Go Back   Science Forums > General topics > Books, movies, games
Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 10-05-2009   #471 (permalink)
Majeston's Avatar
Questioning


 



Not Ranked  0 score     
Re: The importance of hypography's "back up your claims" rule

Quote:
Originally Posted by CraigDThat “experts now state that everything they though they knew about the formation of our solar system is wrong” due to recent Jupiter observation and probe spacecraft data strikes me as an extraordinary claim, Majestron. Do you have a source for this claim?


You've spelled the name incorectly. You're also a bit trigger happy, your questions are only one day old yet you thought it necessary to bully me into answering you in so short a time as if I have nothing else to do. I thought I had mentioned the source, if not it was a show on the History channel at least twice last week and I did not catch the name. The show was a quite recent 2007-2009 presentation of the Galileo mission to Jupiter.





What in the article you link supports the idea that Tycho’s 1672 supernova was the explosion of two stars, Majestron?


It states it was possibly a type 1a nova.









Its conclusion, which you quote, is that its remnants are consistent with a [wiki
type Ia supernova[/wiki]. The most likely cause of this kind of supernova – the single-degenerate model, so called because only one of the stars involved, the white dwarf, contains much degenerate matter – is matter being stripped from the normal star companion of a white dwarf, resulting in unbinding of the white dwarf (what could accurately be called an “explosion”) from very high power fusion reactions surrounding it, but not the unbinding of its companion. This is the reason why astronomers such as those mentioned in Menedez’s article search for nearby normal stars with motion consistent of having been blown away from the vicinity of the supernova, which according the article, Tycho G is believed to be.

A less likely model is the double-degenerate, which involves two white dwarfs. However, in this model, on of the stars is ripped apart to supply the infalling matter fused by the other. Although both stars are unbound in this process, an observer describing it would not call it a “double explosion”, because the first start is torn apart over a long period (about 1000 years) before the second is unbound in the brief (about 1 day) powerful supernova event.

In this day of readily available information, you should not hazard such guesses, Majestron. A simple check of a popular source such as the wikipedia article “double star”, would allow you to know that an unambiguous description of a double star appeared no later than 1651, and possible as early as 1616. Well before the 20th century, double stars were well known to professional and armature stargazers. The Burnham Double Star Catalogue, published in 1906, lists 13665 pairs of double stars.

Worse than depriving yourself of easily available information, by not researching your guesses, Majestron, you risk giving readers bad information. This it one of the main reasons hypography’s first rule is
In general, back up your claims by using links or references




ok sorry Craig, my bad, I've only been here like a few days after a long lapse and I really didn't think you were taking this so seriously due to the nature of the comments being spewed and besides that we really are dealing with a topic that carries a very low level of respect and is in the category of Books-Movies and Games.





Paper 41 of this online copy of Urantia book states:
The most recent of the major cosmic eruptions in Orvonton was the extraordinary double star explosion, the light of which reached Urantia in A.D. 1572. This conflagration was so intense that the explosion was clearly visible in broad daylight.
Unless the Urantia Book and the “Urantia account” are different things, I don’t see how one can claim that “the Urantia account doesn't state that 2 stars exploded”.

It says what it says, I didn't write the revelation. I can think of at least 3 possibilities that someone could interpret that phrase and they are all different. I'm sure you can as well.

Thanks for your comments. I hope I haven't missed anything or pissed anyone off.


----------------
130:4.4 A one-eyed person can never hope to visualize depth of perspective. Neither can single-eyed material scientists nor single-eyed spiritual mystics and allegorists correctly visualize and adequately comprehend the true depths of universe reality. All true values of creature experience are concealed in depth of recognition.
Old 10-05-2009   #472 (permalink)
Majeston's Avatar
Questioning


 



Not Ranked  0 score     
Re: Urantia Book: Complications and Contradictions

Quote:
Originally Posted by modest View Post
Please quote for us several well-respected PhDs with degrees in Physics or Astronomy who claim that stars which are too massive split equatorially forming binaries.

Thank you.

~modest
Their names are on the articles I posted.


----------------
130:4.4 A one-eyed person can never hope to visualize depth of perspective. Neither can single-eyed material scientists nor single-eyed spiritual mystics and allegorists correctly visualize and adequately comprehend the true depths of universe reality. All true values of creature experience are concealed in depth of recognition.
Old 10-08-2009   #473 (permalink)
Moontanman's Avatar
Astounding Vision


Location:
South Eastern North Carolina, Cape Fear Region
 
Moontanman has a reputation beyond reputeMoontanman has a reputation beyond reputeMoontanman has a reputation beyond reputeMoontanman has a reputation beyond reputeMoontanman has a reputation beyond reputeMoontanman has a reputation beyond reputeMoontanman has a reputation beyond reputeMoontanman has a reputation beyond reputeMoontanman has a reputation beyond reputeMoontanman has a reputation beyond reputeMoontanman has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Moontanman
 



Not Ranked  0 score     
Re: Urantia Book: Complications and Contradictions

Are these the guys who you are talking about Majeston?

Chris Halvorson, PhD, Halbert Katzen, JD, Phil Calabrese, PhD

Again you only show your ability to misrepresent and obfuscate the issue. These guys are followers of the book of urantia, they are not a reasonable neutral representation of science. They have the same misguided agenda you do, proving the book of urantia and proselytizing the religion of the book of urantia. Majeston, can you possibly be any more disingenuous? This would be like a creationist quoting a creation scientist to prove the veracity of the bible. Majeston your continuing dishonesty does not further your cause, it only makes you look more and more dishonest and dissembling.


----------------
Michael
Life is the poetry of the universe.
Love is the poetry of life.

Nuclear is the only real option!
http://www.nuclearspace.com/Liberty_ship_menupg.aspx

Over heard from a three year old, "Daddy why do my toes get sticky when I eat strawberry jam?"

Never wrestle a troll. You both get dirty and the troll likes it

Proud graduate of Wossamotta University!
Old 10-08-2009   #474 (permalink)
modest's Avatar
Creating

Moderator

Location:
U.S. Midwest
 
modest has a reputation beyond reputemodest has a reputation beyond reputemodest has a reputation beyond reputemodest has a reputation beyond reputemodest has a reputation beyond reputemodest has a reputation beyond reputemodest has a reputation beyond reputemodest has a reputation beyond reputemodest has a reputation beyond reputemodest has a reputation beyond reputemodest has a reputation beyond repute
 



Not Ranked  0 score     
Re: Urantia Book: Complications and Contradictions

Apparently useful conversation of the thread's title has come to an end. Thread closed.


----------------
Thanks from:
Turtle (10-09-2009)
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Tags
complication, contradiction, theology, urantia book


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Urantia Book - Who Could've Hoaxed This? Turtle Theology forum 225 10-14-2009 10:08 AM
I am writing a book theblackalchemist Watercooler 7 04-30-2009 03:39 AM
Nicodemus Book Kakorat2 History forum 1 12-26-2006 11:17 PM
Apparent contradictions in the Bible Biochemist Theology forum 166 08-06-2005 03:17 PM
Looking for a book! halogenesis Books, movies, games 2 12-22-2003 04:47 PM

» Advertisement
» Current Poll
Who's the sexiest man alive? Johnny Depp or Robert Pattinson?
Johnny Depp - 27.27%
3 Votes
Robert Pattinson - 0%
0 Votes
Someone else (please specify) - 45.45%
5 Votes
I'm too macho to think a guy is sexy - 27.27%
3 Votes
Total Votes: 11
You may not vote on this poll.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:15 AM.

Hypography?

Hypography [n.]: A combination of "hyperlink" and "bibliography" - ie, a list of links to electronic documents. Comparable to discography and bibliography, but not cartography.

We have been online since May 2000, and aim to be the best place to find and share science-related content of all kinds.

Share the love!

Please add more science to your life. Use our RSS feeds on your blog, your portal, or your favorite feedreader!


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.3.2
Copyright © 2000-2009 Hypography
Part of the Hypography - Science for Everyone Network