Did you hear the one about the disappearing planet?

[dad]

A guy walks into a bar....

well, actually science declared a planet (or exoplanet as it is called when it is really far away) existed.

The funny thing is that is up and disappeared. Not there. So, do we get an apology? No.

"What scientists thought was a planet beyond our solar system has 'vanished.' Though this happens to sci-fi worlds, scientists seek a more plausible explanation."

Exoplanet apparently disappears in latest Hubble observations

We get the usual scramble to find some 'plausible' (fishbowl) explanation. In other words they are busted and scrambling to cook up another whopper.

Kids, this is how cosmology works.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

A guy walks into a bar....

well, actually science declared a planet or exoplanet as it is called when far away existed.

The funny thing is that is up and disappeared. Not there. So, do we get an apology? No.

"What scientists thought was a planet beyond our solar system has 'vanished.' Though this happens to sci-fi worlds, scientists seek a more plausible explanation."

Exoplanet apparently disappears in latest Hubble observations

We get the usual scramble to find some 'plausible' (fishbowl) explanation. In other words they are busted and scrambling to cook up another whopper.

Kids, this is how cosmology works.

It must be nice that everything you do turns out perfect and your get it and understand it all first time, everytime.

 

[dad]

It must be nice that everything you do turns out perfect and your get it and understand it all first time, everytime.

Must be a gift.

 

[oldbadger]

A guy walks into a bar....

well, actually science declared a planet (or exoplanet as it is called when it is really far away) existed.

The funny thing is that is up and disappeared. Not there. So, do we get an apology? No.

"What scientists thought was a planet beyond our solar system has 'vanished.' Though this happens to sci-fi worlds, scientists seek a more plausible explanation."

Exoplanet apparently disappears in latest Hubble observations

We get the usual scramble to find some 'plausible' (fishbowl) explanation. In other words they are busted and scrambling to cook up another whopper.

Kids, this is how cosmology works.

All those dishonest scientists, eh?
They report observation of a very remote planet, then they report that it seems to have disappeared. Yes? How sneaky!

The perfect opportunity for your kind of Christianity to grasp and wave in the air. Apology? For what?

I notice that when you get shown to be wrong you just leave the thread....... when all you had to do was acknowledge a point. Hmmmmmm..... science owes you nothing, methinks.

 

[danieldemol]

A guy walks into a bar....

well, actually science declared a planet (or exoplanet as it is called when it is really far away) existed.

The funny thing is that is up and disappeared. Not there. So, do we get an apology? No.

"What scientists thought was a planet beyond our solar system has 'vanished.' Though this happens to sci-fi worlds, scientists seek a more plausible explanation."

Exoplanet apparently disappears in latest Hubble observations

We get the usual scramble to find some 'plausible' (fishbowl) explanation. In other words they are busted and scrambling to cook up another whopper.

Kids, this is how cosmology works.

Science learns from it’s mistakes. Wish I could say the same about creationists

 

[stvdv]

Science learns from it’s mistakes. Wish I could say the same about creationists

I wonder if @dad will grant you the "like" frooble

Then he might prove you wrong

 

[bobhikes]

A guy walks into a bar....

well, actually science declared a planet (or exoplanet as it is called when it is really far away) existed.

The funny thing is that is up and disappeared. Not there. So, do we get an apology? No.

"What scientists thought was a planet beyond our solar system has 'vanished.' Though this happens to sci-fi worlds, scientists seek a more plausible explanation."

We get the usual scramble to find some 'plausible' (fishbowl) explanation. In other words they are busted and scrambling to cook up another whopper.

Kids, this is how cosmology works.

I group both cosmology and the quantum realm in the same scientific grouping which has the biggest error factors because we a limited it to how we can actually view them and there is to much creativity. My Uncle worked for a company that made Electron Microscopes. We got into a discussion about how they worked. And I concluded that basically a TV image is created based off of complex forumals and direct actions of the microscope. He did not like this definition and it pissed him off because he could dismiss it. An electron microscope is not like a microscope at all it does not passively observe with only light and magnification.

 

[ChristineM]

A guy walks into a bar....

well, actually science declared a planet (or exoplanet as it is called when it is really far away) existed.

The funny thing is that is up and disappeared. Not there. So, do we get an apology? No.

"What scientists thought was a planet beyond our solar system has 'vanished.' Though this happens to sci-fi worlds, scientists seek a more plausible explanation."

Exoplanet apparently disappears in latest Hubble observations

We get the usual scramble to find some 'plausible' (fishbowl) explanation. In other words they are busted and scrambling to cook up another whopper.

Kids, this is how cosmology works.

Simple explanation


What happened was your god put it there for Hubble to photograph and then magicked it away so that you could gloat over nothing and feel so good about yourself.

 

[Polymath257]

I group both cosmology and the quantum realm in the same scientific grouping which has the biggest error factors because we a limited it to how we can actually view them and there is to much creativity. My Uncle worked for a company that made Electron Microscopes. We got into a discussion about how they worked. And I concluded that basically a TV image is created based off of complex forumals and direct actions of the microscope. He did not like this definition and it pissed him off because he could dismiss it. An electron microscope is not like a microscope at all it does not passively observe with only light and magnification.

That actually depends on the type of electron microscope. The ones that act like the ordinary light microscopes *do* passively observe, but they are more 'one shot' systems: they take a picture.

What you saw was a scanning electron microscope, which develops the image by the microscope adjusting its position to correspond to the 'landscape', which then gives the picture.

 

[bobhikes]

That actually depends on the type of electron microscope. The ones that act like the ordinary light microscopes *do* passively observe, but they are more 'one shot' systems: they take a picture.

What you saw was a scanning electron microscope, which develops the image by the microscope adjusting its position to correspond to the 'landscape', which then gives the picture.

His company at the time had just achieved best magnification in the industry which is how we got on the topic. But even your definition of passively observe is not correct you are using electrons not light and it still uses a formula to interpret the image you are not seeing the actual one shot image. It is similar to the interpretation of how the planets look artistically based on light reflections we get from them and then interpreting the chemicals and the colors the chemicals should look like.

 

[Polymath257]

His company at the time had just achieved best magnification in the industry which is how we got on the topic. But even your definition of passively observe is not correct you are using electrons not light and it still uses a formula to interpret the image you are not seeing the actual one shot image. It is similar to the interpretation of how the planets look artistically based on light reflections we get from them and then interpreting the chemicals and the colors the chemicals should look like.

Well, humans don't detect electrons directly, so of course we don't see the raw image. In an old photographic process, you use light to change the chemistry of silver in order to form an image. That doesn't invalidate the image.

 

[bobhikes]

Well, humans don't detect electrons directly, so of course we don't see the raw image. In an old photographic process, you use light to change the chemistry of silver in order to form an image. That doesn't invalidate the image.

Never said it did, I said I equate our view of the Universe to be scientifically equivalent to our view of micro world because we a limited in how we can view it. I consider both to have the highest tolerances of error.

 

[night912]

A guy walks into a bar....

well, actually science declared a planet (or exoplanet as it is called when it is really far away) existed.

The funny thing is that is up and disappeared. Not there. So, do we get an apology? No.

"What scientists thought was a planet beyond our solar system has 'vanished.' Though this happens to sci-fi worlds, scientists seek a more plausible explanation."

Exoplanet apparently disappears in latest Hubble observations

We get the usual scramble to find some 'plausible' (fishbowl) explanation. In other words they are busted and scrambling to cook up another whopper.

Kids, this is how cosmology works.

Yep, that's how scientific models work. By using the model, scientists was able to predict that it wasn't a planet, and now with present observations, it was shown to be correct. So do science really need to apologize for being right?

Don't worry about the kids, they know how cosmology works. However, the kids are worry that dad doesn't know how science work. And they suggest dad should stop going to the bars and trying to teach science to others when he doesn't know science. Or at least, don't call it science. The kids just want to help dad so he is not repeatedly embarrassing himself in front of others. Hopefully the message will get through.

 

[dad]

All those dishonest scientists, eh?
They report observation of a very remote planet, then they report that it seems to have disappeared. Yes? How sneaky!

They have to work with the belief system they have. They have to fit everything in somehow. Get a hammer and bash it in if needed. It doesn't matter that the little round hole they have have to bash triangular and square and conical things in doesn't really fit. Naturally, we will see some things that they have smashed and bashed into place actually do not fit.
So it is probably more a matter of ignorance and improper knowledge and theories than deliberate deception with most of them.

The perfect opportunity for your kind of Christianity to grasp and wave in the air. Apology? For what?

Well, for grasping at cosmic straws trying to claim there are planets out there for one thing. Maybe there are. Maybe there are not. Since no distances or sizes of any stellar objects are known, what we actually see out there may be nothing like they fantasize. A so-called planet could be bigger or smaller. All the assumptions tacked on to what we see out there depend on distances being correct. If something is actually, for example, four light months away, rather than say, a billion light-years away, that changes how big it is! That changes the nature of what we are actually seeing. That changes how big the orbit actually is etc etc etc etc etc.
So when we see some so-called planet disappear it is no problem for me. They have no clue what they see anyhow!

I notice that when you get shown to be wrong you just leave the thread.......

Link? Let's show you wrong.

 

[dad]

Science learns from it’s mistakes. Wish I could say the same about creationists

Hey, magicians learn from their disappearing bunnies! Ha

 

[dad]

I group both cosmology and the quantum realm in the same scientific grouping which has the biggest error factors because we a limited it to how we can actually view them and there is to much creativity. My Uncle worked for a company that made Electron Microscopes. We got into a discussion about how they worked. And I concluded that basically a TV image is created based off of complex forumals and direct actions of the microscope. He did not like this definition and it pissed him off because he could dismiss it. An electron microscope is not like a microscope at all it does not passively observe with only light and magnification.

Right. It is a matter of interpreting data I would guess.

 

[dad]

Simple explanation


What happened was your god put it there for Hubble to photograph and then magicked it away so that you could gloat over nothing and feel so good about yourself.

No. They simply use a belief set to interpret data.

 

[dad]

Yep, that's how scientific models work. By using the model, scientists was able to predict that it wasn't a planet, and now with present observations, it was shown to be correct. So do science really need to apologize for being right?

Make up your mind before declaring you are right! 'It is it is not, it is, it is not...we are right whatever we declare because in any event whatever it turns out to be we predicted it!! Nice.

There is a whole set of beliefs that go into declaring what is a planet out in deep space. Not least of these is the beliefs that determine how far away the object is. (they assume time exists out there as it does here for no reason and set distances/sizes accordingly)
Ha

Don't worry about the kids, they know how cosmology works. However, the kids are worry that dad doesn't know how science work. And they suggest dad should stop going to the bars and trying to teach science to others when he doesn't know science. Or at least, don't call it science. The kids just want to help dad so he is not repeatedly embarrassing himself in front of others. Hopefully the message will get through.

Kids know what they are taught. Sometimes they may even have little BS detectors and get suspicious of a load of nonsense that smells.

 

[ChristineM]

No. They simply use a belief set to interpret data.

Your opinion?

In the real world they saw a phenomenon and attributed a result that matches the data. Under further studies that data had changed so the result changed... Its called science, that's how it works. Unlike religious dogma that does not change over centuries unless undisputable evidence forces them to change their fairy story.

 

[dad]

Your opinion?

In the real world they saw a phenomenon and attributed a result that matches the data.

So they did not really know what they were talking about declaring this a planet. Got it.

Under further studies that data had changed so the result changed... Its called science, that's how it works.

When it finally became impossible to keep falsely calling this a planet, they changed their tune and are now scrambling for some 'plausible' (based on earth time and space and rules) explanation. That new explanation will last until they get busted again, and get back to making stuff fit in their belief based paradigm. Fine. That is science, we get it.

Unlike religious dogma that does not change over centuries unless undisputable evidence forces them to change their fairy story.

False. Nothing in the bible has been dismissed by any supposed evidence. Only replaced with beliefs that were chosen.


Heb 13:8 - Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.

We stand on the Rock. Science stands on shifting sands.