Space and Science BS Thread

"Instead, they said the break-up was probably the result of the subtle but inexorable effect of sunlight over many, many years causing the asteroid to spin at a slowly increasing rate until it became unstable and ruptured. This phenomenon, known as the YORP effect, has been debated by scientists, but never previously reliably observed.

....

When hit with sunlight, objects radiate heat back into space. If an object is perfectly round, that phenomenon would not affect its structural stability. But the irregular shape of asteroids - often shaped like a big potato tumbling through space — means that when sunlight is radiated back into space, it exerts a torque on them, leading to a spin."

 

It's an Off-Topic Discussion - what's the issue ?

 

Look, I'm fine with you being a religious person. Do as you please. Just dont bring religion into this thread. If you have scientific proof to back up statements you want to make go for it, thats what this thread is all about. But if you are going to just come in and say a scientific theory is a "scam" just because you refuse to believe it then this isnt the thread for you.

 

That's my opinion and I even apologized for stating it.

If you don't want discussion/opinions which would include dissenting views, it would be helpful to put that in the first post since you are the OP

I'll be going to the beach today as well as tomorrow and enjoy the science I can feel and touch and where I also don't have to accept an unproven theory as fact to be included in the experience

Enjoy your day gentlemen

 

You can have your opinion.. Just dont come in here preaching thats all I'm asking. If you love science great feel free to contribute scientific articles, facts, etc. I just dont want this thread locked and shut down like other threads have been. I'm just saying if something has been proven, I dont understand how you can say its not true? If an article has proof and evidence to back it, dont come in and say its wrong because you believe it is. Come in with hard proof and other evidence and I'm all for reading it. But when other people are posting articles and you are just going to come in with no evidence then you are just arguing for the sake of arguing.

Feel free to stay, I would just like for this thread to stay open.

 

+1

I grew up in a religious family, and have my own convictions.
But the out of hand rejection of even the idea that something might be in conflict with a book that was written 2000+ years ago by primitive peoples interpreting things they did not understand is hugely ignorant.
Even accepting that the writings are the product of divine inspiration, one must also remember that the writings were targeted at primitive peoples not capable of comprehending things they could not touch and feel.

I have no doubts that John saw many incredible things on that island.
I also have no doubt that, even if John saw a rocket launch, and God told him exactly what it was, that the words he put on paper were in a form that would be understood by a person living in the 1st century.

 

lol

understanding the fundamental basics of science theory loses again!

all of my points were ignored, again. just like in the other thread. oh well

 

Where have I been preaching ? Don't tell lies.
OZ is the only one who mentioned I was a creationist.

I apologized for saying it was a scam and the guy was out to make money off his theory. Which I don't think is his own work from the comments made after the article about him

Just because I have trouble with unproven theories, you want me to provide proof that these unproven theories are not true

You can try to bully all you want. Not going to change my opinions without some real facts... Not unproven theories

There is no winning. It's just a discussion thread

See you guys at the next MENSA meeting

 

Nobody cares about changing your mind

 

http://www.cbc.ca/newsblogs/technol...efense-system-against-incoming-asteroids.html

 

I'm just glad we all don't think like that anymore, or we'd still be burning witches and think the earth was the center of the universe

it's funny how much science people rely on in their everyday lives, of which you cannot "see."

 

anyone listen to Joe Rogan? Made my head explode. science is awesome but there is no way we will ever figure all the secrets of the universe or what ever it is out there and beyond. Makes me feel like nothing we do even matters in the big picture, depressing but I guess thats human nature to need to feel important

 

that's literally the point of science

 

to depress people? haha jk. I dig it, just feel like life is pointless thats all

 

I mean to try to explain things we don't know, yet

 

Several mentions of scientist in this thread

Are these the same kind of scientist that lied about global warming ?

The same ones that make up names for wintery storms like a polar vortex ?

We dont need to be lied to by paid scientists about climate change, just so Loons can make us pay more in taxes.

The earth`s climate has changed back and forth for centuries now and will continue to go back and forth.

My .02

 

Obviously the only scientists that matter are the ones you agree with or who fit your mold of the universe.

 

Polar vortex isn't the name of a storm it's a type of storm

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polar_vortex

and

A common skeptic argument is that climate has changed naturally in the past, long before SUVs and coal-fired power plants, and this somehow tells us that humans can't be the main cause of the current global warming. Peer-reviewed research and simple logic show this is not the case.

It's important to know there are a number of different forces acting on the Earth’s climate. When the sun gets brighter, the planet receives more energy and warms. When volcanoes erupt, they emit particles into the atmosphere which reflect sunlight, and the planet cools. When there are more greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, the planet warms. It's worth remembering that without some greenhouse gas the Earth would be a ball of ice.

These forces are called "forcings" because they force changes in the global average temperature.

Looking at the past gives us insight into how our climate responds to such forcings. Using ice cores, for instance, we can work out past temperature changes, the level of solar activity, and the amount of greenhouse gases and volcanic dust in the atmosphere. Looking at many different periods and timescales including many thousands of years ago we've learned that when the Earth gains heat, glaciers and sea ice melt resulting in a positive feedbacks that amplify the warming. There are other positive feedbacks as well and this is why the planet has experienced such dramatic changes in temperature in the past.

In summary the past reveals our climate is sensitive to small changes in heat.

What does that mean for today? Over the past 150 years greenhouse gas levels have increased 40 percent mainly from burning of fossil fuels. This additional "forcing" is warming the planet more than it has in thousands of years. From Earth's history, we know that positive feedbacks will amplify this additional warming.

The Earth's climate has changed in the past and ice cores and other measures tell us why. Based on this knowledge, and other types of evidence we know the human emissions of greenhouse gases are warming the climate.

The 'climate changed naturally in the past' argument is a logical fallacy known as non sequitur, in which the conclusion doesn't follow from the arguments. It's equivalent to seeing a dead body with a knife sticking out the back, then arguing the death must be natural because people died naturally in the past. It fails to even consider the available evidence.

 

OZ, you are neither a scientist nor what you have posted is agreeable. Thus, you are lying and a crook. Amen.

 

http://www.nature.com/news/tree-growth-never-slows-1.14536