Posted on 02/05/2014 2:43:22 AM PST by Olog-hai
The big bang sounds good except ... from whence the observer of the proffered bang?
If our sun is the center of it all, it is foolish to think intelligent life could be out there ... after all ... we must be the parents and ...
well
look at US
If negatively charged electrons whiz around a positively charged nucleus, why do the unlike signs not implode ?
Because the “days” of the Creation are NOT 24 hour days!!!!
True science tries to obtain the truth through observation and vigorous verification. Facts like 'The World is Flat", a belief held in the middle ages, was falsified by scientific observation.
When folks tell me, such and such is a scientific "fact", I point out that it is a currently held belief bearing up under observation and verification so far. And that that so called 'fact' may or may not hold up in the future.
I had an oak tree in my yard that was 106 years old.
People asked how I knew it was 106 years old.
I said, “when I moved here 6 years ago, they told me it was a 100 year old oak tree”.
Man goes to God and asks him “What’s a million years to you?”
God replies, “A second.”
Then the man asks God, “What’s a million dollars to you?”
God answers, “A penny.”
Then the man asks God, “Can I have a penny?”
And God answers, “Sure, just give me a second.”
I am not sure how old earth is but I am sure God chose me from before the foundations were formed. Does that mean I am older than the earth? I don’t think so. There is always something to question isn’t there?
The idea that intelligent people in the Middle Ages believed the Earth was flat is false. Maybe some illiterate peasants did, but not anyone with any schooling. The fact that the Earth was a sphere was known to the ancients.
OK, I'll give this one a shot. How can you act if "you don't know?" So ignorance is not a basis for action. You need a starting point. This is what makes believers out of all of us. Anything else is less than human.
All analogies and models fail at some point.
I'd be willing to bet most of the naysayers here didn't watch the debate.
Or people have a inordinate need to be BSed. It is true in life. Many times I am asked a question where I had no knowledge of the subject asked about. I give the honest answer of “I don’t know.” The questioner, for the most time, can’t accept the answer.
No it isn't. Many people and scientists did believe the earth was flat in the middle ages.
In order for your statement to be true, no intelligent person in the middle ages would have believed in the earth being flat.
You are welcome to try again.
That was a fun one. Long time ago (a century) people thought that the atom was like a solar system. Then they made exactly that question. It got weird because they were testing by heating a body and watching the resulting spectrum (like the rainbow, the dispersion of light in a prism). They said, “we keep adding energy, and this thing goes from red, to yellow, to blue as we expect. But it goes then to white. Not to ultraviolet.” That was very weird for them. Because, if the atoms were like a solar system, things should go smoothly. And colors not changing smoothly was weird.
So they developed a new theory. That’s the deal in science (don’t let the politicians in weather ‘science’ make you think otherwise). The theory was, “no, this is not like a solar system. Because it’s not smooth. The new theory is, «Electrons can’t move smoothly around the atom. Electrons can only take very specific positions. When they change positions, they absorb or emit energy, frequently on the form of light».” Then they set up the equations and made lots of experimentation to confirm that the equations fit. Because, as we’ve already established, it’s all about the equations fitting. Well, one consequence of assuming the electrons can’t jump from state to state without a discrete exchange of energy is that electrons then can’t go from the state nearer to the nucleus straight to the nucleus without a lot of effort. Incidentally, that also explained why gold doesn’t react with almost nothing.
Again, this is an excessive oversimplification. And may be wrong. But it works fine when building computers, and sometimes that’s enough
The phrase "ignorance is bliss" is telling. We have a reflexive aversion to perceive as a function of our solipsistic ego. I'd rather be wrong and win the argument, for example.
All models are wrong; some are useful
I was sort’a following you ... right up to the last sentence, and I think I thank you ... which may be enough.
Apples and oranges argument. More like witnessing a shooting and closing your eyes and covering your ears to believe it never happened.
Where is your proof?
This goes back to the old 1st grade Columbus story. You know the one where Columbus thought the Earth was round, and the monarchs of Europe thought he was crazy. The truth was that everybody believed the Earth was round, but ironically Columbus was wrong in believing it was smaller than it was. Columbus was rejected at first because learned people thought his route to Asia was too long. They were right. What neither side knew was that there was a land mass in between, except for fisherman who kept the secret of their great spots across the Atlantic.
As for intelligent people in the Middle Ages. They had access to the writings of the ancient Greeks, since the ancient Greeks believed the Earth to be round, then they had the knowledge. I will concede that same as today, some intelligent people in Middle Ages believed in some flaky theories.
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.