Why is it not this simple??

163 posts / 0 new
Last post
Nyarlathotep's picture
Q: "Sorry but you can't take

Q: "Sorry but you can't take pictures with a telescope in 1992 and say that because the galaxies are moving apart means there was a big bang in the first place. That just simply means they are moving apart."

A: You grant that galaxies are moving apart in the future. This means they are moving together in the past. Hallelujah! You have seen the light!
Q: "Why can't they see the outer ring of this so called explosion? Now that would be something to see, for there would be absolutely nothing beyond it. But if you then turned the telescope the other way you should also see were the explosion occurred."

A: Why do you insist on using the cartoon description of the big bang as an explosion? Anyway there are several things that put fundamental limits on how far you can make observations. The biggest being the speed of light. You can only see light that has had enough time to reach you. After the inflationary epoch, there hasn't been enough time for light to travel across the universe because of the expansion. Also there is no classical center because it is an isotropic expansion.
Q:"But that's right there is not even one telescope that can see the flames of what is considered the closest star outside of our solar system."

A: Uhhh star's do not have flames, as they do not burn like paper (they do not undergo combustion.)

Lmale's picture
I belive i can help with a

I belive i can help with a point made by neil degrasse tenneson, imagine your on a boat on the ocean you have a circle you can see and no details beyond that circle. In cosmology we have a sphere we can see, based on our technology and the age of the universe (light from stars further away than 14 b light years simply has not had time to reach us), but that does not mean there is not more out there. We also suffer the illusion of being in the center as we see equal distance in all directions.
im pretty sure ive refuted this we cant see the closest star rubbish already, there are pictures easily available GOOGLE.

Chuck Rogers's picture
Stars moving apart, simply

Stars moving apart, simply God stretched out the Heavens.

You have no idea what a star is. Some of you claim the sun to be a star. From the pictures I have seen of the sun, it sure looks like flames on it to me. Now you say stars don't burn. Never the less neather you nor anyone else can see the surface, flames, or anything but emitted light from a star. You have no idea of what it is made up of or how it produces light. Nothing but that you can see emitted light.

Nyarlathotep's picture
Q: "From the pictures I have

Q: "From the pictures I have seen of the sun, it sure looks like flames on it to me."

A: What you are seeing is plasma boundary of the sun. At a temperature of 3000K and above hydrogen becomes a plasma and will become opaque to light in most wavelengths. Below that temperature it is transparent to most light. So you can't really see the surface of the sun either! What you see when you look is the boundary between the transparent hydrogen gas, and the non-transparent hydrogen plasma.
Q: "You have no idea of what it is made up of or how it produces light. Nothing but that you can see emitted light."

A: We know what the sun is made out of the same way we know what the stars are made out of. By examining the light emitted from them for spectral lines. There are different types of stars and this is one way to tell which kind a star is. This is also how redshift is measured. We know the sun is powered by nuclear fusion (not combustion like you suggested) directly from the collection of solar neutrinos. While (to my knowledge) no one has ever collected neutrinos from stars (it is pretty darn hard to collect neutrinos from our sun), the model fits.
Q: "Nothing but that you can see emitted light."

A: It is funny that you would say something like this, because emitted light is the best way to find out what something is made of.

Chuck Rogers's picture
In other words there is no

In other words there is no telescope that can see a star close up as we can the sun. It is possible that God simply made the stars to emit whatever color He wanted them to. Not hard for God.

So tell me, if telescopes can see and determine how many light years far away galaxies are, then why can't they see up close and personal the star they claim is closest to us outside of our solar system?

Nyarlathotep's picture
Q: "In other words there is

Q: "In other words there is no telescope that can see a star close up as we can the sun....then why can't they see up close and personal the star they claim is closest to us outside of our solar system?"

A: Of course not. The sun is about 92,000,000 miles away. The next closest star (Proxima Centauri) is about 24,000,000,000,000 miles away. That means Proxima Centauri is about 470,000 times further away than the sun. That is why pictures of Proxima Centauri don't look as nice as pictures of the sun. You might as well ask why a selfie taken at 1 foot shows good detail of your face, but a similar picture taken 100 milies (which is about the same ratio as above) from your face does not reveal much about your face.
Q: "It is possible that God simply made the stars to emit whatever color He wanted them to. Not hard for God."

A: We do physics assuming that we are playing a game against an honest opponent: that the laws of physics on the Earth are the same as the laws in the rest of the Solar system, and are the same as in the Alpha Centauri system. This is known as the principle of relativity, and every observation ever made agrees with it. But is it possible that a supernatural being is actively messing with the laws to trick us? Certainly, but that would make your god dishonest, and I would guess that is an idea you are not willing to entertain. This is why physicists (and especially religious physicists, and there are many of them) do not entertain this idea.

Chuck Rogers's picture
That doesn't make Him

That doesn't make Him dishonest if the stars are different than the sun. He never calls the sun a star. People just assume that they are, but until we can see them up close it is at best a guess.

God's word says that the stars will fall as figs. If they are like the sun and they fall they wouldn't look like figs falling would they.

Revelation 6:13 KJV
And the stars of heaven fell unto the earth, even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs, when she is shaken of a mighty wind.

It's possible that space is not at all like man kind thinks.

Why when NASA spends money like they do, (our money by the way) why can't they build a telescope that has a power source that they can send it into deep space? Why they would be able to get a lot closer to the star wouldn't they. Maybe you should send them an email and get them started on that. It shouldn't be as hard to do as landing crafts on mars.

Lmale's picture
Omg the idiocy, we lost track

Omg the idiocy, we lost track of two very famous probes because we dont have the technology to control anything past pluto, google photo of our nearest star there are decent pics of our nearest neighbours but no you just assume theres nothing so say theres nothing ffs theres are cameras on hubble soooooo sensitive that focusing them on stars we see without aid would destroy the camera.
You really working hard to avoid knowledge so you can say 'what evidence i see none' and you have a right to belive that but you dont have the right to make baseless claims.

Chuck Rogers's picture
Hey Lmale maybe God decided

Hey Lmale maybe God decided that He wasn't going to allow space crafts to be controlled past Pluto. And maybe He won't allow a telescope to be able to focus in on stars. Possibly because then you would see that they are not what you think they are until the tribulation period. What will you do then?

Ellie Harris's picture
What if I have 80 fairies

What if I have 80 fairies floating above my head. What will you do then? (sorry, I couldn't resist)

Zaphod's picture
A troll (/ˈtroʊl/, /ˈtrɒl/)

A troll (/ˈtroʊl/, /ˈtrɒl/) is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people,[1] by posting inflammatory,[2] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community.

I bring this up here because I can think of no other explanation for the ignorance shown by Chuck Rodgers other than he is a troll. I refuse to believe people can be this dumb so I think it is clear he is only pretending to be in order to rile people up (see inflammatory) knowing quite well that atheist can't stand blatant displays of ignorance and closed-mindedness. Our continued engagement continuously make atheist look stupid for even engaging in conversation with them.

In closing since he is so fond of telling us that we should prove God as he calls it does not exist, I think the burden of him proving he is not a troll should fall on him.

Lmale's picture
Yup im an atheist because god

Yup im an atheist because god did a piss poor job of convincing me he exists fine by me if thats the way you want it lol

Chris T.'s picture
I've never understood this

I've never understood this question. No matter which path one chooses, whether it be from a theological stand point or a scientific stance, both make the same claims. There is a top to the "pyramid" no matter which angle you argue. So something can not come from nothing? Using this logic, then there can never be. If something can not come from nothing, then where did a complex life form with infinite knowledge come from? Science doesn't have all the answers, and is humble enough to admit it, yet I find it more probable that nature is "God" and the eternal existence of gravity is to credit for existence. A quantum vaccum that "gives birth" to quarks seems more tangable than a fully functioning, complex, and intellectual being. It just seems more "natural". If it was by intelligent design, the universe was a very poor design. Most of it is too hostile for life. So why would a being, with infinite knowledge, build a place that is mostly a waste of space?

Lmale's picture
We make no claim on the

We make no claim on the origin of the universe that is not what the bbt is about. The bbt is about how everything came from energy not where the energy came from. Oh there are hypotheses but hypotheses are just reasonable suggestions that are not backed with enough observations evidence predictions to be a claim if they were they would be a theory which is a claim.

Chuck Rogers's picture
Yeah just because you can't

Yeah just because you can't give evidence of how it came to be from nothing. Oh yeah that can't happen. You only believe in the bbt because some man told you about it and showed you some pretty pictures lol. How gullible are you anyway.

Lmale's picture
Yet again no clue what a

Yet again no clue what a friggin theory is despite people explaing it many many many times in ways a 8 yr old would understand. The bbt made predictions that were accurate mae observations....wtf am i bothering you only disbelive them because you were toldt to and made sure you wouldnt learn about them.
You have no problem with thousands of scientific theories except the ones that contradict your book of plagerised myths, yet the same procedure was followed for every damn theory. You may as well go live in a cave if they are bulshit all of science has to be bullshit because all science uses the same damn procedures.
If you were an atheist im santa clause.

Lmale's picture
Look chicky just because you

Look chicky just because you dont understand it AT ALL does not make it untrue its a scientific theory that means its been tested so idiots like you dont have to understsnd it, however the documentary series how the universe works explains it in a way that even someone of your feeble intelligence could understand if you could bothered to learn about shit before trying to argue against it like any sane person would.
You dont see me arguing against the quran because i dont know about it.

Chuck Rogers's picture

Hey buddy I'm trying to let you know, those people that brainwash you don't care what it takes to get tax payers money. They will lie to you and tell you anything you are willing to listen to. They really just look through their millions of dollar telescopes think of something they can put in a magazine and they have you hook line and sinker. They are probably hoochin on a roach or bowl while under the night sky laughing their heads off saying "hey dude let's tell them that the color of the stars determines what kind of minerals they produce, they'll buy it man oh yeah dude let's do it. Hey man you ain't gonna smoke the rest of that, man pass it here man".

Naw couldn't be like that?

Hey Lmale God loves you. He wants you to know the truth. The truth shall make you free indeed.

Zaphod's picture
Yeah Lmale and they'll even

Yeah Lmale and they'll even go as far as to say crazy stuff like there's a god and he all powerful but for some reason always needs money.

Nyarlathotep's picture
He wants us to believe there

He wants us to believe there is a conspiracy involving every mathematician, physicist, and astronomer for the last 150 years (that is how long we've known to identity elements from the light they emit), because he can't reconcile physics which his religion. And the really sad part, there is no need for it: many mathematicians, physicists and astronomers are Christian! They don't have any problem believing that god made the universe in such a way that puny humans who work really hard can understand it. I guess they are part of the conspiracy too.

Chris T.'s picture
Seriously? The guy ,claiming

Seriously? The guy ,claiming an invisible man in the sky is watching his every move, is convicting another man ,that takes only impericle evidence, of "taking their word". Go see for yourself, download the chart, print it off, grab a telescope ( that thing those people use to see stuff far away), grab a prism ( that thing that separates color spectrums) and see what happens. Your seriously questioning something you can go see for yourself versus something you have to take at face value and can never test?

Chuck Rogers's picture
Sure it can be tested. All

Sure it can be tested. All you have to do is seek God with all your heart with no stipulations and He has to show you the truth. You then can accept Jesus as your saviour and switch from the losing side to the winning side. You will then have more than just a test, you will have truth you will stand on even if they threaten you with removing your head.

Nyarlathotep's picture
I am assuming you have done

I am assuming you have done more or less what you describe, so is it safe to say that you "have the truth" now? I'm sure Muslims and many other religious followers would make a similar claim. How do we know you have the truth and they don't?

Chuck Rogers's picture
All religions are based on

All religions are based on works, but one, and that is true Christianity. I had to do nothing but accept a gift. I don't get to Heaven because of something I have done. A gift is not a reward of services rendered, it is an unmerited gift from someone else's sacrifice. I don't work for my salvation, I work because of my salvation. It doesn't matter how bad a person has been, or how good a person may try to be, you can't get to Heaven by works. If we could then for one thing Jesus died for nothing. For another, no one will be able to claim they were good enough that we didn't need Jesus. Every one will give Jesus the credit, and not be able to brag on themselves. God hates pride.

Chuck Rogers's picture
There really is a lot more I

There really is a lot more I can put with that.
One of the greatest is, the innocent dying for the ungodly.

Lmale's picture
Lol a member of the religion

Lol a member of the religion responsible for the worst atrocities in written records had the cheak to say that.

Chuck Rogers's picture
Lmale we have been through

Lmale we have been through this before. You try putting everyone that claims to be Christians in the same religion. The Bible only supports independent churches. There is no were in the Bible of churches being in organizations. And I would say that it is very unlikely that you can find an independent church that is responsible for a war. And even if you could that wouldn't mean that all the rest of the independent churches would have anything to do with the one that started it.

Lmale's picture
You use a slightly edited

You use a slightly edited version of the same book, the same god, the same atrocities are in your book, the racism sexism homophobia the same endorsing of anti semitism slavery and rape, oh and trying to use the no true scotsman fallacy nawty boy.

Lmale's picture
Pride is not a sin pride is

Pride is not a sin pride is behind the greatest things man has accomplished ffs pride is why we went to the moon, you religion is against pride because its harder to brainwash ppl that have pride.

Chuck Rogers's picture

That is wrong, arguments, fights, and war's come from pride. Pride is someone claiming they are better than another or all others.
Proverbs 13:10 KJV
Only by pride cometh contention: but with the well advised is wisdom.

We are not to brag on ourselves. If someone does something that is noticeable, or above and beyond, it will most likely be acknowledged. And if it isn't so what. Someone else either has or will come up with it, whatever it is sooner or later. Being prideful again only claims the one saying, or being it, is better than someone else. We are supposed to be equal. If there was no pride in the world, there would be much much more peace.

Proverbs 16:18 KJV
Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall.

Proverbs 27:2 KJV
Let another man praise thee, and not thine own mouth; a stranger, and not thine own lips.

And worst of all.

Psalm 10:4 KJV
The wicked, through the pride of his countenance, will not seek after God : God is not in all his thoughts.


Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.