Did you read carefully? I see a lot of wishful thinking.
Belief. Not science.
Trust me, they know it. Here is one of the most honest quotes.
"A star is born when atoms of light elements are squeezed under enough pressure for their nuclei to undergo fusion."
How is a star born?
How do you get such a weak force as gravity to gather
enough gas together in space, with nothing to constrain
it, and put it under enough pressure to make it collapse
into a gas planet, much less a star?
The most basic gas equations tell you it's impossible.
Star Formation
And it only gets worse. Early in big bang time, all the
matter and energy were travelling apart from each other
at nearly the speed of light. There is no way they got close
enough for gravity to affect them. So, where did the early
stars come from?
No, I showed that the gap theory was impossible according to the narrative.No, you just brought up a gap that literally isn't there.
I don't see a gap. And God could have done a lot of things, but I don't believe He did. Of course, you are free to believe anything you like, including the false "gap theory."The gap you see doesn't matter, except to say that, for some reason, God could have just let the earth set alone, unfinished
for an unspecified period of time.
I don't.Why do you think he would have done that and then specified that the rest of creation took six days about six thousand years ago?
So the state of astrophysics fifty years ago settles the question, does it? I suppose that is a marginal improvement upon creationists’ common practice, of using the state of evolutionary theory 160 years ago as a basis for their arguments.
Lecture 12: Star Formation
Ok. Lets try it.
"To convert a dense core into a star, we must both compress it (decreasing R by a factor of 4,400,000) and heat it (increasing T by a factor of 580)."
"To convert lead into gold, we need pixie dust." Where do you get it?
How do you propose to both compress gas in space and heat it up,
which will increase the motion and dispersal of the gas which is not
constrained? It can't be done be gravity or any known natural force.
"Dense interstellar clouds are ordinarily stable. To start their collapse, we must first compress them with a shock wave traveling through the interstellar medium. One source of shock waves is supernovas (exploding stars). "
Another magic bean. A supernova, instead of scattering the gas,
causes it to collapse? Only in some astronomer's dream.
Appeal to authority fallacy is when someone uses expertise in one field to support expertise in another. For example, using the opinion of a lawyer, engineer or chemist in matters of biology would be an appeal to authority.
Dunning Kruger again. Doubtless you are fully qualified to become the next Astronomer Royal. Not to mention the Nobel Prize you are going to win by demonstrating how wrong everybody else, really qualified, has been for all these years.
Besides, Justatruthseeker is going to be suing you for breach of copyright, in stealing his favourite “pixie dust” piece of vacuity.
No, your example here is an Appeal to False Authority
(also known as: appeal to unqualified authority, argument from false authority)
Appeal to Authority
argumentum ad verecundiam
(also known as: argument from authority, ipse dixit)
Description: Insisting that a claim is true simply because a valid authority or expert on the issue said it was true, without any other supporting evidence offered.
Appeal to Authority
You didn't answer my questions. No problem.
I don't think they can be answered, except in
a hypothetical (fictional) way.
Tell me, oh wise one, if you needed heart surgery, would you listen to the opinion of the taxi driver who drove you to the hospital, or to the opinion of the cardiac surgeon you saw when you got there?
If you were to ask both and accept the word of
the good doctor just because he's a doctor, then
you have committed the fallacy.
To show, from the narrative, that the gap theory is impossible.Why bring it up at all then, in such a confusing way?
Then you have a reading comprehension problem.Your post appeared to be defending the gap.
Actually it can be done by gravity. And is. Look at Jupiter and Saturn.It can't be done be gravity or any known natural force.
No, your example here is an Appeal to False Authority
(also known as: appeal to unqualified authority, argument from false authority)
Appeal to Authority
argumentum ad verecundiam
(also known as: argument from authority, ipse dixit)
Description: Insisting that a claim is true simply because a valid authority or expert on the issue said it was true, without any other supporting evidence offered.
Appeal to Authority
Actually it can be done by gravity. And is. Look at Jupiter and Saturn.
In 1966 Dr. Frank Low measured the heat being given off by Jupiter and found that it was 1.9 times the heat being received from the sun. The cause is contraction due to Jupiter's very powerful gravity which both compresses and heats the planet.
I don't want to sound unkind but this is about 4th grade General Science stuff.
Fair enough, I stand corrected.
Regardless, my OP is not an Appeal to Authority. At no point was I making the argument that evolution is 'true' because a biologist (in this case Todd Wood) says it is true.
Rather, I was pointing to the fact he is one of the few creationists who recognizes the reality of science (namely that evolution *is* supposed by evidence regardless of most creationists claims to the contrary). I find it odd that so many creationists deny the reality of the situation they are up against.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?