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

[dad]

The funny thing - SCIENTISTS WOULD LIKE TO BE WRONG. IT MEANS THERE NEW
SCIENCE OUT THERE TO DISCOVER.

They can cheer up then, they got their wish.

But... it's probably swallowed by a black hole or something...

Using your belief set, I can see why that would be a choice you would think was probable. I guess that black hole was a fast swallowed? Never even left crumbs.

 

[dad]

Distances in space can indeed be calculated.
But tis true that I personally don't have the math.
That's @Polymath257's department.

No. They indeed cannot. The way they calculate distances involves belief that time and space are homogeneous in the universe. That cannot be proven so all distances cited are invalid.

 

[dad]

So, your solution to the mystery is that God made the star disappear. Now, let's hear your religious theory as to why and/or how God made the star disappear.

I have no need to offer any solution. When something much bigger and brighter than the sun vanishes with no traces, and no one knows why, this tells me they basically don't really know what they are talking about.

If you cannot, then it becomes obvious that: Naturally, science Dad is clueless as to why.

False. Even if I could and did, you would reject it as not scientific. God does have a sense of humour. Maybe He just had the star vanish to show that the theories of man are incorrect? Ha.

Maybe I can give you a path to explore. Your God needed to eliminate the distant start in order to get the stuff He needed to make a deadly virus.

Thanks we needed an example of demented thinking.

 

[sun rise]

Me against science?? You kidding? I am against fables and lies being offered as science falsely.

As am I and that's why I know that evolution is a fact, the age of the universe is a fact and so forth. That's because the scientific method was used in those and many other cases in the same manner as in other areas.

To be in favor of science you must be in favor of the scientific method which relies on physical evidence.

 

[dad]

The sky daddy that lives in your head that you control by moving its strings. It will do and say whatever you want it to.

Well, it seems you are trying to call God a puppet. That doesn't work since God wrote down how He created it all. No one can make God to have done anything else.

 

[dad]

ROFL... you're just FULL of unsubstantiated claims, aren't you? But I guess that's about all you've got top argue with. So sad.

It is not unsubstantiated to read in Scripture how man has limits in knowledge and how that what science says is a lie.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Well, it seems you are trying to call God a puppet. That doesn't work since God wrote down how He created it all. No one can make God to have done anything else.

No, people created the entirety of which its attributed to an avatar that they control. It always was people in the past and always will be people in the future controlling puppet gods that plays second fiddle to their own actions.

 

[dad]

As am I and that's why I know that evolution is a fact,

God did equip life with the ability to adapt and evolve. However if by 'evolution' you mean that life itself owes it's existence to the act of evolving, that is anything but fact. It isn't even a good fable.

the age of the universe is a fact and so forth.

As long as that age of the universe is in creation week, I would agree it is fact. If you refer to the belief based so called years used by so called science, the only fact is that they are religious nonsense .

That's because the scientific method was used in those and many other cases in the same manner as in other areas.

Fishbowl projections. Just because something is a certain way in your backyard does not mean we can model the universe from it.

To be in favor of science you must be in favor of the scientific method which relies on physical evidence.

To be in favor of a blowgun made from a ball point pen case does not mean that the spitball can go to infinity and beyond. We should know the limits of any method.

 

[dad]

No, people created the entirety of which its attributed to an avatar that they control. It always was people in the past and always will be people in the future controlling puppet gods that plays second fiddle to their own actions.

A little godless fishbowl philosophy. OK. We can chalk that up to an attempt at humour.

 

[sun rise]

No. They indeed cannot. The way they calculate distances involves belief that time and space are homogeneous in the universe. That cannot be proven so all distances cited are invalid.

That's a logical fallacy. It's been proven that the universe is at least approximately isotropic and homogeneous so there might be some differences but that does not in any way prove that the distances are invalid but rather they might be a bit off.

Whether the laws of the universe have changed has been looked at extensively. Are the Laws of Physics Really Universal? is one example review. The findings are that no such changes have been found.

The key difference is the humility involved. Scientists who are worth their salt keep an open mind and are led by the facts as they find them. The best are careful not to let their assumptions cloud their judgement.

 

[Polymath257]

No. They indeed cannot. The way they calculate distances involves belief that time and space are homogeneous in the universe. That cannot be proven so all distances cited are invalid.

For the short distances involved (just a few hundred light years), the parallax measurements are quite good. To have inhomogeneities large enough to make them invalid would produce other very obvious effects.

 

[QuestioningMind]

It is not unsubstantiated to read in Scripture how man has limits in knowledge and how that what science says is a lie.

If "It's written in my magic book" is substantiation to you, then that explains quite a lot. So you ignore established science, but if it's in your magic book it's golden! Thanks for sharing!

 

[blü 2]

The Serpent lied to man. He tried to get us to doubt the creator.

Quote me the lie you claim the Snake told. On my reading of the story, everything the snake said was correct and straightforward, and the only person who misspoke was God, since they didn't die on the day they ate the fruit.

And as I pointed out to you, the reason they were kicked out of the Garden was, clearly and expressly, NOT because they ate the fruit.

And as I further pointed out to you, it's a VERY GOOD thing that humans know good from evil. Do you disagree?

Science does the exact same thing. Coincidence?

You still haven't explained to me why you prefer to rely on stories instead of looking at reality. Science studies what in your terms is the book God wrote with [his] own hand, unmediated.

It follows that in your terms science knows a lot more about God and what [he] did, than you or your stories do. Time to wake up ─ reality's out there and it's full of wonders.

 

[sun rise]

God did equip life with the ability to adapt and evolve. However if by 'evolution' you mean that life itself owes it's existence to the act of evolving, that is anything but fact. It isn't even a good fable.

To you it's a fable. To me, it's fact.

As long as that age of the universe is in creation week, I would agree it is fact. If you refer to the belief based so called years used by so called science, the only fact is that they are religious nonsense .

Go argue with these people Genesis Clearly Teaches that the Days Were NOT 24 Hours

 

[dad]

That's a logical fallacy. It's been proven that the universe is at least approximately isotropic and homogeneous so there might be some differences but that does not in any way prove that the distances are invalid but rather they might be a bit off.

Two jobs for you then. One is give the source/proof that you claim how it was proven that the universe was isotropic and homogeneous. We wait.

And the second is the kicker. Show how you know time is homogeneous!? Hilarious.

Whether the laws of the universe have changed has been looked at extensively.

Not an issue in this thread for starters. The issue is what time is known to be like in the far universe. You see that would be needed to know distances through space and time.

The key difference is the humility involved. Scientists who are worth their salt keep an open mind and are led by the facts as they find them.

Except they are led by their beliefs.

Apparently some are not honest enough to admit it.

The best are careful not to let their assumptions cloud their judgement.

Their only judgment is adhering to beliefs. Example: 'in what way can we adhere most closely with our beliefs to explain a massive disappearing star'!?

 

[dad]

For the short distances involved (just a few hundred light years), the parallax measurements are quite good. To have inhomogeneities large enough to make them invalid would produce other very obvious effects.

No, they are utterly useless and wrong even out to a light month! (as far as we know)

They just take a swath of fishbowl space and time and stick a line on a paper representing this. Except they omit the time. They try to make is just space. They neither know that space is the same out there, nor time itself!
They work on belief alone.

 

[dad]

If "It's written in my magic book" is substantiation to you, then that explains quite a lot. So you ignore established science, but if it's in your magic book it's golden! Thanks for sharing!

Anything strange to their cave is magic to a caveman.

 

[QuestioningMind]

Anything strange to their cave is magic to a caveman.

And you prefer your magic book to actual science... got it! Thanks for clarifying.

 

[dad]

Quote me the lie you claim the Snake told. On my reading of the story, everything the snake said was correct and straightforward, and the only person who misspoke was God, since they didn't die on the day they ate the fruit.

How about, 'you shall not surely die'? Adam died. We all die now.

And as I pointed out to you, the reason they were kicked out of the Garden was, clearly and expressly, NOT because they ate the fruit.

? How would an unbeliever that the bible says is unable to understand explain anything about God or His word to anyone?

And as I further pointed out to you, it's a VERY GOOD thing that humans know good from evil. Do you disagree?

I am not sure that the quintessential definition of good is knowing evil. It seems like knowing involved more than a superficial knowledge from the outside. It involved something more akin to making love to evil and partaking.

You still haven't explained to me why you prefer to rely on stories instead of looking at reality. Science studies what in your terms is the book God wrote with [his] own hand, unmediated.

Origin fables are not reality.

It follows that in your terms science knows a lot more about God and what [he] did

The reason they cannot come to a knowledge of the truth is because they do not know Him.

Time to wake up ─ reality's out there and it's full of wonders.

I don't believe you are acquainted. But make all the delirious claims you like.

 

[dad]

And you prefer your magic book to actual science... got it! Thanks for clarifying.

I don't care what cavemen think is magic. Nor do I care what they think of what I like or dislike.