2 proofs that nature was designed

klutedavid · Mar 3, 2021

Warden_of_the_Storm said:
Not an answer.

That was an instruction primate, not an answer.

Speedwell · Mar 3, 2021

klutedavid said:
What was the classification based upon?

An arbitrary decision about where to draw the line.

klutedavid · Mar 3, 2021

Speedwell said:
An arbitrary decision about where to draw the line.

Based on what, opinion or evidence?

Frank Robert · Mar 3, 2021

klutedavid said:
What was the classification based upon?

The criteria for a planet.

So, the three criteria of the IAU for a full-sized planet are:

It is in orbit around the Sun.
It has sufficient mass to assume hydrostatic equilibrium (a nearly round shape).
It has “cleared the neighborhood” around its orbit.

Pluto meets only two of these criteria, losing out on the third.

Warden_of_the_Storm · Mar 3, 2021

klutedavid said:
That was an instruction primate, not an answer.

I would like you to answer my question: since you claim that science will reach an end point, do you have anything that can replace science?

Estrid · Mar 3, 2021

Pluto is like this very tiny speck a really long way off.
The amount that can be learned looking at a distant something
from here is pretty incredible, and all some can do is
find fault.

Speedwell · Mar 3, 2021

klutedavid said:
Based on what, opinion or evidence?

Based on meeting the criteria to be a planet.

Speedwell · Mar 3, 2021

Estrid said:
Pluto is like this very tiny speck a really long way off.
The amount that can be learned looking at a distant something
from here is pretty incredible, and all some can do is
find fault.

Klutedavid is not the only one. A number of creationists who come to this forum seem to believe that the change in Pluto's classification is significant in some way.

klutedavid · Mar 3, 2021

Frank Robert said:
The criteria for a planet.

So, the three criteria of the IAU for a full-sized planet are:

It is in orbit around the Sun.

It has sufficient mass to assume hydrostatic equilibrium (a nearly round shape).

It has “cleared the neighborhood” around its orbit.

Pluto meets only two of these criteria, losing out on the third.

I thought that the orbit of Pluto was not in the plane of the other planets? That being one of the main reasons.

klutedavid · Mar 3, 2021

Speedwell said:
Klutedavid is not the only one. A number of creationists who come to this forum seem to believe that the change in Pluto's classification is significant in some way.

Not so, I care not for the naming of celestial bodies or even their classification. I prefer cosmology and not astronomy.

Kylie · Mar 3, 2021

Frank Robert said:
The criteria for a planet.

So, the three criteria of the IAU for a full-sized planet are:

It is in orbit around the Sun.

It has sufficient mass to assume hydrostatic equilibrium (a nearly round shape).

It has “cleared the neighborhood” around its orbit.

Pluto meets only two of these criteria, losing out on the third.

I would argue that the presence of Trojan asteroids means Jupiter hasn't fulfilled the third either...

But that would be me just being difficult.

Kylie · Mar 3, 2021

Speedwell said:
Klutedavid is not the only one. A number of creationists who come to this forum seem to believe that the change in Pluto's classification is significant in some way.

And, apparently, that changing the name we use for a thing changes something about that thing as well.

Kylie · Mar 3, 2021

klutedavid said:
Not so, I care not for the naming of celestial bodies or even their classification. I prefer cosmology and not astronomy.

Do you realise that cosmology is a subset of astronomy?

What you said is the equivalent of saying you don't care about the different organs on the Human body, you prefer to concentrate on the liver instead.

klutedavid · Mar 3, 2021

Kylie said:
Do you realise that cosmology is a subset of astronomy?

What you said is the equivalent of saying you don't care about the different organs on the Human body, you prefer to concentrate on the liver instead.

Cosmology differs from astronomy in that the former is concerned with the Universe as a whole while the latter deals with individual celestial objects. Modern physical cosmology is dominated by the Big Bang theory, which attempts to bring together observational astronomy and particle physics;[5][6] more specifically, a standard parameterization of the Big Bang with dark matter and dark energy, known as the Lambda-CDM model. (wikipedia)

Kylie · Mar 4, 2021

klutedavid said:
Cosmology differs from astronomy in that the former is concerned with the Universe as a whole while the latter deals with individual celestial objects. Modern physical cosmology is dominated by the Big Bang theory, which attempts to bring together observational astronomy and particle physics;[5][6] more specifically, a standard parameterization of the Big Bang with dark matter and dark energy, known as the Lambda-CDM model. (wikipedia)

Like I said, cosmology is a subset of astronomy.

klutedavid · Mar 4, 2021

Kylie said:
Like I said, cosmology is a subset of astronomy.

Cosmology will outgrow that subset and become the dominant discipline.

VirOptimus · Mar 4, 2021

klutedavid said:
Cosmology will outgrow that subset and become the dominant discipline.

Why?

Any support for this claim?

klutedavid · Mar 4, 2021

VirOptimus said:
Why?

Any support for this claim?

Cosmology deals with the physical situation that is the context in the large for human existence: the universe has such a nature that our life is possible. This means that although it is a physical science, it is of particular importance in terms of its implications for human life.

VirOptimus · Mar 4, 2021

klutedavid said:
Cosmology deals with the physical situation that is the context in the large for human existence: the universe has such a nature that our life is possible. This means that although it is a physical science, it is of particular importance in terms of its implications for human life.

Thats a no then.

Warden_of_the_Storm · Mar 4, 2021

So there is nothing that can really replace science then.
Good to know.

2 proofs that nature was designed

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Defeater of Illogic

Defeater of Illogic

Defeater of Illogic

Well-Known Member

Defeater of Illogic

Well-Known Member

A nihilist who cares.

Well-Known Member

A nihilist who cares.

Well-Known Member

Similar threads