Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Evolution Disclaimer Supported
The Advocate (Baton Rouge) ^ | 12/11/02 | WILL SENTELL

Posted on 12/11/2002 6:28:08 AM PST by A2J

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 5,221-5,2405,241-5,2605,261-5,280 ... 7,021-7,032 next last
To: Condorman
Nick Bostrom bump. He's a very smart fellow and rarely fails to make a very strong and well thought out case for the positions he explores. Worth reading and not somebody whose ideas should be dismiss lightly, in my opinion.
5,241 posted on 01/16/2003 12:52:23 PM PST by tortoise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5236 | View Replies]

To: AndrewC
I don't expect to see a salt crystal, which has a center of mass, to suddenly start spinning for no reason.

But the salt crystal is spinning, at least once a day. Shrink it down to a really, really tiny fraction of its current size--which is exactly what happens to a molecular cloud--and you will see it achieve a surprisingly large angular velocity.

The only way to have a molecular cloud with a zero net angular momentum is to arrange it that way ahead of time (i.e. fine tuning).

5,242 posted on 01/16/2003 12:56:01 PM PST by Physicist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5239 | View Replies]

To: Physicist
So now you should also see why it's ludicrous to expect that Venus has meandered around the solar system.

Sauce for the goose.

Origin of the Earth and Moon

Moon making made easy

More computer power will help, but the problem will remain that giant impacts are inherently improbable, and the Solar System's chaotic nature makes it impossible to re-run history and get the same outcome. "None of the scenarios for the Moon's formation is highly likely," Stevenson says.

That does not indicate what I believe about either scenario, it just means I don't think ludicrous applies.

5,243 posted on 01/16/2003 12:59:40 PM PST by AndrewC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5237 | View Replies]

To: donh
When I use non-rational in your case, I simply mean you are taking a leap of faith since your conjectures are merely from the mind of a man and are certainly not based on any empirical evidence. On one hand, you naturalists say there is no observable evidence for God and will not consider the possibility, yet you come up with such non-rational possibilities for the origin of the universe that have no basis in evidence whatsoever. Just what sort of evidentiary rules do you use - if any? Of course, empiricism falls flat on its face as well, so I am confused about your epistemology - just how do You know that you KNOW something?
5,244 posted on 01/16/2003 1:00:24 PM PST by exmarine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5231 | View Replies]

To: Physicist
But the salt crystal is spinning, at least once a day.

That is due to external causes, which I have explicitly left out. The crystal also spins once a year and once every ~220 million years among likely other centers.

5,245 posted on 01/16/2003 1:11:42 PM PST by AndrewC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5242 | View Replies]

To: tortoise
Worth reading and not somebody whose ideas should be dismiss lightly, in my opinion.

Yeah, no kidding. I read that as a lark a few months ago. When I finished, I started over from the beginning, trying to poke holes in it somewhere. I remember being surprised as how well-constructed the paper turned out to be.

5,246 posted on 01/16/2003 1:16:44 PM PST by Condorman (Error in REALITY.SYS, <A>bort, <R>etry, <S>hell to Virtual Reality?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5241 | View Replies]

To: longshadow; RadioAstronomer; PatrickHenry; donh
And this makes you what -- designated Nerd-by-proxy of the day?

Nerds-R-Us :^D

5,247 posted on 01/16/2003 1:18:21 PM PST by Aracelis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5211 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry; RadioAstronomer; longshadow
I'm worried. I've heard that mass perterbation can lead to blindness, which is a serious handicap for an astronomer.

All I will tell you is that RA is in no danger of losing his eyesight.

5,248 posted on 01/16/2003 1:19:51 PM PST by Aracelis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5217 | View Replies]

To: AndrewC
Sauce for the goose.

Not at all. I told you I don't buy the "Mars-sized body" idea, either. I also have an impact-parameter fine-tuning argument against the notion, which I won't bother to write up here.

Still, the Venus idea is ludicrous for many more reasons than the MSB idea. First, the MSB would either be an interloper or dislodged by an interloper, so the formation arguments wouldn't apply. In Velikovsky's (medved's) model, Venus is excreted spontaneously by Jupiter, which is ludicrous in and of itself. Furthermore, the MSB would only have to interact once, whereas Velikovsky's Venus is asked to perform tasks all around the solar system. Finally, the MSB would have done its dirty work over four billion years ago, not recently as Velikovsky would have it.

5,249 posted on 01/16/2003 1:20:29 PM PST by Physicist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5243 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry; longshadow; RadioAstronomer; donh
perterbations

One little spelling error and it's reproduced ad infinitum. It should be spelled, perturbations. Ok fellas, now have fun with that...

5,250 posted on 01/16/2003 1:22:31 PM PST by Aracelis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5217 | View Replies]

To: AndrewC
That is due to external causes, which I have explicitly left out.

Well, there you go. But assume the salt crystal isn't on the Earth, but that you place it in space somewhere. I don't care where you put it or how, but I can tell you that it is not going to have zero angular momentum unless you work very hard at cancelling it out. The placement process, whatever it may be, will undoubtedly impart a nonzero angular momentum to it.

Molecular clouds are the same way, except that there is nobody meddling with it to make sure it doesn't spin. And if it does spin, however slowly, that angular velocity will be amplified by the collapse process. You see?

5,251 posted on 01/16/2003 1:27:35 PM PST by Physicist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5245 | View Replies]

To: viaveritasvita
Scripter: I remembered an old post where I think you highlighted that in Kalifornicate a homeschool had to be "legally" sanctioned.

That's right and the name of our private home school is the same as your screen name. We're raising our kids to be critical thinkers so they can recognize the bad science behind the theory of evolution. Sorry evos, had to get that in there.

Thanks for the Feng story. It's a great reminder of the freedoms we have here that I will fight to the death to keep.

5,252 posted on 01/16/2003 1:28:58 PM PST by scripter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5186 | View Replies]

To: Physicist
Not at all. I told you I don't buy the "Mars-sized body" idea, either.

The sauce comment was not meant for you but for those that believe the moon hypothesis and so contemptuously dismiss the other.

5,253 posted on 01/16/2003 1:29:41 PM PST by AndrewC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5249 | View Replies]

To: tortoise
God isn't going to have an 'identity' // career crisis . . . evos should // will - - - big time ! ! !
5,254 posted on 01/16/2003 1:31:23 PM PST by f.Christian (Orcs of the world: Take note and beware.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5238 | View Replies]

To: Physicist
I don't care where you put it or how, but I can tell you that it is not going to have zero angular momentum unless you work very hard at cancelling it out.

But you are talking about the whole enchilada when you place it. That is external reference. I know that something spinning, spins. And as I pointed out to you long ago, which you did not understand, when something moves, everything moves.

5,255 posted on 01/16/2003 1:34:54 PM PST by AndrewC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5251 | View Replies]

To: scripter
We're raising our kids to be critical thinkers so they can recognize the bad science behind the theory of evolution.

But the question is, is that same "critical eye" universally applied?

5,256 posted on 01/16/2003 1:51:38 PM PST by Condorman (Be consistent -- but not all the time)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5252 | View Replies]

To: Piltdown_Woman
All I will tell you is that RA is in no danger of losing his eyesight.

As I've long suspected, that "control room" of his is just a cover for some really kinky activities. His guise as a SETI researcher is crumbling. But I'm glad you're taking care of his eyesight.

5,257 posted on 01/16/2003 1:59:15 PM PST by PatrickHenry (PH is really a great guy!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5248 | View Replies]

To: AndrewC
The sauce comment was not meant for you but for those that believe the moon hypothesis and so contemptuously dismiss the other.

Actually, I've always liked the idea that the Moon orbited the mysterious fifth planet, and when those folks blew themselves up fighting off giant bugs 300 million years ago, the Moon was cast free and eventually ended up orbiting our world.

5,258 posted on 01/16/2003 2:13:21 PM PST by Junior (Yepper. I'm definitely nuts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5253 | View Replies]

To: Condorman
When I finished, I started over from the beginning, trying to poke holes in it somewhere. I remember being surprised as how well-constructed the paper turned out to be.

Yeah, he's one of those people that if he says something that is contrary to my judgment, I immediately start cross-examining myself because it is probably me that is wrong. I remember discussing this very concept with him when he was working on the paper and looking for some conceptual feedback to flesh it out, and he fielded my objections and questions with ease.

5,259 posted on 01/16/2003 2:14:55 PM PST by tortoise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5246 | View Replies]

To: AndrewC
Velocity is relative; rotation is not.
5,260 posted on 01/16/2003 2:19:16 PM PST by Physicist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5255 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 5,221-5,2405,241-5,2605,261-5,280 ... 7,021-7,032 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson