CMB Electro Magnetic waves only seen on earth

[Subduction Zone]

Try posting something that addresses the issue. The OP already talked about how waves and light were exclusively seen IN our time. Either there is no honesty here or you really do not begin to comprehend.

Been there done that. I posted an article that you either did not understand, could not understand, or ignored. It demonstrated that physics was the same at interstellar distances. You meanwhile run away from the fact that the burden of proof is upon you. Even the least little bit of evidence beats no evidence at all. Your claims were refuted on the first page here.

 

[gnostic]

Been there done that. I posted an article that you either did not understand, could not understand, or ignored. It demonstrated that physics was the same at interstellar distances. You meanwhile run away from the fact that the burden of proof is upon you. Even the least little bit of evidence beats no evidence at all. Your claims were refuted on the first page here.

It is simply that dad can make any claim he wants, but refuse to take responsibility for his claim, by showing the evidence and data that support his claims.

Even if he doesn’t collect the evidence and data, himself, then the very least he could do is cite a single work or some works of actual scientist(s) that do have evidence or data that can back up his claims.

Dad cannot even do that. So basically, dad is nothing more than his unsubstantiated personal opinions, based on his own ignorance of how science works.

Shifting the burden of proof upon those who disagree with his claims, is a common defect shared among creationists, demonstrating their dishonesty.

 

[paarsurrey]

It is simply that dad can make any claim he wants, but refuse to take responsibility for his claim, by showing the evidence and data that support his claims.

Even if he doesn’t collect the evidence and data, himself, then the very least he could do is cite a single work or some works of actual scientist(s) that do have evidence or data that can back up his claims.

Dad cannot even do that. So basically, dad is nothing more than his unsubstantiated personal opinions, based on his own ignorance of how science works.

Shifting the burden of proof upon those who disagree with his claims, is a common defect shared among creationists, demonstrating their dishonesty.

"So basically,dad is nothing more than his unsubstantiated personal opinions"

The same are others except if their expressions quote from a text book of science or the like. Right, please?

Regards

 

[Dan From Smithville]

"So basically,dad is nothing more than his unsubstantiated personal opinions"

The same are others except if their expressions quote from a text book of science or the like. Right, please?

Regards

No. Referencing an informed and supported source is not the equivalent of what dad is doing. He is stating a personal opinion based on the bias of his religious views (more personal opinion), claiming it as some universally accepted fact (truth?), but never demonstrating that of supporting it in any way.

 

[gnostic]

"So basically,dad is nothing more than his unsubstantiated personal opinions"

The same are others except if their expressions quote from a text book of science or the like. Right, please?

I don't need to say anything, because Dan's reply to you is the answer you wanted answer. I couldn't have said it better than Dan's.

 

[Milton Platt]

Much meaning is attached to electromagnetic waves that stream into earth (and the solar system area). Among the meanings is that these waves represent heat in the CMB. There is good reason for this, because we know that these waves (at least where we observe them here on earth and area) do represent heat.

However, since we have only seen the quanta (photons) in our time and space here, it would be wrong to assume that this represents the same thing far out in unknown space and time.

After all they calculate radiant energy using time.


"radiant energy may be calculated by integrating radiant flux (or power) with respect to time"

Radiant energy - Wikipedia

Additionally we have only seen these oscillations of electric and magnetic fields here at our point of observation (The fishbowl of earth and solar system area).

Light has only bee seen here, so the speed that it moves here in our time and space is all we know. If space and/or time were different in far space then these oscillations and fields and etc could not be assumed to represent the universe at large. We may better think of it as representing how light and waves and fields operate/exist HERE in the fishbowl.

Therefore the cosmic microwave background might not exist as we thought, but could just be how we see light and fields and waves in time and space here.

In this case it cannot be used as evidence for any big bang. The only question is therefore...do we KNOW that time exists the same out there (and space) or not?

We have to go with the evidence we have as to the nature of time. It is fun to speculate, of course. But until someone comes up with a testable hypothesis that time operates somehow differently in one area of space than another, we have to go with what we know. We know that at least it seems to be the same in our solar system.

 

[Shad]

An interesting way to think of how all the stars could go OUT one day as the bible says, is to think of them as already BEING out! One day, when the last bit of light reaches the fishbowl here,...no more...darkness...all the heavens go dark! Now I don't know how God does it, but that is one way to conceptualize it happening!

Stars would disappear over time not in a single day if you accept modern physics regarding visible light, the speed of light and stellar astronomy

 

[gnostic]

Stars would disappear over time not in a single day if you accept modern physics regarding visible light, the speed of light and stellar astronomy

I think the problem is that dad think astronomers and astrophysicists have no idea what they are doing, or worse, he know better than everyone else.

 

[Shad]

I think the problem is that dad think astronomers and astrophysicists have no idea what they are doing, or worse, he know better than everyone else.

More to the point is that active observations of stars has demonstrated the reliability of existing models of astronomy. So he would have to reject what we known of the observable universe

 

[dad]

We have to go with the evidence we have as to the nature of time.

You have none. Now what?

It is fun to speculate, of course. But until someone comes up with a testable hypothesis that time operates somehow differently in one area of space than another, we have to go with what we know.

To do that it seems to me man would need to get out of the fishbowl, and get other observation points. He can't. So he assumes that our time and space here must represent the universe for no real reason. Ha.

We know that at least it seems to be the same in our solar system.

Yes, the area of the solar system (fishbowl) has the same time far as we know. That is not very far, not even one lousy light day!

 

[dad]

Stars would disappear over time not in a single day if you accept modern physics regarding visible light, the speed of light and stellar astronomy

Stellar..anything...no way. I accept that for a light day time is the same. That does not seem to mean much if the stars all went out, as to what we would see on earth. It just means that once we see all the stars go out, that light we see is a day late!

 

[Shad]

Stellar..anything...no way. I accept that for a light day time is the same.

This is babble

That does not seem to mean much if the stars all went out, as to what we would see on earth. It just means that once we see all the stars go out, that light we see is a day late!

Nope. More babble.

 

[dad]

This is babble

One light day. That is the extent of what science knows about and how far the probes have (almost) gone.

Beyond that you may not tell us anything about what time is like. Ha.

 

[Milton Platt]

You have none. Now what?
To do that it seems to me man would need to get out of the fishbowl, and get other observation points. He can't. So he assumes that our time and space here must represent the universe for no real reason. Ha.
Yes, the area of the solar system (fishbowl) has the same time far as we know. That is not very far, not even one lousy light day!

We do have evidence about the nature of time. for us, it is linear, it is relative to the person experiencing it, it appears to be universally the same with respect to these observations anyplace withing the universe we have thus far been able to test it. There may be other aspects of time which have been verified, I'm not a physicist or cosmologist, so I defer to them.
But we have no reason to think it is different in some other part of our universe.

 

[dad]

We do have evidence about the nature of time.

Let me guess you just can't post it. Convenient.

for us, it is linear, it is relative to the person experiencing it, it appears to be universally the same with respect to these observations anyplace withing the universe we have thus far been able to test it.

Nothing appears universally to someone who has one tiny point of observation. You would be more accurate to say something like..'from our fishbowl perspective, even things far far far out of the fishbowl out in unknown space and time appear...a certain way to us here'

There may be other aspects of time which have been verified, I'm not a physicist or cosmologist, so I defer to them.

They don't know, don't hold your breath.

But we have no reason to think it is different in some other part of our universe.

Great, so post that reason already!

 

[gnostic]

More to the point is that active observations of stars has demonstrated the reliability of existing models of astronomy. So he would have to reject what we known of the observable universe

It isn't just astronomy that dad rejected.

dad also think time and physics worked differently on Earth itself. He frequently talk of time and physics being very different in pre-Flood era and post-Flood era (including present time).

dad dismissed the radiometric dating method can measure any time or date BEFORE THE FLOOD. He saying the radiometric method don't work on any object, rock, bone or fossil.

He is doing the same thing on this topic he created about CMB and the Big Bang.

You got to admire his consistencies of being stubbornly ignorant in all areas of sciences, in biology, geology and astrophysics.

 

[dad]

dad also think time and physics worked differently on Earth itself. He frequently talk of time and physics being very different in pre-Flood era and post-Flood era (including present time)..

Why fib??

 

[Shad]

It isn't just astronomy that dad rejected.

dad also think time and physics worked differently on Earth itself. He frequently talk of time and physics being very different in pre-Flood era and post-Flood era (including present time).


dad dismissed the radiometric dating method can measure any time or date BEFORE THE FLOOD. He saying the radiometric method don't work on any object, rock, bone or fossil.

He is doing the same thing on this topic he created about CMB and the Big Bang.

You got to admire his consistencies of being stubbornly ignorant in all areas of sciences, in biology, geology and astrophysics.

Of course as it conflicts with a bronze/iron age claim. He will not abandon the religion he is emotionally tied to.

 

[gnostic]

Why fib??

I haven’t fib. The only one who consistently fib, is you.

Yo have said in the past that radiometric dating won’t work on anything before the Flood, giving wrong numbers of years.

So anything before 4500 years ago, will give dates older than they are...according to you?

Aren’t you the one who think dinosaurs lived with man, between the times of Adam to the Flood? Aren’t you the one who think the KPl (Cretaceous-Paleogene) extinction event (66 million years ago) occurred with Genesis Flood?

You are the one with the twisted reality conspiracy theory.

 

[dad]

I haven’t fib. The only one who consistently fib, is you.

Yo have said in the past that radiometric dating won’t work on anything before the Flood, giving wrong numbers of years.

I have said that we do not know this nature existed, and therefore whether the processes and radioactive decay we know now in this nature existed. That is not saying time changed.

So anything before 4500 years ago, will give dates older than they are...according to you?

Less actually. You see they use things like tree rings for collaboration, and if trees grew in weeks rather than years, the dates they 'collaborate' would be wildly skewed.

Aren’t you the one who think dinosaurs lived with man, between the times of Adam to the Flood?

Of course. God created man in the same week as other creatures.

Aren’t you the one who think the KPl (Cretaceous-Paleogene) extinction event (66 million years ago) occurred with Genesis Flood?

I have said that this is my best guess at the moment. But that has zero to do (that I know about) with time changing.

The issue of time is important when we are talking about the far universe. You see if we do not know what time itself is like there (and space) then nothing could be said to take millions of years of our time to get here!