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

[Terrywoodenpic]

They use whatever they can to splatter their same old bag of beliefs onto. When they fail in a prediction or have something happen that doesn't fit at all, they simply create exotic scenarios where it possibly could be explained by the usual belief set. Since it takes many year to find out they again were wrong, they can sail along playing the wise man again till the next time.

Who is. THEY, ?
The person out of step with reality seems to be yourself.

 

[Tiberius]

Your replies should address the topic and issues. The topic here is not your opinion about my beliefs.

Apparently the topic is you badmouthing science. I'm just asking you to back up that claim - something which you have not only failed to do, but actually try to get out of.

It's almost like you know your position is unsupportable.

 

[dad]

Apparently the topic is you badmouthing science. I'm just asking you to back up that claim - something which you have not only failed to do, but actually try to get out of.

It's almost like you know your position is unsupportable.

When we point out what science was wrong about, and what it admits not knowing, that is not badmouthing anything. When some spammers badmouth the bible and creation here, however, that is another matter.

 

[dad]

Who is. THEY, ?
The person out of step with reality seems to be yourself.

In the case of claims made in the name of science it is obvious who makes them. Focus.

 

[shunyadragon]

Naturally, science is clueless as to why.

"From 2001 to 2011, the light from the galaxy consistently showed evidence that it hosted a 'luminous blue variable' star some 2.5 million times brighter than the Sun. Stars of this type are unstable, showing occasional dramatic shifts in their spectra and brightness. Even with those shifts, luminous blue variables leave specific traces scientists can identify, but they were absent from the data the team collected in 2019, leaving them to wonder what had happened to the star. "It would be highly unusual for such a massive star to disappear without producing a bright supernova explosion," says Allan."

A cosmic mystery: ESO telescope captures the disappearance of a massive star

Could it be their theories are wrong?

Ha

It is not a mystery. It is simply an observation of an event. Qne of a star collapsing to likely form a black hole without forming bright explosion or supernova. It has been observed that stars do collapse and not form a cupernova. This is only one more observation of an event, nothing more.

 

[shunyadragon]

When we point out what science was wrong about, and what it admits not knowing, that is not badmouthing anything. When some spammers badmouth the bible and creation here, however, that is another matter.

As far as being wrong, no. This simpy one observation of the event of a collapsing star. nothing less nor nothing more, unless you are claiming that the scientists are wrong at simply what they observed..

Cause gravity.

 

[Tiberius]

When we point out what science was wrong about, and what it admits not knowing, that is not badmouthing anything. When some spammers badmouth the bible and creation here, however, that is another matter.

Nah, you can't prove that science was wrong about anything. All you do is cry about it because it disagrees with your beliefs, and you aren't capable of subjecting your beliefs to any critical thought. Either that or you're a troll (but if so, not a very good one).

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

In the case of claims made in the name of science it is obvious who makes them. Focus.

Please put that into meaningful English, it is incomprehensible as you have written it.

 

[dad]

As far as being wrong, no. This simpy one observation of the event of a collapsing star. nothing less nor nothing more, unless you are claiming that the scientists are wrong at simply what they observed..

Cause gravity.

No. It was not expected at all. They were wrong to not expect it, and not be able to do anything but offer belief based explanations as to what we observed.

 

[dad]

Nah, you can't prove that science was wrong about anything. All you do is cry about it because it disagrees with your beliefs, and you aren't capable of subjecting your beliefs to any critical thought. Either that or you're a troll (but if so, not a very good one).

They had no clue why a massive star (in their opinion) up and disappeared. All we have on offer is more belief based conjecture as to why what we observe may have happened, your religion grew old long ago.

 

[dad]

Please put that into meaningful English, it is incomprehensible as you have written it.

Science makes science claims. They made them. Need it broken down further to meet your comprehension level?

 

[Tiberius]

They had no clue why a massive star (in their opinion) up and disappeared. All we have on offer is more belief based conjecture as to why what we observe may have happened, your religion grew old long ago.

You call science a religion because it admits it doesn't have all the answers? Please. I'd rather an honest "I don't know," than your desperation to invent some answer no matter how flawed and wrong it is.

And your position has been "belief based conjecture as to why what we observe may have happened" for a lot longer than science. So you're the pot calling the kettle black.

 

[Samantha Rinne]

You call science a religion because it admits it doesn't have all the answers? Please. I'd rather an honest "I don't know," than your desperation to invent some answer no matter how flawed and wrong it is.

And your position has been "belief based conjecture as to why what we observe may have happened" for a lot longer than science. So you're the pot calling the kettle black.

You want the truth?!? You can't handle the truth.

The stars are going out.

Matthew 24:29

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Science makes science claims. They made them. Need it broken down further to meet your comprehension level?

Science making science claims,
makes far more sense
than religion making science claims.
Science never makes religion claims.
However you make religious claims against science,
Which is very odd indeed.

 

[dad]

You call science a religion because it admits it doesn't have all the answers? Please. I'd rather an honest "I don't know," than your desperation to invent some answer no matter how flawed and wrong it is.

And your position has been "belief based conjecture as to why what we observe may have happened" for a lot longer than science. So you're the pot calling the kettle black.

Show that what they say happened to the 'massive star' really did happen. You can't they can't. So you believe and spam your beliefs as something else.

 

[dad]

Science making science claims,
makes far more sense
than religion making science claims.

The universe ballooning from a speck in a fraction of a second, rather than being created does not make sense to all people. Just to your religion.

Science never makes religion claims.

Science is religion and is so deluded and confused and desperate that it doesn't even know what it is all about.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

The universe ballooning from a speck in a fraction of a second, rather than being created does not make sense to all people. Just to your religion.
Science is religion and is so deluded and confused and desperate that it doesn't even know what it is all about.

Only the deluded believe sciences a religion.

 

[shunyadragon]

No. It was not expected at all. They were wrong to not expect it, and not be able to do anything but offer belief based explanations as to what we observed.

I never said it was expected. I simply said it was an observed event. It was observed that a star collapsed likely it will form a black hole, nothing less nor nothing more..

Cause gravity

 

[Tiberius]

You want the truth?!? You can't handle the truth.

The stars are going out.

Matthew 24:29

Let me know when the stars have fallen to earth, okay?

 

[Tiberius]

Show that what they say happened to the 'massive star' really did happen. You can't they can't. So you believe and spam your beliefs as something else.

Asking me to back up my claim is not the same thing as you providing evidence for yours. You do not understand logic.