Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire You call this science? 2 billion year error?

“In science it often happens that scientists say, "You know that's a really good argument; my position is mistaken," and then they would actually change their minds and you never hear that old view from them again. They really do it.
It doesn't happen as often as it should, because scientists are human and change is sometimes painful. But it happens every day. I cannot recall the last time something like that happened in politics or religion.” Carl Sagan

Now I'm really worried about me....

Science deals with research and testing, not divine revelation.

DBT,,,

If we you look at past ancient civilizations, divine revelation often came through the influence of hallucinogens.

ultimately it comes back to brain chemistry science trial and error drug experimentation. ...

And then there is Georges Lemaitre, mathematician, astronomer, physicist. Also a Catholic priest, Jesuit trained no less. He was the first to identify that the recession of nearby galaxies can be explained by a theory of an expanding universe, which was observationally confirmed soon afterwards by Edwin Hubble. So when you run the clock backwards to a sinularity, 13.7 or 11.7 billion years ago, you're dealing with Lemaitre's equations. And no, he wasn't burned at the stake, or even subjected to house arrest.

And then there is Georges Lemaitre, mathematician who lived in the 20th century; not the 13tn century. Lucky for him.

Depends of your settings.

Stupid scientists!

Next thing you know they’ll try to convince us the internet is real! Hahahah!!!!








Wait....what?

Well, there's The Vatican Observatory founded in 1891 (at Castle Gandolfo for LoTR fans) And astronomy goes back further, Gregorian calendar 1582. And way back to the dark ages. Who do you think preserved scientific literary works in that time period? Monks going mad copying books all day, every day. And that was only what I've picked up in passing.

BTW what really pissed the pope off wasn't what Galileo wrote but he published before the pope was ready to grant his approval. Something not done in those days.

Hell, they can't even decide if Pluto is a planet - depends on which one you ask. Almost as bad as the Campfire.

This^^^^
kwg

Really?

You lot are in a pissing match about two billion years, or not as the case may very well be.


There is only one certainty in this whole pointless subject...whatever that ring twit comes up with is wrong.

I didnt think it was considered anything less than a dwarf planet.

now lets talk about the 1960s Vatican reforms that demoted saints by taking their A-list class halos away.

folks spent centuries puffing up such legends to have them suddenly ...

now if they had just applied stringent protocols before ordaining them as saints it all could have been avoided;
a waiting period,
background checks,
trial-grade evidence of extraordinary virtue or martyrdom,
a minimum of two miracles,
and finally wait for the Holy Spirit to enlighten someone at the Vatican to the fact that something did not or didn't
met the criteria of a saint.




I was told yrs ago that the hard-drive space on a computer does not actually comprise of real space as we know it.

well its there otherwise you could not fill it up with ones data, but the space the data takes up was never actually there.

otherwise known as I.T. metaphysics.

Of course hard drive space is real. Each data bit occupies physical space consisting of magnetic domains. For more data either you need greater physical size or use fewer domains per bit. Of course space meaning an area within a field.

I haven't read all the posts on this thread, just enough to convince me (again) that there are some really dumb people here.

Look, the way science works is that it observes the evidence, makes a conclusion, and does some observations to test that conslucion. If new evidence shows up, the conclusion can be modified. That has happened MANY TIMES in all branches of science.

Regarding the age of the universe, it was estimated based on calculating the Hubble Constant. (If you don't know what that means, go back to high school.) New observations may change the best estimate of the Hubble constant.

But some things are so certain they will not be overturned based on any evidence. The earth is not 7,000 years old, snakes don't talk, Noah's phony flood never happened, and you can't make striped baby goats by forcing goats to look at striped sticks while they are copulating.

If you want to talk about disagreement, what about the 33,000 different Protestant demoninations, all with a different view of what the Bible actually says.

Really? Rasis an interesting question: How did you come to know that?

Interesting. You challenge science because they made a revision to an estimate. And you base your ridicule on a bible that has been mistranslated and revised how many times?

Oh, back to religion again, then?

What you are noting is that all worldviews, at base level, must contain some presupposed certainties upon which to build the rest of their coherent view of how things are explained. Whether one calls this "preunderstandings" or "religion" or "foundational assumptions" or "ontological realities" or "fill-in-the-blank," everybody has them.

That, of course, is why scientific constants are not constant. And why Thomas Kuhn wrote his now (in)famous book.

Science has been stuck for 100 years.
The only things we can measure for certain are; 1) General Relativity , 2) Quantum Mechanics

All that stuff about the age of the universe is based on Doppler shift in light. A photon's frequency is proportional to its energy. If the object is going away fast, there is a red shift. If the object is coming fast, there is blue shift. If there is such a thing as "tired light", then all their calculations about the universe don't work. It all depends on that one unverifyable thing.... that a photon does not get tired in 14 billion years of travel.

The math of what we cannot know

Yes, Quantum physics is the deal breaker.
I pick creation in however way God imagined it to be.
Quantum science takes time and space our of the equation and just confuses mainstream science about the origin of things.