Massive star two and a half MILLION times as bright as sun...vanishes

dad · Jul 28, 2020

Tiberius said:
If you can't provide any evidence from the real world, fine. Be honest about it. You could learn from failure.

Nothing to say on topic eh? OK. (we'll add this to almost every other post you ever made)

dad · Jul 28, 2020

Wild Fox said:
You haven never learned from your failures.

How would you know? Try to remember that not accepting your beliefs for no reason is not a mistake.

Bear Wild · Jul 28, 2020

dad said:
How would you know? Try to remember that not accepting your beliefs for no reason is not a mistake.

No but your misinformation certainty is.

dad · Jul 28, 2020

Wild Fox said:
No but your misinformation certainty is.

Vague insults.

Tiberius · Jul 30, 2020

dad said:
Nothing to say on topic eh? OK. (we'll add this to almost every other post you ever made)

I have no idea why the star vanished from sight.

I'm just here to counter your unsupported claims about why it happened.

dad · Jul 30, 2020

Tiberius said:
I have no idea why the star vanished from sight.

I'm just here to counter your unsupported claims about why it happened.

You admit not knowing. So how would you know what claims were wrong or right on the issue?

I don't know either. What we do know is that their ideas about the universe did not include a star vanishing that was millions of times (they say) brighter, and 100 times bigger than the sun, leaving no trace.

Tiberius · Jul 30, 2020

dad said:
You admit not knowing. So how would you know what claims were wrong or right on the issue?

I don't know either. What we do know is that their ideas about the universe did not include a star vanishing that was millions of times (they say) brighter, and 100 times bigger than the sun, leaving no trace.

So you think that because I can't give an answer to what happened to this star, I should just accept your fantasy about what happened?

Please. I'd rather an honest "I don't know" than embracing any nonsense just because I have a need for an answer and any ridiculous answer will do.

dad · Jul 31, 2020

Tiberius said:
So you think that because I can't give an answer to what happened to this star, I should just accept your fantasy about what happened?.

Believe what you like. I take note that the sum of beliefs of which cosmology consists is responsible for the error. Ha.

I notice the poor sods are still tossing around billions of years because their faith based distance/times do not agree with each other!

New approach refines the Hubble's constant and age of universe

They toss around billions of imaginary years like mad little bangees.

Tiberius · Jul 31, 2020

dad said:
Believe what you like. I take note that the sum of beliefs of which cosmology consists is responsible for the error. Ha.

I notice the poor sods are still tossing around billions of years because their faith based distance/times do not agree with each other!

New approach refines the Hubble's constant and age of universe

They toss around billions of imaginary years like mad little bangees.

So you now have gone from, "They can't explain it," to, "they were in error."

Your inability to use logic properly is truly astounding.

dad · Aug 1, 2020

Tiberius said:
So you now have gone from, "They can't explain it," to, "they were in error.".

When a star 100 times as big as the sun disappears and no one predicted this, it is an error. When the Hubble constant is at odds with other methods to determine distance to the tune of a billion years, they are in error. I mean if the little moon disappeared against the predictions and expectation of science we would have to conclude that science was simply wrong in their ideas. If the moon is about say, 4000 times smaller than this star that vanished, that tells us something of the predictive powers of science!

Tiberius · Aug 2, 2020

dad said:
When a star 100 times as big as the sun disappears and no one predicted this, it is an error.

No, it just means that there are things we haven't figured out yet. It does NOT prove that our current understanding is wrong.

When the Hubble constant is at odds with other methods to determine distance to the tune of a billion years, they are in error. I mean if the little moon disappeared against the predictions and expectation of science we would have to conclude that science was simply wrong in their ideas. If the moon is about say, 4000 times smaller than this star that vanished, that tells us something of the predictive powers of science!

Please, enough of your fantasies. Give us evidence from the real world, or give us nothing. All you've ever done is make a big noise with nothing to back it up.

dad · Aug 2, 2020

Tiberius said:
No, it just means that there are things we haven't figured out yet. It does NOT prove that our current understanding is wrong.

Please, enough of your fantasies. Give us evidence from the real world, or give us nothing. All you've ever done is make a big noise with nothing to back it up.

No more slogans, find a position and defend it. There are obvious gaping holes in stories from the standard cosmo model fable book. Some seek to justify this whopping incongruity by appealing for calm and continued faith in the so called science system. Others ignore the fails and appeal to a hatred of God and Scripture records as some supposed justification for their floundering faith system. Others try to shut up opposition by spamming spurious slogans in an apparent attempt to cover up their inability to defend their religion by boring threads to death.

Tiberius · Aug 2, 2020

dad said:
No more slogans, find a position and defend it. There are obvious gaping holes in stories from the standard cosmo model fable book. Some seek to justify this whopping incongruity by appealing for calm and continued faith in the so called science system. Others ignore the fails and appeal to a hatred of God and Scripture records as some supposed justification for their floundering faith system. Others try to shut up opposition by spamming spurious slogans in an apparent attempt to cover up their inability to defend their religion by boring threads to death.

Still waiting for you to defend your position. You make a big noise, but you never offer any support. Even now, you refuse to support your position and would rather try to make fun of me. But making fun of me only makes you look like an immature child, and it doesn't give any credibility to your position.

So support your own position or remain a laughing stock...

dad · Aug 3, 2020

Tiberius said:
Still waiting for you to defend your position. You make a big noise, but you never offer any support. Even now, you refuse to support your position and would rather try to make fun of me. But making fun of me only makes you look like an immature child, and it doesn't give any credibility to your position.

So support your own position or remain a laughing stock...

Not sure what you think 'my position' is supposed to be on the OP? My position is that science doesn't know, and that is why we see these mistakes, and that is is a matter of belief only. You want to know what other beliefs than your own are?
Your position is that you admit ignorance on the topic, if I recall. That'll do er!

Tiberius · Aug 3, 2020

dad said:
Not sure what you think 'my position' is supposed to be on the OP? My position is that science doesn't know, and that is why we see these mistakes, and that is is a matter of belief only. You want to know what other beliefs than your own are?
Your position is that you admit ignorance on the topic, if I recall. That'll do er!

Your position is that if science doesn't know, then it is wrong.

However, there are some people who see the value in an honest "I don't know" rather than grabbing onto any answer because you can't bear not having an answer.

dad · Aug 4, 2020

Tiberius said:
Your position is that if science doesn't know, then it is wrong.

If science knew it would be right. the repeated fails tells us something.

However, there are some people who see the value in an honest "I don't know"

If the constant stream of origin claims were presented as 'I do not really know, and am clueless and the claims are just based on beliefs' that would be an honest I don't know.

The claims are taught as matter of fact usually. That is dishonest.

Tiberius · Aug 4, 2020

dad said:
If science knew it would be right. the repeated fails tells us something.

Again your incorrect notion that if science does not have the answer right now then it has failed.

Science is not about providing immediate answers. Science is about providing accurate answers.

If the constant stream of origin claims were presented as 'I do not really know, and am clueless and the claims are just based on beliefs' that would be an honest I don't know.

The article you posted made it very clear that the scientists were very open about the fact that they didn't know what had happened. They are doing exactly as you claim they should be doing, and yet you still insist on claiming that science has failed.

There's just no pleasing you, is there?

The claims are taught as matter of fact usually. That is dishonest.

Those claims that are presented as fact by reputable scientists have a great deal of supporting evidence.

Those claims that are presented as fact by you have your insistence that old fairy tales are true because they say things you want to believe.

dad · Aug 5, 2020

Tiberius said:
Again your incorrect notion that if science does not have the answer right now then it has failed.

Science is not about providing immediate answers. Science is about providing accurate answers.

Since it admits not knowing where this 'massive' star went, the only honest answer possible is that you do not know at all.

Impressive.

The article you posted made it very clear that the scientists were very open about the fact that they didn't know what had happened. They are doing exactly as you claim they should be doing, and yet you still insist on claiming that science has failed.

When predictions fail routinely it is appropriate to ask if they actually know what the heck they are talking about at all! Especially when their stories go against what the Almighty said was true as ever true could be.

Those claims that are presented as fact by reputable scientists have a great deal of supporting evidence.

None whatsoever, only belief as the basis. That is the problem.

Those claims that are presented as fact by you have your insistence that old fairy tales are true because they say things you want to believe.

No. The reason real predictions of Scripture and records known to be true are valued is not because people want those to be so. The reason is because God gave us the record.

Tiberius · Aug 5, 2020

dad said:
Since it admits not knowing where this 'massive' star went, the only honest answer possible is that you do not know at all.

Impressive.

I don't recall any scientists saying otherwise. They've been quite open about the fact that they do not know what happened.

You are the one claiming that this lack of knowledge means science has failed, thus demonstrating that you don't know in the slightest what you are talking about.

When predictions fail routinely it is appropriate to ask if they actually know what the heck they are talking about at all! Especially when their stories go against what the Almighty said was true as ever true could be.

Your fantasy ideas don't offer any predictions at all.

None whatsoever, only belief as the basis. That is the problem.

As I've told you many times now, the fact you can't recognise the supporting evidence does not mean there is none. You can't say it isn't there just because you are blind to it.

No. The reason real predictions of Scripture and records known to be true are valued is not because people want those to be so. The reason is because God gave us the record.

More fantasy.

Yerda · Aug 8, 2020

Wow. Cool article.

dad said:
Could it be their theories are wrong?

It doesn't seem beyond the realm of possibility that stars can do stuff that no one knows about yet. The fact we have theories at all about objects that are crazy far away is incredible in itself.

Are there any particluar theories you think are questionable regarding stellar evolution?

Massive star two and a half MILLION times as bright as sun...vanishes

Undefeated

Undefeated

Well-Known Member

Undefeated

Well-Known Member

Undefeated

Well-Known Member

Undefeated

Well-Known Member

Undefeated

Well-Known Member

Undefeated

Well-Known Member

Undefeated

Well-Known Member

Undefeated

Well-Known Member

Undefeated

Well-Known Member

Veteran Member