Dealing with Creationism in Astronomy! (Moved)

[Michael]

I don't think you read my post or the post I was responding to.

Someone said maybe we should forget science and consider that "God Did It". I pointed out that mankind tried this approach before, when religions ruled society. It was called the Dark Ages. I for one don't want to go back to that.

I hear you.

I was simply pointing out to you that with respect to Lambda-CDM and it's description of the physical universe, astronomers have in fact gone back to the 'dark' ages of physics. How is 'inflation did it", or "dark/invisible energy did it" any fundamentally more empirical than "God did it"?

I personally tend to prefer an empirical explanation of the universe, hence my preference for EU/PC theory and my personal distaste for Lambda-magic theory.

 

[Black Dog]

I hear you.

I was simply pointing out to you that with respect to Lambda-CDM and it's description of the physical universe, astronomers have in fact gone back to the 'dark' ages of physics. How is 'inflation did it", or "dark/invisible energy did it" any fundamentally more empirical than "God did it"?

I personally tend to prefer an empirical explanation of the universe, hence my preference for EU/PC theory and my personal distaste for Lambda-magic theory.

There is a huge difference because scientists don't believe anything is 100% true. Has science quit researching Dark Matter? No. If God did it, what is the point in searching further, we know the answer. How can you search further?

 

[Michael]

There is a huge difference because scientists don't believe anything is 100% true.

Well, they still "believe" in exotic forms of matter and energy despite all the failures in the lab, and all the flaws found in their galaxy mass estimates that were used in that 2006 lensing study.

http://thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=15850&sid=c19efb74f515909c54b562e6e968b802

Has science quit researching Dark Matter? No.

Why not? We now know that the botched the stellar mass estimates in 2006 by a whopping factor of between 3 and 20 depending on the size of the star and the type of galaxy. They also falsified all their 'popular' mathematical models for exotic matter at LHC, LUX, PandaX, Xenon100, etc. Why are they still looking for it at all? When is a theory simply 'falsified' by later data, and 'tests' that turned out to be falsified by the results?

If God did it, what is the point in searching further, we know the answer. How can you search further?

Well, we could ask why God did it, how God did it, and where God came from. How do you search any further than "inflation/invisible energy/matter did it"?

How is "inflation did it" any more empirical than 'God did it' as it relates to any lab results or empirical cause/effect demonstrations?

 

[Black Dog]

Well, we could ask why God did it, how God did it, and where God came from.

LOL, exactly. And that was done all through the dark ages. How did it better the human condition? Now lets compare that to science, and what it has done to improve our lot.

 

[RealityCheck01]

Wrong. Dark Matter and Dark Energy have never been detected anywhere. Space or laboratory.

That is really ignorant , Justatruthseeker, because dark matter and dark energy have been detected in space as you know.

The more you make up fairy stories about science the less truth you seem to be seeking!
http://www.space.com/17734-milky-way-galaxy-giant-gas-halo.html and http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/archive/releases/2015/15/full/
are evidence for the 50% of normal matter that we have not detected yet!
This is the missing baryon problem not the matter which cause the flat rotation curves for galaxies.
Astronomers (and I) know about plasma in space and that is is stupid to think that it is dark matter because plasma emits light.
Astronomers (and I) know about plasma and its effects are limited to a Debye length.

And the entire whole acts collectively - hence rotation curves are flat. (see :37 on, specifically 1:27)

This is a lie about the content of that video, Justatruthseeker. The video is about the behaviour of plasma in an experiment in micro-gravity. The video is not about galaxy dynamics.

But, being you still refuse to treat plasma like it acts on earth...

But that is a delusion, Justatruthseeker, because I and scientists treat plasma like it acts on earth and even as it only acts in space, e.g. Forbidden emission lines have only been observed in extremely low-density gases and plasmas, either in outer space or in the extreme upper atmosphere of the Earth. And of course we do not have stars in labs here on Earth!

 

[Black Dog]

Well, they still "believe" in exotic forms of matter and energy despite all the failures in the lab, and all the flaws found in their galaxy mass estimates that were used in that 2006 lensing study.

http://thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=15850&sid=c19efb74f515909c54b562e6e968b802



Why not? We now know that the botched the stellar mass estimates in 2006 by a whopping factor of between 3 and 20 depending on the size of the star and the type of galaxy. They also falsified all their 'popular' mathematical models for exotic matter at LHC, LUX, PandaX, Xenon100, etc. Why are they still looking for it at all? When is a theory simply 'falsified' by later data, and 'tests' that turned out to be falsified by the results?



Well, we could ask why God did it, how God did it, and where God came from. How do you search any further than "inflation/invisible energy/matter did it"?

How is "inflation did it" any more empirical than 'God did it' as it relates to any lab results or empirical cause/effect demonstrations?

Michael, I thought you might find this interesting:

 

[Michael]

LOL, exactly. And that was done all through the dark ages.

And it's still done in terms of the "dark ages" of astronomy, and dark energy, which is why you can't name so much as a single source of the mythical stuff. Ditto for inflation and triple ditto for exotic matter theory. Dark matter theory has devolved into the ultimate dark matter of the gap claim these days.

How did it better the human condition?

How has theism bettered the human condition, or just speculation in general? When did "inflation" or "dark energy" ever better the human condition?

Now lets compare that to science, and what it has done to improve our lot.

Empirical physics, like medicine, electronics, etc has improved our lot in life, but "science" is too general. EU/PC theory is a form of pure empirical physics, and it has empirical tangible value as a result. "Dark energy' theory hasn't improved anyone's lot in life, except for perhaps a few scientists that claim it has some effect on a photon, but who cannot demonstrate that claim empirically, and in fact they cannot even name a single source of "dark energy". Controlled experimentation is therefore *out of the question*.

 

[Michael]

Michael, I thought you might find this interesting:

I'll try to listen to the whole thing as I get time today, but Krauss seems like one of the biggest hypocrites in physics. He constantly bashes religion, yet he peddles his own 'faith based' belief system as "science". He tends to turn me off pretty quickly.

He's already complaining about the term 'In the beginning..' while force feeding everyone his own favorite creation mythos that requires not just *one* supernatural construct, but *four* of them!

 

[Michael]

That is really ignorant , Justatruthseeker, because dark matter and dark energy have been detected in space as you know.

What we *know* is that your galaxy mass estimates are pitifully flawed, and dark energy was another fudge factor that you folks simply made up to prop up an otherwise falsified claim about the cause of photon redshift. We know you can't name a single source of the mythical stuff too. We also *know* that you've failed every lab test on dark matter done to date. That's what we "know".

 

[RealityCheck01]

So why are you insisting we treat 99.99% of that 4% like the other tiny .01% ????????

Because you are not stating the truth, Justatruthseeker? Scientists (and I) treat plasma as real plasma!
There are ignorant, deluded and even lying cranks on the Internet who lie about the properties of plasma, e.g. the Thunderbolts crowd have the delusions that any twisty thing in space is a Birkeland current when filaments in plasma are a common, non-Birkeland current effect.

Of course there is the basic plasma physics of the Debye length that you are in total denial of. It restricts plasma effects in interstellar space to scales of ~100,000 kilometres.

It is bad to emphasize that for 2 years you have had the delusion that plasma experiments need to take account of gravitational forces.

Yes relativistic - i.e. not magical acceleration away from a claimed gravitational source.

Yes ignorance abut relativistic jets. They are jets of plasma moving at
relativistic velocities away from the centre of galaxies which have super massive black holes.
Yes a delusion about gravity. Gravity acts on charged, massive particles (plasma)!

Wrong - redshift is an event in that Plasma ...

A fairy story about cosmological redshift is not the truth, Justatruthseeker.
Backing up that fairy story with no links to cosmological redshift is not the truth either. More fairy stories snipped.

 

[Michael]

Michael, I thought you might find this interesting:

Note that Krauss does exactly the same "filtering" of history that every other astronomer tends to be guilty of. For instance, he completely failed to mention that Hubble himself *rejected* the notion of expansion, and rather he embraced a static universe and "tired light" theory. Krauss never mentions that fact. Why? I'll tell you why. He has a personal need to rewrite astronomical history to suit himself, and to suit his own creation mythology.

You'll also note that inelastic scattering occurs in the lab, whereas 'space expansion" does not.

 

[Michael]

Michael, I thought you might find this interesting:

And....

He also pulls the common "bait and switch" device when he uses "Doppler shift" (moving objects) to support his "space expansion' claim. Typical empirical bait and supernatural switch tactics.

 

[Michael]

Because that not you stating the truth, Justatruthseeker?

The only one distorting the truth is the guy that claims that electrical discharges are impossible in plasma.

Scientists (and I) treat plasma as plasma!

Er, no. You tried to treat plasma as a *vacuum* in magnetic reconnection theory! You try to treat plasma with pure *pseudoscience* according to the author of MHD theory.

There are ignorant, deluded and even lying cranks on the Internet who lie about the properties of plasma, e.g.

Ya, like the guy you see in the mirror who's probably still never read a textbook on MHD theory, but claims that electrical discharges are impossible in plasma, and that "reconnection' is a plasma optional process!

You and Clinger have no right to lecture anyone on the behaviors of plasma. Have you even actually read a real textbook on MHD theory yet RC?

 

[RealityCheck01]

https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn7623-plasma-experiment-recreates-astrophysical-jets/

Notice specifically it is electric current and magnetic fields in Plasma which in the laboratory produce those jets - but in space it magically becomes a spinning infinite point mass.

Notice specifically it is electric current and magnetic fields in Plasma which in space are thought to produce astrophysical (including relativistic) jets.
That "spinning infinite point mass" is a fairy story. Black holes have a finite mass. The supermassive black hole in the centre of our galaxy has a measured mass of ~4 million solar masses.

How determined not to look for the truth must one be to not click on a link and read about astrophysical (including relativistic) jets? Or for that matter actually read Plasma experiment recreates astrophysical jets?

Astrophysical jets are among the largest and most energetic objects in the universe. The matter inside them travels at nearly the speed of light from colossal black holes at the centres of galaxies. Smaller jets spew at lower speeds from young stars and even brown dwarfs.

Theorists believe they arise when material falls onto a massive spinning object from a surrounding disc, before being funnelled outwards from the object’s poles by magnetic fields generated by the object and disc. The exact mechanism is unclear, but a couple of research groups in the world are using magnetic fields to build small-scale jets in the laboratory.

[/QUOTE]

 

[Michael]

Michael, I thought you might find this interesting:

http://arstechnica.com/science/2015...ould-change-our-understanding-of-dark-energy/

Krauss is also peddling the concept of a "standard candle", when in fact they've been shown to be less than "standard" after all. Ooopsy daisy?

 

[RealityCheck01]

1. You can't see but a tiny fraction.

This is what I wrote

Fantasies are not flaws in a paper , Justatruthseeker.
A completely ignorant question is not flaws in a paper.
A "Fairie Dust" rant is not flaws in a paper.

The basics of A direct empirical proof of the existence of dark matter (ignore the "proof" hype in the title) are simple.
1. Map the light emitted from the colliding material in the galaxy cluster collision.
2. Map the mass distribution of the colliding material in the galaxy cluster collision.
3. See that there is material that has not acted as plasma is seen to act here on Earth and other places. There is "plasma" that has passed through the plasma without interacting. There is "plasma" that is not emitting light. That "plasma" is matter. That "plasma" is dark. We call this dark matter !

You replied with ignoring the actual science, inanity about the heliosphere, and an inability to understand English: "plasma" in quotes is not actual plasma.

 

[RealityCheck01]

Because over and over and over again you and mainstream astronomers continue to make the same mistake.

A whole post with your ignorance about what astronomers do, Justatruthseeker, makes it seem that you are running away from the facts. Because of that ignorance, a statement like

Treating that 99.99% (Plasma) of that 4% like the tiny little .01% (solids, liquids and gasses).

is a lie because plasmas are not treated like solids, liquids or gasses. They are treated like what they are !
Lots of ranting about irrelevant science snipped.

 

[Michael]

Michael, I thought you might find this interesting:

When Krauss gets to the lensing data, he conveniently ignores the fact that the galaxy mass estimates they've been using have been shown to be flawed by a whopping factor of between 3 and 20 depending on the size of the star and the type of galaxy in question. They also found more mass in the form of million degree plasma around the galaxy in 2012 than exist in all the stars in the galaxy.

http://thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=15850

So far I've heard nothing new, and I can't say I'm impressed. He's been effectively toeing the party line, while ignoring all information that makes his claims 'questionable", including problems with their non standard 'standard candle' claims, and their flawed galaxy mass estimates.

 

[RealityCheck01]

Why have you directed this at me?

I pointed out that Michael's FYI to you is a misleading (to be charitable) link to the Thunderbolts collection of ignorance and delusions.
Since this is the science section of the forum, a "God did it" assertion is not relevant and maybe not a legitimate remark (depends on the forum rules).

 

[RealityCheck01]

http://thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=15850&sid=b1ac00c6341f91d9f86884c944e7223c

The "flaw" in that 2006 paper has been demonstrated over and over and over again.

Fantasies are not a demonstration of anything expect a fertile imagination, Michael, and denial of reality, e.g. that the discovery of more visible matter contributes to the missing visible matter problem - it does not reduce the need for dark matter.
6 November 2014 Michael: Fantasies about visible matter observations and dark matter need evidence