Science << vs >> Religion
LGK

Scarborough, UK

#645 Feb 18, 2014
Big Al wrote:
<quoted text>
As I said before I think this is a bit beyond both yours and my knowledge of physics but I think you are making two obvious errors.
The first is that you are accepting the idea that this relatively small number of anomalous observations have been “reasonably verified” as actual redshifts due to something other than recessional motion. Recent data from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey and the 2dF Galaxy Redshift Survey indicate no redshift anomalies which cannot be accounted for by normal phenomena associated with the large-scale structure of the cosmos.
The second problem is that you seem to dismiss out of hand the tens of thousands of observations of redshifts which are in complete agreement with Hubble’s Law. Although only one “verified” anomalous observation would indicate that recessional motion is not the only cause of redshift it would not completely negate the fact the recessional motion of objects is positively known to cause redshift.
None of what I’ve studied is beyond my knowledge of physics.

This statement “tens of thousands of redshifts in agreement with Hubble’s law” violates the Black Swan principle & falsifiability. There are millions of white swans but how many does it take to prove that not all swans are white. ONE, numero uno.

So how many contradictory observations (i.e. if correct the theory is false) does it take to overturn any, including Hubble’s Law: ONE. Yet there are nearly 400 and you still cling on. Isn't this worse than dogmatism & a bit Comical Ali like?

Discordance is observed with not just one but different kinds of observations, different telescopes & by researchers in different continents. They include:

1. Redshift overlapping with low Redshift Object -
2. Optical High bridges
3. Radio bridges
4. X-ray bridges
5. Quantized redshifts
6. Redshift mismatch in a galaxy group
7. Pair alignment
8. Line alignment

Hubble’s Law is dead. It’s never been verified. The observations that led to its development were misinterpreted. Hubble himself warned against this. The universe is not expanding & it's all been a big mistake, an honest mistake yes but a mistake alright.

You like using quotes & here’s one,“A proof is that which convinces a reasonable man; a rigorous proof is that which convinces an unreasonable man.”-Mark Kac (mathematician).

We now have more than rigorous proof, what will it take to convince you?
Big Al

Hibbing, MN

#646 Feb 18, 2014
LGK wrote:
<quoted text>
None of what I’ve studied is beyond my knowledge of physics.
Says you!
LGK wrote:
This statement “tens of thousands of redshifts in agreement with Hubble’s law” violates the Black Swan principle & falsifiability. There are millions of white swans but how many does it take to prove that not all swans are white. ONE, numero uno.
The existence of one black swan proves that not all swans are white but does not negate the existence of white swans. Should one observation of redshift not due to resestional motion be verified that would prove that not all redshift is caused by recessional motion but would not negate all of the observations of redshift due to recessional motion. Again I would point out what I think is your second error in thinking.
LGK wrote:
So how many contradictory observations (i.e. if correct the theory is false) does it take to overturn any, including Hubble’s Law: ONE. Yet there are nearly 400 and you still cling on. Isn't this worse than dogmatism & a bit Comical Ali like?
400 anomolous observations compared to tens of thousands of observations in agreement with Hubble's Law is by any standard a relatively small mumber.
LGK wrote:
Discordance is observed with not just one but different kinds of observations, different telescopes & by researchers in different continents. They include:
1. Redshift overlapping with low Redshift Object -
2. Optical High bridges
3. Radio bridges
4. X-ray bridges
5. Quantized redshifts
6. Redshift mismatch in a galaxy group
7. Pair alignment
8. Line alignment
Hubble’s Law is dead. It’s never been verified. The observations that led to its development were misinterpreted. Hubble himself warned against this. The universe is not expanding & it's all been a big mistake, an honest mistake yes but a mistake alright.
According to what you want to believe not according to the evidence.
LGK wrote:
You like using quotes & here’s one,“A proof is that which convinces a reasonable man; a rigorous proof is that which convinces an unreasonable man.”-Mark Kac (mathematician).
We now have more than rigorous proof, what will it take to convince you?
You have no rigorous proof that Hubble's Law is not valid only a relativly small amount of unverified anomoulous observations.

“People almost invariably arrive at their beliefs not on the basis of proof but on the basis of what they find attractive.” &#8213; Blais e Pascal, That would be you.

“Wear white at night.”

Since: Jun 09

Albuquerque

#647 Feb 18, 2014
Gillette wrote:
<quoted text>
NO! Wait... are you saying that LGK is making a mountainous pile of BS out of nothing?
Would a 100% ethical person and world-class philosophical mind like LGK do something like that?
LOL
LGK doesn't like you anymore because you made fun of his personal relationship with Jesus.

It's indeed sad that fundies ultimately sink to that 'proof' when they can't put their money where their mouths are. All it really means is they figure they've got a free pass to the magical theme park in the sky and don't need to go to church any more.

On a lighter note; you probably know by now I teach a catechism class. At first it was just a half dozen kids between eight and ten years old but has now grown to sixteen kids between six and eleven. You know I'm kind of cynical about the whole religion thing but the parents must think I've got it all figured out. There's a lot more to keeping the Sabbath holy but I've made it perfectly clear that not going to Mass on Sunday is not an option.

“Wear white at night.”

Since: Jun 09

Albuquerque

#648 Feb 18, 2014
LGK wrote:
<quoted text>
None of what I’ve studied is beyond my knowledge of physics.
This statement “tens of thousands of redshifts in agreement with Hubble’s law” violates the Black Swan principle & falsifiability. There are millions of white swans but how many does it take to prove that not all swans are white. ONE, numero uno.
So how many contradictory observations (i.e. if correct the theory is false) does it take to overturn any, including Hubble’s Law: ONE. Yet there are nearly 400 and you still cling on. Isn't this worse than dogmatism & a bit Comical Ali like?
Discordance is observed with not just one but different kinds of observations, different telescopes & by researchers in different continents. They include:
1. Redshift overlapping with low Redshift Object -
2. Optical High bridges
3. Radio bridges
4. X-ray bridges
5. Quantized redshifts
6. Redshift mismatch in a galaxy group
7. Pair alignment
8. Line alignment
Hubble’s Law is dead. It’s never been verified. The observations that led to its development were misinterpreted. Hubble himself warned against this. The universe is not expanding & it's all been a big mistake, an honest mistake yes but a mistake alright.
You like using quotes & here’s one,“A proof is that which convinces a reasonable man; a rigorous proof is that which convinces an unreasonable man.”-Mark Kac (mathematician).
We now have more than rigorous proof, what will it take to convince you?
Why don't you do us all a big favor here and cite your sources so we don't have to wonder what the cluck you're talking about.
Anonymous Girl

San Diego, CA

#650 Feb 18, 2014
LGK wrote:
<quoted text>
It's not hanging on but inscribed onto an ancient Egyptian temple wall from one of the ancient dynasties. Outline the logical steps that dictate it is a fraud. I can see how prejudice and ignorance of Aristotle's dictum leads to claims of fraud.
If it isn't a fraud why haven't I seen it on NOVA, or National Geographic that cover this kind of stuff? Do you think they are trying to conceal it, and if so, why?
LGK wrote:
<quoted text> On people believing anything, here is how it comes about: "When people stop believing on God it's not that they believe nothing. It's that they will believe anything." "When men choose not to believe in God they do not there after believe in nothing, they then become capable of believing anything" G K Chesterton.
If your God exists, why does it create tornado's in the bible belt killing people while they worshiping him and tearing it's house of worship into splinters? This is something that would happen if there was no God in control of the universe and direct evidence your god doesn't exist.
Anonymous Girl

San Diego, CA

#651 Feb 18, 2014
LGK wrote:
<quoted text>The 1st post is survey. In the hierachy of assessing evidence at the bottom of the list are survey. They are most unscientific & open to manipulation. Anyone whose done the most basic of research training at undergrad level will know that.
So you think anyone that does the most basic of research training at undergrad levels, believes that the American Association for the Advancement of Science does unscientific surveys and is open to manipulation. Please provide some believable evidence to prove your nonsensical statement is correct.
LGK wrote:
<quoted text> The 2nd is a description based on the very assumptions in question. It wouldn't pass a logic test. I would use it to train students how not to think.
You wouldn't be allowed to train students anywhere on planet earth with your demented logic. I don't say this to demean you like you do the scientific community, but it is the truth, ask around..
LGK wrote:
<quoted text> On 16th century mentality, here is a small list of people who belonged to that club: Nicholas Copernicus, Galileo & Da Vinci (invented the wheel). 16th century inventions include bottles, pencils & rockets. Be careful with thus chronological snobbery, it's another thing I'd teach in a logic class on how not to.
Again, you won't be allowed teach in a logic class anywhere in the world except possible N. Korea, give it a shot!

Since: Feb 13

Location hidden

#652 Feb 18, 2014
feces for jesus wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL
Please share your evidence of jesus rising from the dead. "Inquiring minds want to know"
Jesus did not rise from the dead. That is the biggest religious hoax ever perpetrated on mankind. And those who have claimed to witness it are frauds. "...they are their own witnesses; they see not, nor know; that they may be ashamed". Isaiah 44:9. Only the living God can conquer death and she will never die. "O Lord our God, other lords beside thee have had dominion over us: but by thee only will we make mention of thy name. They are dead, they shall not live; they are deceased, they shall not rise: therefore hast thou visited and destroyed them, and made all their memory to perish". Isaiah 26:13-14. God will abolish the idols in Israel and it's not something we will give up willingly.

Since: Feb 14

Location hidden

#653 Feb 18, 2014
susanblange wrote:
<quoted text>Jesus did not rise from the dead. That is the biggest religious hoax ever perpetrated on mankind. And those who have claimed to witness it are frauds. "...they are their own witnesses; they see not, nor know; that they may be ashamed". Isaiah 44:9. Only the living God can conquer death and she will never die. "O Lord our God, other lords beside thee have had dominion over us: but by thee only will we make mention of thy name. They are dead, they shall not live; they are deceased, they shall not rise: therefore hast thou visited and destroyed them, and made all their memory to perish". Isaiah 26:13-14. God will abolish the idols in Israel and it's not something we will give up willingly.
There were never ever any witnesses to Jesus unwrapping himself and taking a stroll out of the tomb. All was found was an empty tomb and theirs no agreement on that story either.

NDanger

“Third Eye”

Since: Nov 10

You can't get there from here.

#654 Feb 18, 2014
Anonymous Girl wrote:
<quoted text>
If it isn't a fraud why haven't I seen it on NOVA, or National Geographic that cover this kind of stuff? Do you think they are trying to conceal it, and if so, why?
<quoted text>
If your God exists, why does it create tornado's in the bible belt killing people while they worshiping him and tearing it's house of worship into splinters? This is something that would happen if there was no God in control of the universe and direct evidence your god doesn't exist.
Why don't you ask this? Why does GOD allow tornadoes to happen, flattening whole neighborhoods, yet leaving HIS House intact full of HIS people on a Sunday morning?

NDanger

“Third Eye”

Since: Nov 10

You can't get there from here.

#655 Feb 18, 2014
feces for jesus wrote:
<quoted text>
Still waiting for your evidence of jesus rising from the dead. Let me guess, you'll present it only when he comes back again.
Still waiting for you to post something worthwhile. Let me guess, that'll never happen...

Since: Feb 13

Location hidden

#656 Feb 18, 2014
Helix Galaxy wrote:
<quoted text>There were never ever any witnesses to Jesus unwrapping himself and taking a stroll out of the tomb. All was found was an empty tomb and theirs no agreement on that story either.
The tomb was empty because Jesus' followers came and stole the body. Jesus told his followers you literally had to eat his body and drink his blood to be saved. John 6:48-58. You symbolically do this every time you take communion. God does not approve of cannibalism or the consumption of blood. Mary Magdalene is the one that started the rumor that Jesus was alive and she had 49 demon spirits in her. Why do you think Jehovahs Witnesses are called "witnesses"?

“Wear white at night.”

Since: Jun 09

Albuquerque

#657 Feb 18, 2014
NDanger wrote:
<quoted text>
Why don't you ask this? Why does GOD allow tornadoes to happen, flattening whole neighborhoods, yet leaving HIS House intact full of HIS people on a Sunday morning?
Tell me, Nick. Does God show any preference? Should we all become Methodists or what?
An don't tell me Southern Baptist. We all know God flattens those dens of iniquity like a two hundred pound Mexicanita flattens a tortilla.

Since: Nov 13

Oceanside, CA

#658 Feb 18, 2014
LGK wrote:
<quoted text>
You are probably right about the Catholic Church.
I'm sure there are many secrets in the underground vaults of the Vatican that they would not want the populace to see. it would bring the Church crashing down. I'm surprised somebody hasn't tried to remote view the vaults yet.
Anonymous Girl

United States

#659 Feb 19, 2014
NDanger wrote:
<quoted text>
Why don't you ask this? Why does GOD allow tornadoes to happen, flattening whole neighborhoods, yet leaving HIS House intact full of HIS people on a Sunday morning?
I realize you don't have enough going for you to know tornadoes in the bible belt hit randomly. Sometimes they rip churches apart and sometimes not..Maybe you're attentive enough to understand that this is exactly what would be happening if there was no God controlling the universe which there isn't as the evidence shows.

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#660 Feb 19, 2014
Anonymous Girl wrote:
<quoted text>
Where did you find Jesus was sent to save me, in an old book saying snakes talk and a man lived in a big fishes belly for 3 days and survived? A tad unbelievable don't ya think?
In the same "old book" that foretold the birth of Israel.

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#661 Feb 19, 2014
Anonymous Girl wrote:
<quoted text>
An old book isn't the correct equation for finding the answer to the question we're discussing..
It is. It foretold the birth of Israel LONG before it happened. It also foretold the eternal Hell fire for unbelievers.

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#662 Feb 19, 2014
Truthseeker007 wrote:
<quoted text>
Death has no terrors for the man who knows the actuality of reincarnation through his own memories of past lives.He is accustomed to think of himself as a spirit, not as a physical body; for him the body is but an observation-post which he has constructed for himself upon the plane of earth.
"doctrines of demons"

1 Timothy 4:1 (NKJV)
1 Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons,
LGK

Chester, UK

#663 Feb 19, 2014
Big Al wrote:
<quoted text>
Says you!
<quoted text>
The existence of one black swan proves that not all swans are white but does not negate the existence of white swans. Should one observation of redshift not due to resestional motion be verified that would prove that not all redshift is caused by recessional motion but would not negate all of the observations of redshift due to recessional motion. Again I would point out what I think is your second error in thinking.
<quoted text>
400 anomolous observations compared to tens of thousands of observations in agreement with Hubble's Law is by any standard a relatively small mumber.
<quoted text>
According to what you want to believe not according to the evidence.
<quoted text>
You have no rigorous proof that Hubble's Law is not valid only a relativly small amount of unverified anomoulous observations.
“People almost invariably arrive at their beliefs not on the basis of proof but on the basis of what they find attractive.” &#8213; Blais e Pascal, That would be you.
Does this resonate?
--------A patient insisted to his doctor that he (patient) was dead. The doctor stabbed the patient with a needle & drew blood.“See, you are bleeding, dead people don’t bleed so you are cannot be dead.” The patient said,“No, no, no Dr. That’s just one anomalous result!!!”------

I used to naively think that it was evidence that persuaded people to change their minds. Oh no, it’s nothing to do with that. Evidence can be explained away or rationalised if it doesn’t fit. 400 results from different instrument is used: photo, radio-waves or X-rays etc can all be rationazed as anomalies.

Is quantized redshift an anomaly as well, and how does that make you feel?(Sorry I'm not being funny, just following on from Pascal)
LGK

Chester, UK

#664 Feb 19, 2014
Anonymous Girl wrote:
<quoted text>
So you think anyone that does the most basic of research training at undergrad levels, believes that the American Association for the Advancement of Science does unscientific surveys and is open to manipulation. Please provide some believable evidence to prove your nonsensical statement is correct.
<quoted text>
You wouldn't be allowed to train students anywhere on planet earth with your demented logic. I don't say this to demean you like you do the scientific community, but it is the truth, ask around..
<quoted text>
Again, you won't be allowed teach in a logic class anywhere in the world except possible N. Korea, give it a shot!
I have written research protocols, reviewed studies, taught critical review of published research & been to 101 meetings lectures / conferences on this stuff. I know where surveys stand. Take that whichever way you want. Here is a basic text & I’m a little annoyed it’s now a free download. I *bought* mine 100 years ago (it seems!)

If I believed that there was such a thing as “demented logic” you are right, I shouldn’t be allowed to teach anyone.“Demented logic” is an oxymoron.

Logic by the way is universal. It’s the same in N Korea, USA, UK & Antarctica. Again if I believed there was such a thing as USA logic & another called N Korean logic, I really do deserve to be shot.
LGK

Chester, UK

#665 Feb 19, 2014
Anonymous Girl wrote:
<quoted text>
So you think anyone that does the most basic of research training at undergrad levels, believes that the American Association for the Advancement of Science does unscientific surveys and is open to manipulation. Please provide some believable evidence to prove your nonsensical statement is correct.
<quoted text>
You wouldn't be allowed to train students anywhere on planet earth with your demented logic. I don't say this to demean you like you do the scientific community, but it is the truth, ask around..
<quoted text>
Again, you won't be allowed teach in a logic class anywhere in the world except possible N. Korea, give it a shot!
I forgot the attachment http://www.hstathome.com/tjziyuan/How%20to%20...

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Christian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Poll Was Paul a False Apostle? (May '08) 3 hr ROG 5,715
Evidence Against God (Jan '16) 3 hr ROG 4,411
Nettie's Pit Stop (Jan '12) 3 hr Poof1 27,327
Scientific Proof Of GOD(for dummies) 3 hr KAB 1,813
Design, Nowhere Evident 4 hr Skeeeptical 200
Do you believe in tolerance for Gay Christians? 4 hr little lamb 90
The False Teachings of the Hebrew Israelites, s... (Jan '14) 6 hr Atheistgirl 220
News Religion, higher education and critical thinking (Aug '15) 7 hr 15th Dalai Lama 9,233
More from around the web