Galaxies- large and old, creationism fails
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
12-12-2014, 05:55 PM
RE: Galaxies- large and old, creationism fails
I just did a Google search for "creationism fails" this thread comes up on the second page of search results. Big Grin

It should be flypaper for delusional creationists. Lamo

Gods derive their power from post-hoc rationalizations. -The Inquisition

Using the supernatural to explain events in your life is a failure of the intellect to comprehend the world around you. -The Inquisition
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-12-2014, 09:00 AM
RE: Galaxies- large and old, creationism fails
(12-12-2014 11:03 AM)CHRIST IS OUR SAVIOR Wrote:  you guys need jesus, he will help you repent of your sins.Angel

Do you have any evidence of sins, their negative effect, or Jesus' ability to help? Any that doesn't require presupposition?

Someone else told me I have to follow the five pillars of Islam. Someone else told me to leave the leprechaun's gold alone.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes RobbyPants's post
18-12-2014, 09:15 AM (This post was last modified: 18-12-2014 09:19 AM by TheInquisition.)
RE: Galaxies- large and old, creationism fails
Thought I would add this to this thread, how are the distances to the stars measured?

Methods of Observational Astronomy

Let me give a quick summation:

1.Parallax method- You can quickly demonstrate the idea behind trigonometric parallax to yourself by placing one finger in front of you and keeping it in that position. Close your right eye and make a mental note of your finger's position against the background. Now close your left eye and view your finger again note how the position against the background has changed! This is the same principle behind the trigonometric parallax method used by astronomers. Just like your finger seems to move based on which eye is open, a star appears to move against the background of space due to the Earth's movement around the Sun.

Note- This method derives distance independent of the velocity of light, it is not part of the distance calculation.

[Image: trigparallax.jpg]

2. Absolute magnitude- A star's brightness which is determined by it's temperature and measured brightness from Earth. Basically, if a 40 Watt light bulb can provide enough light to read by when it's 5 ft. away, it will not provide enough light to read 500 ft. away. Determining this absolute magnitude provides a straightforward method of determining stellar distances.

Cepheid variables provide very reliable and predictable variations in absolute magnitudes that have proved extremely valuable in determining distances of distant galaxies.

Note- This does not depend on the velocity of light, it depends on the amplitude of light from an object.

3. Red shift- as space-time expands, the wavelength of light gets stretched out and it's frequency is reduced or red-shifted. This is used for extreme distance measurements.

Note-This is not dependent on the velocity of light, this is dependent on the frequency of light.


Astronomers have these three methods and more for determining the distance to stellar objects. None of them depend on the velocity of light, they all buttress each methodology and cross-correlate to confirm that when they measure the distance to stellar objects, you can be sure that they know exactly what they're talking about.

Now would a creationist simply dismiss this as "evolutionary science" ? probably, but what I'm trying to get across is that astronomers base their estimates for the size and age of the universe on solid observational evidence. Science has proof, creationists have a myth in a book.

There is more than a starlight problem for creationists, there is a frequency and amplitude problem, the very nature of electromagnetic radiation has to be dismissed to believe in a creationist model of the universe. You literally are denying the basic structure of the universe at this point.

Gods derive their power from post-hoc rationalizations. -The Inquisition

Using the supernatural to explain events in your life is a failure of the intellect to comprehend the world around you. -The Inquisition
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheInquisition's post
18-12-2014, 09:19 AM
RE: Galaxies- large and old, creationism fails
(12-12-2014 11:03 AM)CHRIST IS OUR SAVIOR Wrote:  you guys need jesus, he will help you repent of your sins.Angel

'Tis the season to be silly, fa la la la la, la la la la.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-12-2014, 10:48 AM (This post was last modified: 20-12-2014 10:55 AM by Ace.)
RE: Galaxies- large and old, creationism fails
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-12-2014, 11:04 AM
RE: Galaxies- large and old, creationism fails
(10-12-2014 11:14 AM)theophilus Wrote:  
(07-12-2014 07:36 PM)TheInquisition Wrote:  I asked my former creationist friend about why there are objects so far away if the universe was 6,000 years old,

The Bible says that the earth was created only a few thousand years ago; it doesn't say anything about when the rest of the universe was created.

One the fourth day God placed lights in the sky but the Bible doesn't say he created the bodies that were the source of those lights at that time. Since there was light the sun must have already existed. All of us have experienced cloudy days when there was light but the sun couldn't be seen. Obviously this condition prevailed over the whole earth before the fourth day. God changed atmospheric conditions so that the sun, moon, and stars became visible.

There is a post in my blog where I explain this in more detail:

https://clydeherrin.wordpress.com/2014/0...-universe/

What a bunch of crap. Why would ANYONE look to an ancient piece of gargabe book that was cooked up for entirely political reasons, written by a bunch of ancient priests who had NO CLUE about how the Earth formed for ANY reason in 2014 ?
You can "bla bla bla" about it from here to eternity. It won't change the fact that humans who had no idea how it happened, assembled the prevailing myths of the time and cultures, and rewrote them to make it appear THEIR "god done it".

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-12-2014, 12:19 PM
RE: Galaxies- large and old, creationism fails
(12-12-2014 11:03 AM)CHRIST IS OUR SAVIOR Wrote:  you guys need jesus, he will help you repent of your sins.Angel

I wanted to 'like' this comment but then I thought he or she might get the wrong idea that I agree with him. ...but I do like the comment lmao

may Shrek cleanse your sins and have mercy on your soul Wink

"If you cannot explain it simply, you don't understand it enough" -Albert Einstein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-12-2014, 01:03 AM
RE: Galaxies- large and old, creationism fails
I was out with my telescope last night showing my wife and daughter the celestial sights. I showed them Jupiter and her moons and our own moon.

Then I turned my telescope towards Andromeda. A galaxy 40% larger than our own. Looking at Andromeda is looking back in time 2.5 million years.

I realized that all matter in the universe has always existed and will always exist in one form or another. Like those photons that had traveled all the way from Andromeda. They entered my optic nerve and were transformed into an electronic signal in my brain that became part of my consciousness. That atomic piece of Andromeda became part of me. It is an impossibility for matter to be created from nothing.

A billion years from now when our sun goes supernova, the
remnants of me and that particle of Andromeda will be blasted out into space. 2.5 million years after that it might enter the optic nerve of some other being and hopefully it will recognize those photons for what they are.

Not god just me.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Jack_Ripper's post
30-12-2014, 01:20 AM
RE: Galaxies- large and old, creationism fails
(15-12-2014 09:00 AM)RobbyPants Wrote:  Any that doesn't require presupposition?

Any form of logic that doesn't require presupposition?

Truth seeker.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-12-2014, 02:08 AM
RE: Galaxies- large and old, creationism fails
(30-12-2014 01:20 AM)diddo97 Wrote:  Any form of logic that doesn't require presupposition?

[Image: spam-family-of-products.ashx]

Cogito ergo spam.

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes EvolutionKills's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: