• Reminder: Do not call, text, or mention harrassing someone in real life. Do not encourage it. Do not talk about killing or using violence against anyone, or engaging in any criminal behavior. If it is not an obvious joke even when taken out of context, don't post it. Please report violators. If you want your account deleted, send a private message to @BlackTransLivesMatter

    Do not post IRL pranks here without including the source

    DMCA, complaints, and other inquiries:

    [email protected]

Elon Musk has been living a second life online as “Adrian Dittman” - an autistic Musk super fan who spends his life on Twitter.

Suetonius

Suetonius

LAUGH.
‎
‎
Forum Clout
124,721
T-t-t-Terry! said:
That's what the science says with no evidence.
Click to expand...
Then something is wrong because theres no need for a hypothetical here. We’ve been to another body, the moon, and it didn’t provide us any different evidence that would force us to reevaluate where the center is.

I guess the bigger question is why? What would be the big end goal to convincing people the Sun is the center. I could understand some “They wanted to spite the church” but then you’re talking about 500 odd years of upholding this blatant lie. What is the payoff?
 
The NaTurryl Man

The NaTurryl Man

Trying to make myself a thing
‎
Forum Clout
43,064
The Sue Deal said:
Then something is wrong because theres no need for a hypothetical here. We’ve been to another body, the moon, and it didn’t provide us any different evidence that would force us to reevaluate where the center is.

I guess the bigger question is why? What would be the big end goal to convincing people the Sun is the center. I could understand some “They wanted to spite the church” but then you’re talking about 500 odd years of upholding this blatant lie. What is the payoff?
Click to expand...
They didn't do the tests on the moon, lol. Here

Hubble also demonstrated that the redshift of other galaxies is approximately proportional to their distance from Earth (Hubble's law). This raised the appearance of this galaxy being in the center of an expanding Universe, however, Hubble rejected the findings philosophically:

...if we see the nebulae all receding from our position in space, then every other observer, no matter where he may be located, will see the nebulae all receding from his position. However, the assumption is adopted. There must be no favoured location in the Universe, no centre, no boundary; all must see the Universe alike. And, in order to ensure this situation, the cosmologist postulates spatial isotropy and spatial homogeneity, which is his way of stating that the Universe must be pretty much alike everywhere and in all directions."[24]

The redshift observations of Hubble, in which galaxies appear to be moving away from us at a rate proportional to their distance from us, are now understood to be associated with the expansion of the universe. All observers anywhere in the Universe will observe the same e ffect.
Click to expand...
Dismissed on philosophical grounds. An unmerited assumption that it would appear so anywhere in the universe. No empirical evidence to back it up. That's the science, sweety.
 
musTARD

musTARD

‎
Forum Clout
7,395
BUBBLER said:
All French are fags.
Click to expand...
French women

0ccae604e02701222439ae12aa466a38.jpg


ef44c6c8ca2330ac439321ff655580ee.jpg


192a534bd7eeabe92155c2c59b614682.jpg
 
F

Farmer Brown

‎
Forum Clout
2,896
T-t-t-Terry! said:
They didn't do the tests on the moon, lol. Here


Dismissed on philosophical grounds. An unmerited assumption that it would appear so anywhere in the universe. No empirical evidence to back it up. That's the science, sweety.
Click to expand...
What was "dismissed philosophically" here was the assumption that we are the center of the universe, because there is no empirical evidence to back that up. The opposite of what you are arguing.

What is accepted, because there is no empirical evidence to justify us being the center of the universe, is that there is no center. (The last paragraph you highlighted.) Because all galaxies move away from us at a rate proportional to their distance, anyone anywhere would observe the same thing. (You don't have to "go there" to observe it, you just have to think about it to come to this conclusion based on observations made here. The same way when two cars pass each other I can measure the speed of separation from one car. I don't have to take measurements from the other car too.)
 
The NaTurryl Man

The NaTurryl Man

Trying to make myself a thing
‎
Forum Clout
43,064
Farmer Brown said:
What was "dismissed philosophically" here was the assumption that we are the center of the universe, because there is no empirical evidence to back that up. The opposite of what you are arguing.
Click to expand...
The observation is that we're at the center but there's no empirical evidence to back that up? How about the observation?
Farmer Brown said:
What is accepted, because there is no empirical evidence to justify us being the center of the universe, is that there is no center. (The last paragraph you highlighted.)
Click to expand...
Just dismissing the observation and assuming the position again.
Farmer Brown said:
Because all galaxies move away from us at a rate proportional to their distance, anyone anywhere would observe the same thing. (You don't have to "go there" to observe it, you just have to think about it to come to this conclusion based on observations made here. The same way when two cars pass each other I can measure the speed of separation from one car. I don't have to take measurements from the other car too.)
Click to expand...
Is that how we do a science? We just think about it? Lol. You say you don't have to take measurements from the other car but I'd assume that at some point somebody actually did experiments to verify that observation from a single point was valid. You have no ability to actually do that with the rest of the universe. "Just trust me bro." isn't very compelling.
 
F

Farmer Brown

‎
Forum Clout
2,896
T-t-t-Terry! said:
The observation is that we're at the center but there's no empirical evidence to back that up? How about the observation?

Just dismissing the observation and assuming the position again.

Is that how we do a science? We just think about it? Lol. You say you don't have to take measurements from the other car but I'd assume that at some point somebody actually did experiments to verify that observation from a single point was valid. You have no ability to actually do that with the rest of the universe. "Just trust me bro." isn't very compelling.
Click to expand...
I'm not even arguing what is correct here. I'm telling you you quoted paragraphs to buttress your point and they are saying the exact opposite of what you think they do.

And no, thinking logically is not "doing science." There are certain presuppositions made even while "doing science," one of which is the laws of physics apply everywhere the same.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top