Dissecting an actual science article

[[serious]]

Like we just assume that last tuesday happened?

One can assume what one wants, however, one would need evidence if one called it a science claim.

Dad: unsure of whether last tuesday actually happened.

Gotcha.

 

[dad]

That you don't care one bit about when meteors hit Mercury or what happened when they did.

Rather than offering weird opinions or psychic feelings about whether other posters 'care' about the topic, why not post something relevant and real?

 

[dad]

Dad: unsure of whether last tuesday actually happened.

Gotcha.

Dad: unsure of whether last tuesday actually happened.

Gotcha.

One can assume what one wants, however, one would need evidence if one called it a science claim.

There is a spirit behind anti Christ science you know. I see it raise it's head once in awhile. Here are some scientists at Cern getting into it..
"
Fake human sacrifice filmed at Cern, with pranking scientists suspected
The video, which circulated online, shows several individuals in black cloaks gathering in a main square at Europe’s top physics lab, in what appears to be a re-enactment of an occult ceremony.

The video includes the staged “stabbing” of a woman. It is filmed from the perspective of a secret viewer watching from a window above who, as the ceremony reaches its climax, lets out a string of expletives and flees with the camera still running.

The ceremony appears to have been staged in front of a statue of the Hindu deity Shiva that is on permanentdisplay at the complex, home of the Large Hadron Collider."
https://www.theguardian.com/science...ed-at-cern-with-pranking-scientists-suspected


That was last week. Now if you want to talk about the early days of man's history on earth and the laws in place, you will need some more juice.

 

[[serious]]

One can assume what one wants, however, one would need evidence if one called it a science claim.

There is a spirit behind anti Christ science you know. I see it raise it's head once in awhile. Here are some scientists at Cern getting into it..
"
Fake human sacrifice filmed at Cern, with pranking scientists suspected
The video, which circulated online, shows several individuals in black cloaks gathering in a main square at Europe’s top physics lab, in what appears to be a re-enactment of an occult ceremony.

The video includes the staged “stabbing” of a woman. It is filmed from the perspective of a secret viewer watching from a window above who, as the ceremony reaches its climax, lets out a string of expletives and flees with the camera still running.

The ceremony appears to have been staged in front of a statue of the Hindu deity Shiva that is on permanentdisplay at the complex, home of the Large Hadron Collider."
https://www.theguardian.com/science...ed-at-cern-with-pranking-scientists-suspected


That was last week. Now if you want to talk about the early days of man's history on earth and the laws in place, you will need some more juice.

How do we know that was last week unless we assume a same state past (to use your terminology)?

 

[AirPo]

Rather than offering weird opinions or psychic feelings about whether other posters 'care' about the topic, why not post something relevant and real?

Ask for my opinion, then whine about it. I think you just proved my point.

 

[dad]

Ask for my opinion, then whine about it. I think you just proved my point.

No one asked for empty off topic time wasting cliches actually. Looking at another article I see the usual laws are out the window for certain ions in certain conditions..

""This apparent departure from the familiar laws of thermodynamics is akin to our warm apple pie either cooling as expected or spontaneously bursting into flames, depending on the pie's exact temperature when it is placed in the window," said Hudson, the senior author of the study.
After allowing collisions between the atoms and ions to occur and the system to reach its final temperature, the physicists removed the calcium atoms and measured the temperature of the barium ions. The results, which show the existence of multiple final temperatures based on ion number and initial temperature, suggest that subtle non-equilibrium physics is at play.
.....
The researchers trace these strange features to the heating and cooling rates which exist in the system -- the peculiar temperature dependence of the interaction among multiple ions in an ion trap. Both simulation and theory support their experimental findings, and paint the buffer-gas cooling process as a fundamentally nuanced, non-equilibrium process rather than the straightforward equilibrium process it was originally understood to be."

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/08/160819114629.htm

Perhaps you can show us an ability to comment intelligently on this?

 

[dad]

How do we know that was last week unless we assume a same state past (to use your terminology)?

"The deuteron -- one of the simplest atomic nuclei, consisting of just one proton and one neutron -- is considerably smaller than previously thought. This finding was arrived at by an international research group that carried out experiments at the Paul Scherrer Institute, PSI. The new result is consistent with a 2010 study by the same group, in which the researchers measured the proton and found a significantly smaller value than previous research using different experimental methods. The result from 2010 formed the basis for what has been known since then as "the proton radius puzzle." The new measurement of the deuteron's size has now given rise to an analogous mystery. It is possible that this will lead to an adjustment of the Rydberg constant, a fundamental quantity in physics. Another possible explanation is that a physical force as yet unknown is at work."

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/08/160811142730.htm

I assume you agree that forces may exist that are yet unknown to science?

 

[AirPo]

No one asked for empty off topic time wasting cliches actually. Looking at another article I see the usual laws are out the window for certain ions in certain conditions..

""This apparent departure from the familiar laws of thermodynamics is akin to our warm apple pie either cooling as expected or spontaneously bursting into flames, depending on the pie's exact temperature when it is placed in the window," said Hudson, the senior author of the study.
After allowing collisions between the atoms and ions to occur and the system to reach its final temperature, the physicists removed the calcium atoms and measured the temperature of the barium ions. The results, which show the existence of multiple final temperatures based on ion number and initial temperature, suggest that subtle non-equilibrium physics is at play.
.....
The researchers trace these strange features to the heating and cooling rates which exist in the system -- the peculiar temperature dependence of the interaction among multiple ions in an ion trap. Both simulation and theory support their experimental findings, and paint the buffer-gas cooling process as a fundamentally nuanced, non-equilibrium process rather than the straightforward equilibrium process it was originally understood to be."

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/08/160819114629.htm

Perhaps you can show us an ability to comment intelligently on this?

Not true at all. I could actually quote the post that specifically ask for my opinion, but it would just be waved away. That's the way The HI Theory works. Thanks for proving my point.

 

[dad]

Not true at all. I could actually quote the post that specifically ask for my opinion, but it would just be waved away. That's the way The HI Theory works. thanks for proving my point.

When asked for your opinion, we mean about the topical issue at hand. Not whether your whiny bleaching and moaning is right inside your own head.

 

[MrSpikey]

One can assume what one wants, however, one would need evidence if one called it a science claim.

There is a spirit behind anti Christ science you know. I see it raise it's head once in awhile. Here are some scientists at Cern getting into it..

Does one need special evidence for a science claim that some deem "anti Christ"? How would that differ from the evidential requirements for a regular science claim?

 

[AirPo]

When asked for your opinion, we mean about the topical issue at hand. Not whether your whiny bleaching and moaning is right inside your own head.

The topic at hand is as it's always been in HI Theory threads. "I'm right, you're wrong, I win, nah na nah na nah nah!"

 

[dad]

The topic at hand is....

..The stuff in science articles that is posted.

 

[dad]

Does one need special evidence for a science claim that some deem "anti Christ"?

Does it honor Jesus? Does it oppose His word?

How would that differ from the evidential requirements for a regular science claim?

There is no evidence for the big bang, or evolution of life. Period. The requirements for their claims about creation are that they be based on their godless belief system, and nothing else...ever. It is a religion. The science cover is blown. There is real science dealing with the world and the present physics and laws, but they have lumped that in together with the evil anti Christ methodology and belief system in a dishonest attempt to give credence to their religion of darkness.

 

[MrSpikey]

Does it honor Jesus? Does it oppose His word?

Science looks at the universe and measures how it works. If you believe Jesus created the universe, then I guess it must honor that. If you believe Jesus created it, but the observations oppose "His word", then one of these things is wrong. You obviously think the observations of scientists are wrong; "and yet it moves".

There is no evidence for the big bang, or evolution of life. Period. The requirements for their claims about creation are that they be based on their godless belief system, and nothing else...ever. It is a religion. The science cover is blown. There is real science dealing with the world and the present physics and laws, but they have lumped that in together with the evil anti Christ methodology and belief system in a dishonest attempt to give credence to their religion of darkness.

You're entitled to your opinion. I would offer to discuss the evidence with you, but your opinion appears to be that anything that disagrees with your religious views must be inherently wrong, so I figure I'd just be wasting my time.

 

[dad]

Science looks at the universe and measures how it works.

No, it doesn't. It looks under it's nose and uses beliefs to model the universe without God!

If you believe Jesus created the universe, then I guess it must honor that. If you believe Jesus created it, but the observations oppose "His word", then one of these things is wrong. You obviously think the observations of scientists are wrong; "and yet it moves".

It no more moves than a corpse moves. The universe moves, yes. Creation moves. But dead so called science looks at that movement of the heavens, and projects insane godless beliefs and notions and fantasies onto it, trying to pretend it is explaining the moves!

You're entitled to your opinion. I would offer to discuss the evidence with you, but your opinion appears to be that anything that disagrees with your religious views must be inherently wrong, so I figure I'd just be wasting my time.

I am familiar with the belief system that science uses to create their opinions. I know that the issue is not evidence of any kind at all, but the issue is the fanatical godless religious set of doctrines that they foul all evidence WITH!

 

[MrSpikey]

No, it doesn't. It looks under it's nose and uses beliefs to model the universe without God!

God isn't specifically excluded, but regularly fails to show up.

Make of that what you will.

 

[dad]

God isn't specifically excluded, but regularly fails to show up.

You thought science had stuff to see God?
Do not blame a golf ball for not being able to see spacecraft. Do not blame an ant for not being able to play a piano.

 

[MrSpikey]

You thought science had stuff to see God?
Do not blame a golf ball for not being able to see spacecraft. Do not blame an ant for not being able to play a piano.

I said he failed to show up on a regular basis. Apparently, you think he's shown up before - did people need to "ha[ve] stuff" to see him then? Or were their senses sufficient?

 

[dad]

I said he failed to show up on a regular basis. Apparently, you think he's shown up before - did people need to "ha[ve] stuff" to see him then? Or were their senses sufficient?

The Scriptures revealed how God would reveal Himself to man. That was Jesus. In the flesh. Born in a real town to a real virgin, rode in on a real donkey, raised from the real dead, fed and healed real multitudes, witnessed by real people, etc etc. That was the way Jesus revealed Himself. Science is out of the loop.