|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 47 (9216 total) |
| |
KING IYK | |
Total: 920,534 Year: 856/6,935 Month: 137/719 Week: 129/116 Day: 3/40 Hour: 1/1 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 1720 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Creation Museum Age of the Earth is False (Simple and RAZD) | |||||||||||||||||||||||
simple ![]() Inactive Member |
quote:Where reason is defined as belief in the myth of a same state past. The problem is, they have no facts for that. quote:? 67? Do you mean 57? quote: Except that when it fades faster than required in that scenario, all you do is sprinkle stardust on it!!
quote: So?? Why would they not move at about the same speed as light??
quote: "Assuming that all of the high-energy photons originate from 56Co decay, the escaping photon intensities at various energies are related by the characteristics of the scattering medium and the physics of the scattering processes. Considering only these factors, we conclude that the total mass of 56Co implied by the light curve is not uniformly shielded by a thick envelope. Extensive 'mixing' of 56Co (initially 56Ni) and other heavy elements through the supernova envelope might explain the observations. It is likely that a small fraction of the 56Co mass implied by the light curve has been [b]removed by some mechanism[//b] to nearly thin regions."Gamma-rays and X-rays from SN1987A | Nature Sorry, but, so fat we really do not have a clear case. Something removed what we assume to be something, and it might be explained by extensive mixing, and stardust, and good thoughts, all PO. First it needs to be demonstrated that it really has to be PO decay. If you get that far, so what?? One could then envision how the PO event simply got quickened here!! Let's face it, a different universe is absolutely able to meet all evidence as much as the same past myth can.
quote: The temporary state is no lie. Thinking is was all there was, and will be all there will is where you got muddled up thinking a lie was involved.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
simple ![]() Inactive Member |
quote:Without a valid proof of a same state past, you have no reason why not! I have the bible, and what a document that is! quote: Already pointed out that the seasons could have been in a day. The mist coming up in the day, etc.
quote:Show us this pattern in rings beyond the 4400 level? No lumping the present in with the far past. quote:A couple of things. First, I say a tree could grow in a week, like the olive tree Noah saw. Maybe some took longer. Maybe years. Nowthen, let's see some rings 4500 deep here, and cut the present nonsense.
quote:Ah, OK, so there actually are physical rings beyond the 4400 mark. Fine. Now, is it hard to get a close up of the rings that are beyond this?? That is the area in question. And only that. I must admit, I do find it curious that the missing rings are from the early starting growth of the tree. That could be significant.
quote:A different amount of carbon in the past could be a prt of the explanation. As for cell growth, let's see the pre 4500 level rings, and the cell growth here that you find relevant. quote: I assume that you can't seem to focus on the era in question, and try to lump in the present stuff. Anyone that can read would have to assume the same!
quote:Rings affected by the wet parts of the day, and the windy parts of the day, and ....etc. I see no reason that the different light, and growth processes could not form rings. quote:I think the point here, is that trees correspond in growth, that they lived before or during the live tree's time. This matters not at all except in a same past myth. Not at all. quote:No, so let's see it then!! What can you tell us about the carbon levels pre 4500 rings ago?? quote:Those looking for the truth using a baseless assumption of a same state past and future are really looking to prop up their myth! Once they realize it could never be supported, their search would have to go beyond the limits of PO science. All evidence can be looked at with either a same past or different past filter. Period.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
simple ![]() Inactive Member |
quote:OK, but the days needed there were adjusted as the light faded, speculating that dust made it fade faster. So, it isn't like we have a precise thing here. quote: The evidence is only the truth when we can understand what we see. When you start from the myth, and filter evidence through it, it can no longer be called the truth. Not unless the filter was verified. It can never ever ever ever be. Ever.
quote: Can you flesh this out? Why and how? And so?
quote:Ah. No. Any mass gamma ray photons might have is present state mass. Why would this get here about the same time as the light? In your mind there was an explosion, and they both left about the same time almost, the gamma rays a little before. I wonder if the light that was left here in this universe did not come in several flavors. - The electromagnetic spectrum. If the spectrum came to be at the split, then it was then that the light was left, or scattered in all the ways we know it here. In such a case, having a part of the stuff scattered arrive some days or weeks before others is no biggie!!! Job 38:24 - By what way is the light parted, which scattereth the east wind upon the earth? The PO projection into space that you do is a cute little show. But the creation reality coming at us is the show of shows.
quote:They still show the underlying sort of assumptions that are made, only more of the same these days, to try and explain in a PO way, new stuff that comes up. Since the first explanations are shown to be wrong, they are indeed no longer valid. Fact is they never were, any more than today's attempts!! quote: Or for yours! But I have the bible, which is better than nothing. No, the earth could not have changed last week. WE observed that, as we did last year, century, etc. But guess where it all starts to end, and NO longer be recorded??? - The first kingdoms after the flood, which you of course have dated wrong!!! That is a real barrier. Edited by simple, : No reason given. Edited by simple, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
simple ![]() Inactive Member |
quote: Not a universe that is false, but one that is not the true created eternal state! Temporary. The only so called evidence you mean is things we see that you filter through your assumption that it was always like this. Same with the future, when you claim a dismal crashing of our galaxy, or fizzling out of our sun, or whatever. That you have to admit. You have no idea about the future state of the heavens at all. The only ideas from the past come from the myth of a same state past. The is, in the future, light in heaven, so we won't need the light of the sun. So it is fine to assume some differences in light. The earth will be made new, and Eden was a lot different, because in both places we and the earth last forever. It is perfectly OK to assume a different state earth! In fact, if we are talking future or deep past, it is a must. There also will be wind, just as some sort of wind blew on the flooded earth. This may have been some sort of space wind, or such, that could not exist in this present state, for all we know. The air may have even been a little different, but wind was still wind of some kind. Yes, we may assume that there were fundamental differences in many basic things we take for granted as being 'normal' now the way we know them. It is not perfectly OK to assume, however that they were the same. Not if you want to call it science. To do that, you end up with missing black holes, stars, evidences, and leaps of faith that head right to the pond, or the whole universe in a little soup.
quote:Then we don't know! So what? Science is not just about religiously holding to a baseless assumption the past and future have to be the same. It applies only to what it applies to, and that is this temporary state physical only universe. Maybe not even all of it, for example, the interior of the earth is likely still merged, both spiritual and physical. The seismic waves that hit this material might register as liquid or something. They do not have the smarts to detect spiritual also material. Man is much smaller than you have presumed in real knowledge.
quote: No more null than yours, and certainly not as dull! It is also not based on bull.
quote: If you stumble on any let us know. Meanwhile you were asked some things, and all you come back with is this. Like what about the pre 4400 level tree rings?? What pattern and carbon, etc there do we see, without lumping in all the post split ring growth as well?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
simple ![]() Inactive Member |
Your failure to establish a PO past is all that matters. The rest is elementary. Whether you like it or not.
The mess is yours. The future is mine.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
simple ![]() Inactive Member |
quote:False, you show you don't even comprehend the argument. They are as they appear to be! Your claim they always will be and were is what is blown away by your utter lack of any evidence or proof. quote:If there is cobalt, so what?? The light curve faded faster than we would expect. So you attribute that to dust. Yet you never get down to the details, like the tree rings pre split. quote:And when it fades faster that expected we also assume that is true. The match, then depends on the right amount of dust, no?? Prove there was the right amount, don't assume it. quote:They assume that conditions were the same, and yes, they do assume rings equal a year. Face it. quote:I never said they do assume the levels are constant, I don't think. And, I have told you many times to stop the silly lumping. Focus on the pre flood rings.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
simple ![]() Inactive Member |
quote: The evidence I deal with is what is presented, not some vague claim after the fact that is not clearly supported. I already gave the link that mentioned that it was the dust that made the curve fade faster. Maybe you could make your point, if you have one clearly, and simply. ""It is true that there is a little more light coming from the supernova than you'd expect just from radioactive decay," says Robert P. Kirshner of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics in Cambridge, Mass. "What we see is consistent with the formation of a neutron star that's a pulsar, but it doesn't prove it."http://findarticles.com/...s/mi_m1200/is_n25_v134/ai_6935010 There is not just light expected from decay there. That is why they invent black holes or missing stars. Something else is in the in here they don't account for or comprehend. And what they look for is PO past explanations that might 'explain it'."Our study shows that moderate 56Ni mixing at velocities 2500 km s’1 can explain the observed light curve if the density of the outer layers of the presupernova exceeds the value obtained in the evolutionary model of a single nonrotating star severalfold." Content Not Found: Ingenta Connect "The Mass of EvidenceOne clue was the elements needed to produce the extra brightness. "All the power in a Type Ia comes from the burning of carbon and oxygen to heavier elements, notably nickel 56," Nugent says. "A Type Ia of normal brightness makes about 60 percent of a solar mass worth of nickel 56, the rest being other elements. But SNLS-03D3bb is more than twice as bright as normal; it must have more than twice as much nickel 56. The only way to get that is with a progenitor that's 50 percent more massive than the Chandrasekhar mass." The other factor is the slowness of SNLS-03D3bb's ejecta, as detected in the shifting of elemental lines in its spectrum. The velocity of supernova ejecta depends on the kinetic energy released in the explosion, which is the difference between the energy released in thermonuclear burning minus the binding energy that acts to hold the star together, a function of the star's mass. The more massive the star, the slower the ejecta. But how could a carbon-oxygen progenitor ever accumulate mass greater than the Chandrasekhar limit without exploding? It's possible that a very rapidly spinning star could be more massive. It's also possible that two white dwarfs, with a combined mass well over the Chandrasekhar limit, could collide and explode."New Kind of Supernova Discovered - Universe Today The assumption is present state mass, of course. There are a plethora of assumptions piled on to form the ever shifting claims of what 'must' have went on with these SNs! The elements we detect in the spectrum are also steeped in assumptions. For example, if the universe state were not the same, and one created a star, would not one also use the elements, with the same spectral signature? If it was a time reversal thing, we should still see the same elements. Or, possibly if it was an explosion as apparent to our perceptions, remember it still would have been long ago. That means it also could have been affected by any universe state change, and we simply get a delayed 'movie' of what went on, coming in to us in POsurroundvision. That won't be determined by your vague responses, skirting the evidence, and making vague little statements. The more one looks at the claims, the more ridiculous and religious they start to appear.
quote:They also assume that the yearand patterns extend into the unknown deep past, which they also assume for no reason was the same. Thanks for admitting that! quote:They are too some rings that extend beyond the 44, or 4500 level. You admitted that already. The simple concept is your unflinching unbased belief that the state was the same then, and that the ring pattern HAD to be formed as no. Nonsense. There were wet parts of a day, water coming up from below. There were windy bits, there were days and nights, maybe some flooding now and then, and etc etc etc. There is no reason at all to say that the rings were not laid down in the faster growth of the past. None. You were asked to focus on the suspect era pre 4400 level rings, and show the data there only. Then you need to show why it had to be PO. You can't. Really. Your myth is busted real good.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2025