Astronomers should be sued for false advertizing.

[Michael]

We should sue all the churches for the Bible's false claims regarding astronomy and biology!

If only pastors and priests were paid for by the state from public funds, and they were running around claiming to have a created a "God camera" that validates YEC, you might actually have a case.

 

[mzungu]

If only pastors and priests were paid for by the state from public funds, and they were running around claiming to have a created a "God camera" that validates YEC, you might actually have a case.

And your point being You claim the existence of God yet you have not even a theory explaining his existence; Why you don't have a clue as to what constitutes God or any deity for that matter yet you laugh at Dark energy

 

[Michael]

And your point being

My point being, it's a blatant example of false advertizing.

You claim the existence of God yet you have not even a theory explaining his existence;

You mean like astronomers can't even name a source of "dark energy"?

Actually, I can tell you what God is made of. Didn't you read the thread? You can't tell me what "caused" your creation event, nor the 'source' of "inflation". For goodness sake, at least I can 'see' the God/universe I believe in, and I've endowed neither with any 'superpowers' like Guthainity requires.

Why you don't have a clue as to what constitutes God

Absolutely, positively false.

http://www.christianforums.com/t7440288/

The universe I believe in is a 'living', aware, alive being. It's not invisible. It's not made of any supernatural stuff that fails to show up in labs on Earth. Even awareness shows up on Earth, whereas SUSY theory was actually *falsified*, and still "Guthianity" goes on forever and ever just like any bad religion.

or any deity for that matter yet you laugh at Dark energy

I laugh at dark energy because it's a mythological placeholder term for pure human ignorance, and I can fully explain what they are ignorant of, specifically photon physics and plasma physics. In real plasma, plasma redshift and signal broadening occurs. Only in fantasy brands of sky mythology will photons traverse billions of light years of dust and plasma galore, and magically experience no signal broadening, nor even a speck of plasma redshift.

Holy smokes! They *forgot/left out/remain in denial of* various forms of plasma redshift. As long as they ignore Hubble's *2nd* option, not to mention 5 decades of laboratory findings, they'll continue to grope around in the dark ages of cosmology. I want no part of that nonsense, and I don't want that dark sky mythos stuffed into my children's heads in the classroom.

 

[mzungu]

Actually, I can tell you what God is made of. Didn't you read the thread? You can't tell me what "caused" your creation event, nor the 'source' of "inflation". For goodness sake, at least I can 'see' the God/universe I believe in, and I've endowed neither with any 'superpowers' like Guthainity requires.

Absolutely, positively false.

http://www.christianforums.com/t7440288/

The universe I believe in is a 'living', aware, alive being. It's not invisible. It's not made of any supernatural stuff that fails to show up in labs on Earth. Even awareness shows up on Earth, whereas SUSY theory was actually *falsified*, and still "Guthianity" goes on forever and ever just like any good religion.

I laugh at dark energy because it's a mythological placeholder terms from pure human ignorance, and I can fully explain what they are ignorant of, specifically photon physics and plasma physics. In real plasma, plasma redshift and signal broadening occurs. Only in fantasy brands of sky mythology will photons traverse billions of light years of dust and plasma galore, and magically experience no signal broadening, nor even a speck of plasma redshift.

Holy smokes! They *forgot/left out/remain in denial of* various forms of plasma redshift. As long as they ignore Hubble's *2nd* option, not to mention 5 decades of laboratory findings, they'll continue to grope around in the dark ages of cosmology. I want no part of that nonsense, and I don't want that dark sky mythos stuffed into my children's heads in the classroom.

The universe has awareness The universe is God WOW OK take a stainless steel knife and prove in the lab that it has awareness Dear me what next "TALKING SNAKES and a FLAT EARTH"
murder by death - YouTube

 

[Michael]

The universe has awareness The universe is God WOW OK take a stainless steel knife and prove in the lab that it has awareness Dear me what next "TALKING SNAKES and a FLAT EARTH"

Back to talking snakes again? Wow!

Ya know....

Spinoza, Einstein, and a host of other "scientist" have entertained Pantheism at some point. For you to simply 'dismiss' the concept with ridicule is absurd, particularly since you're supporting a sky religion that 96 percent "faith in the unseen" (in the lab), and SUSY theory was actually *falsified* at LHC. Standard particle physics theory is now complete without any need for exotic matter, and several simple SUSY theories were tried and falsified already.

The ever shrinking gaps in empirical physics are leaving no room at all for any of your invisible sky deities, but those same empirical laws of physics leave a whole universe of room for a very living, very alive, very dynamic "God" that can and does have a very empirical effect on human beings.

Not only is your wimpy theory of the universe in denial of the results from the lab, it's incapable of even making any logical predictions about human beings and the effect of the universe on the human psyche. What a wimpy theory.

 

[mzungu]

Back to talking snakes again? Wow!

Ya know....

Spinoza, Einstein, and a host of other "scientist" have entertained Pantheism at some point. For you to simply 'dismiss' the concept with ridicule is absurd, particularly since you're supporting a sky religion that 96 percent "faith in the unseen" (in the lab), and SUSY theory was actually *falsified* at LHC. Standard particle physics theory is now complete without any need for exotic matter, and several simple SUSY theories were tried and falsified already.

The ever shrinking gaps in empirical physics are leaving no room at all for any of your invisible sky deities, but those same empirical laws of physics leave a whole universe of room for a very living, very alive, very dynamic "God" that can and does have a very empirical effect on human beings.

Not only is your wimpy theory of the universe in denial of the results from the lab, it's incapable of even making any logical predictions about human beings and the effect of the universe on the human psyche. What a wimpy theory.

YES DEAR, SOME TEA PERHAPS?

​

 

[Michael]

YES DEAR, SOME TEA PERHAPS?
​

I assume that the blue, pink, and yellow cups in your mad hatter tea party represent the placeholder terms for human ignorance that you need to attempt to avoid dealing with pure plasma physics? No signal broadening, plasma redshift or normal missing plasma at your metaphysical denial of reality tea party, eh?

 

[mzungu]

I assume that the blue, pink, and yellow cups in your mad hatter tea party represent the placeholder terms for human ignorance that you need to attempt to avoid dealing with pure plasma physics? No signal broadening, plasma redshift or normal missing plasma at your metaphysical denial of reality tea party, eh?

Steady state, talking snakes, tired light, flat earth, aware universe, geocentrism, it is all the same; They are all quackery, crackpot ignorant ideas than refuse to die. If you insist on beating a long dead horse then be my guest. Meanwhile science is progressing while you are still holding your whip!

 

[Naraoia]

Oh, you two, just stop it. It's not even funny any more.

 

[Blayz]

I'm sorry, but I still don't get the "false advertizing" part. False claim I could understand, but advertizing? What is it being advertized?

Some preacher dude said the world would end a few months ago, it didn't. That counts as a false claim, but not false advertizing, since he wasn't selling anything.

You still haven't explained what was being sold, and I mean that literally as in what people were handing over money for in order to purchase something, that was being falsely advertized.

Otherwise there is no case for suing.

Or flogging, but I think that was you just revealing what you really mean for a moment, rather than an actual response.

 

[Tiberius]

Michael just wants to sound important and have people pay attention to him. So he makes grandiose claims and sweeping statements.

 

[Michael]

Michael just wants to sound important and have people pay attention to him. So he makes grandiose claims and sweeping statements.

Nah, it has nothing to do with me. I'm just advertizing PC/EU theory, hence the grandiose claims and sweeping statements.

 

[Michael]

I'm sorry, but I still don't get the "false advertizing" part. False claim I could understand, but advertizing? What is it being advertized?

"Dark energy" and mainstream theory are being "advertized" in a highly misleading and inappropriate manner. It's like advertizing astrology.

Some preacher dude said the world would end a few months ago, it didn't. That counts as a false claim, but not false advertizing, since he wasn't selling anything.

He wasn't being publicly funded, and using public funds was he?

You still haven't explained what was being sold, and I mean that literally as in what people were handing over money for in order to purchase something, that was being falsely advertized.

They are "selling" the claim that dark energy causes photon redshift, but they've never demonstrated that claim. They get "paid" to study photon redshift. The actual cause of photon redshift has *nothing* do to with "dark energy". That's a bogus, false and misleading claim.

They might as well be claiming that their "dark energy god did it".

 

[Tiberius]

He wasn't being publicly funded, and using public funds was he?

No, he was privately funded, and several of the people gave their entire life savings to him, convinced he was right.

Needless to say, those people are now in a very bad situation financially, and I doubt he has done anything to help them out.

 

[Michael]

No, he was privately funded, and several of the people gave their entire life savings to him, convinced he was right.

Needless to say, those people are now in a very bad situation financially, and I doubt he has done anything to help them out.

It seems to me that example also demonstrates the value of legal remedies when claims and reality don't jive. It wasn't my tax money however, so I personally have no recourse or financial interest in that particular boondoggle.

 

[Blayz]

"Dark energy" and mainstream theory are being "advertized" in a highly misleading and inappropriate manner. It's like advertizing astrology.

But you are allowed to advertise astrology, heck, open any paper. It's advertised all over the place.

They are "selling" the claim that dark energy causes photon redshift, but they've never demonstrated that claim. They get "paid" to study photon redshift. The actual cause of photon redshift has *nothing* do to with "dark energy". That's a bogus, false and misleading claim.

Making a claim is not equivalent to false advertising. You have still demonstrated nothing that they can be sued for.

I consider all of your comments on this topic to be bogus, false and misleading, but I would never suggest suing you, nor would I suggest you are advertising falsely.

They might as well be claiming that their "dark energy god did it".

...and that's still not false advertising, nor a suable offense.

 

[Michael]

But you are allowed to advertise astrology, heck, open any paper. It's advertised all over the place.

But not with *public* funds. You don't see the government advertizing "Christianity" do you?

Making a claim is not equivalent to false advertising. You have still demonstrated nothing that they can be sued for.

They did not create a "dark energy camera" in spite of their claim to the contrary. It's not a "ghost" camera. It's not a "God" camera. It's not even all that "special" of a camera in the first place! It's not a "space expansion" camera. It's not an "inflation + dark energy" camera either. It is just a camera. Period.

I consider all of your comments on this topic to be bogus, false and misleading, but I would never suggest suing you, nor would I suggest you are advertising falsely.

I'm not taking public money, and I'm not taking private funds either. It's not as though I "profit" from my statements in any way.

...and that's still not false advertising, nor a suable offense.

In the commercial/consumer world, one cannot claim to cure cancer unless one can actually cure cancer with that product. You can't claim to cure dandruff either, unless it's true. All claims must be "demonstrated" to be true, one can't simply "make up" the facts.

There are in fact several *demonstrated* cause/effect links between Compton redshift, Stark redshift, the Wolf effect and what Chen called "plasma redshift" and photon redshift in the lab. There is no cause/effect link between photon redshift and "dark energy", or "inflation". The camera doesn't take pictures of "ghosts", or "dark unicorns", or "dark elves", or "dark energy". It takes images of redshifted photons at best case, a red spectrum if we're being completely 'honest' about it. The rest is pure "hype" that is related to a subjective *interpretation* of the redshift phenomenon.

 

[Blayz]

But not with *public* funds. You don't see the government advertizing "Christianity" do you?

That's a weird conflation of concepts you have going there
1) public funds
2) the separation of church and state
3) the use of public funds by private individuals versus the government itself.

Would need an entire forum to sort that lot out. I will say this though, if the government were to advertise Christianity, of the myraid things that might happen, being sued for false advertising is not one of them.

They did not create a "dark energy camera" in spite of their claim to the contrary. It's not a "ghost" camera. It's not a "God" camera. It's not even all that "special" of a camera in the first place! It's not a "space expansion" camera. It's not an "inflation + dark energy" camera either. It is just a camera. Period.

Not false advertising.
Not a suable offense.

In the commercial/consumer world, one cannot claim to cure cancer unless one can actually cure cancer with that product.

Sadly not true, as much as one might like it to be otherwise. Also irrelevant, since these scientists are not in the commercial/consumer world.

You can't claim to cure dandruff either, unless it's true. All claims must be "demonstrated" to be true, one can't simply "make up" the facts.

They are not making up facts, they are making up interpretation. But even if they were making up facts:

Not false advertising.
Not a suable offense.

The rest is pure "hype" that is related to a subjective *interpretation* of the redshift phenomenon.

Not false advertising.
Not a suable offense.

 

[Michael]

That's a weird conflation of concepts you have going there
1) public funds
2) the separation of church and state
3) the use of public funds by private individuals versus the government itself.

Would need an entire forum to sort that lot out.

Perhaps. Then again, try putting yourself in my skeptical shoes for a moment. Inflation, dark energy, and SUSY theory are more impotent in the lab and more impotent on Earth than most standard theistic concepts of God, and certainly *far* more impotent than Christ IMO. You don't hear anyone claiming to have their lives turned around by inflation or dark energy.

If you intend to peddle that invisible sky nonsense with public funds (my public funds in particular) I will set logical boundaries on how I expect you'll spend my money. I don't mind spending my tax dollars on equipment to study space, but labeling such equipment a "God camera" isn't particularly useful or helpful. From my personal perspective it is in fact a "God camera" because it takes pictures of our living universe. It's not a "dark energy" camera however, because dark energy does not exist, and it doesn't emit photons. Dark energy isn't a "real" thing that exists in nature, it's is a *placeholder term for human ignorance*, specifically ignorance of signal broadening and plasma redshift in plasma.

Not false advertising.
Not a suable offense.

Sure it is. They claim they built a "dark energy camera". How did they "test" that the camera in question is actually sensitive to "dark energy" if they can't even name a source for dark energy, let alone any control mechanism for dark energy? Why not just call it an invisible unicorn camera?

Sadly not true, as much as one might like it to be otherwise. Also irrelevant, since these scientists are not in the commercial/consumer world.

They are taking my tax dollars and teaching my children "pseudoscience" according to the author of MHD theory. Worse however, they're teaching my children and your children about irrational invisible sky nonsense, and making irrational unsupported claims about the cause of photon redshift. It's not physically or empirically related to 'dark energy'. They can't even bring a defined quantity of "dark energy" into a courtroom!

They are not making up facts, they are making up interpretation. But even if they were making up facts:

Not false advertising.
Not a suable offense.

I disagree. Since they are in fact taking public money and making up facts, like their claim that dark energy causes photon redshift, they are obligated to stop making false claims, or demonstrate their claim. They can't demonstrate their claim about dark energy being related to photon redshift in a court, whereas I could demonstrate that photon redshift has several "natural" causes right here in plasma in real labs on Earth. They'd lose in any court of law.

 

[Blayz]

Inflation, dark energy, and SUSY theory are more impotent in the lab and more impotent on Earth than most standard theistic concepts of God, and certainly *far* more impotent than Christ IMO. You don't hear anyone claiming to have their lives turned around by inflation or dark energy.

The lack of harm you imply makes it even more not false advertising, and not a suable offense.

If you intend to peddle that invisible sky nonsense with public funds (my public funds in particular) I will set logical boundaries on how I expect you'll spend my money.

Except you don't get to do that. You don't get to make up laws or the application thereof just because you don't like what your government spends your money on.

I don't mind spending my tax dollars on equipment to study space, but labeling such equipment a "God camera" isn't particularly useful or helpful.

Also:
Not false advertising
Not a suable offense.

Sure it is. They claim they built a "dark energy camera". How did they "test" that the camera in question is actually sensitive to "dark energy" if they can't even name a source for dark energy, let alone any control mechanism for dark energy? Why not just call it an invisible unicorn camera?

I daresay they had their reasons, but even if they did call it an invisible unicorn camera, guess what:

Not false advertising
Not a suable offense.

They are taking my tax dollars and teaching my children "pseudoscience" according to the author of MHD theory.

What child on this planet learns astrophysics? In what school is the article you are citing taught as a part of the curriculum?

Worse however, they're teaching my children and your children about irrational invisible sky nonsense

I don't have any children.


I also think you are missing my argument. I am not interested in discussing the actual science here, whether it is correct or incorrect. I am simply pointing out that your claiming it is false advertising and a suable offense is completely and utterly wrong.

So far, you have provided no counter. Can we just take it as read you want to moan and bewail this branch of science into perpetuity, and move on to arguing the actual point? I can just pretend there are paragraphs and paragraphs of why you think they are scientifically wrong embedded in your post.