believe the earth was ever inundated to hundreds or thousands of feet or that the story of the flood is necessarily true, merely that it could be founded in reality. Real science has great difficulty addressing anything outside of experiment, or at bare minimum, empirical evidence. We tend to color in reality that isn't shown by experiment but it isn't real, only belief.

Thanks for that.

The story of Noah in the bible (written in the early part of the 1st millennium BCE) is taken from the Sumerian story of Ziasudra (not later than mid-3rd millennium BCE and perhaps much older), who when translated into Akkadian (and soon, Babylonian) was called Uta-Napashti. The story is included in the epic of Gilgamesh, and Andrew George's translation and notes (Penguin Classics) are delightful reading if you enjoy ancient voices.

The trouble with Egyptian sources is that they had an annual flood, but it arrived down the Nile, not by rain from the sky.

 

[dad]

Ah, old friend, you're still living back in Newton's day. Einstein points out that because for each observer the speed of light is the constant, time (and not the speed of light) is the variable. So they get different readings about how long it takes other objects to move from A to B relative to them.

Or consider this. Clock A stays home while Clock B flies round the world and returns home. For Newton, the clocks exactly match both before and after. But according to Einstein, and well confirmed by experiment and built into your GPS, Clock A (that stayed home) will be ahead of Clock B. Not by much, but for real.

You might enjoy reading >this<.

All your clocks are in the fishbowl. I kid you not.