Why not admit that Hubble is lost and gone ?

[threadworm]

I'm almost at the point that I wish smart people had never invented the concept of a an argumentative fallacy. There's too many people out there with only a bastardized surface level misunderstanding of them that think just screaming them is an argument.

I think there is a knee jerk tendency on all sides to fall back on these to the point where they become an argumentative fallacy in themselves - all you have to do is identify which fallacy you think a statement has fallen foul of rather than actually address the argument itself.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

There's a CT handbook??

Well, there's a theory that there's a handbook, the evidence is on YouTube.

 

[smartcooky]

I could give you chapter and verse on key positions taken by Nazi officers in the Manhattan Project.

And your prize is....

 

[tinribmancer]

Well, there's a theory that there's a handbook, the evidence is on YouTube.

Well, they all got their diploma's from The Youtube University, so that would make sense.

 

[Daniel]

Your shrill repetition of the word 'fallacy' does not stop your material (and I use the word 'your' advisedly) being garbage and sourced from an idiot.

1. Baseless 'bare' Assertion Fallacy: 'material garbage'.

2. Ad Hominem (Fallacy) and 3rd grade name calling: 'idiot'.

I have not decided on its idiocy in advance, or concluded it is garbage without looking.

1. Really, Prove it...?

2. And 'deciding' prior to or after you've looked @ something is Non-Sequitur (Fallacy) to the issue; unless, we were attempting to ascertain whether or not you were employing a Pre-Conceived Bias. Follow? (It's Rhetorical)

I have checked the material

1. Prove it...?

2. And please expand on your "Checked" here...How/What did you 'Check'...?

...confirmed it is garage

That's what we're after....HOW/What method did you use to "Confirm"....?
We want to VALIDATE your method to 'check' if there are ERRORS in Reasoning i.e., (Logical Fallacies).

Until you SHOW how you arrived @ your conclusion 'garage' (lol) so as to Coherently SUPPORT your Ipse Dixit, then it remains a TEXTBOOK... Ad Hominem and Baseless 'bare' Assertion Fallacy.

And what does 'garage' have to do with anything?

and drawn a reasonable conclusion about its author as a result.

Well after you post your method then we'll evaluate whether it was 'REASONable'.

Whining about ad hominems is a nice cop out for you isn't it?

Well if it walks/eats/quacks like a duck...it's a duck. And it's not a 'Cop Out' to point out Logical Fallacies when someone argues Fallaciously It's a 'Cop Out' (aka: Juvenile Diversion ) when the one employing Logical Fallacies complains about the one pointing out the Fallacious Reasoning in response to their coherent arguments. Why (??) well, Logical Fallacies....are Fallacious.

Bitching about all these supposed fallacies the world is employing against you...

The 'World' isn't... just you and your cohorts as Illustrated/Defined/Documented and explained in detail.

Bitching about all these supposed fallacies the world is employing against you nicely absolves you of any responsibility as far as backing up your argument...

I don't know about 'absolving' anything. Employing (aka: Carpet Bombing) Logical Fallacies (as you and your cohorts have demonstrably done) certainly stops the discussion because there are ERRORS in your Reasoning That's what Logical Fallacies are.

If someone calls you a brain dead moron, why not try demonstrating that they are wrong

1. You mean... like on a Playground?

2. Well it's a Baseless 'bare' Assertion (Fallacy) and Argument from Ignorance (Fallacy) until the "Claimer" SUPPORTS their Juvenile Caricature.

It's the Acme of Foolishness (Unsound Reasoning) to even attempt to consider 'disproving' Baseless Assertions/Arguments from Ignorance. duh

It's tantamount to somebody claiming that dark matter is created from Invisible 3 Toed Gnomes throwing pixie dust in a black hole behind the Crab Nebula and when Nobody has DISPROVED IT ---concluding that it's TRUE!


Do you have a coherent substantive 'adult' argument?? Or do you wish to continue to feebly bog/mire the discussion in irrelevant minutia in a clumsy attempt to 'CLOAK' your merit-less trainwreck position?? (We SEE You )

Thanks for Illustrating psssst...we already knew.


regards

 

[NoahFence]

1. Baseless 'bare' Assertion Fallacy: 'material garbage'.

2. Ad Hominem (Fallacy) and 3rd grade name calling: 'idiot'.





1. Really, Prove it...?

2. And 'deciding' prior to or after you've looked @ something is Non-Sequitur (Fallacy) to the issue; unless, we were attempting to ascertain whether or not you were employing a Pre-Conceived Bias. Follow? (It's Rhetorical)






1. Prove it...?

2. And please expand on your "Checked" here...How/What did you 'Check'...?





That's what we're after....HOW/What method did you use to "Confirm"....?
We want to VALIDATE your method to 'check' if there are ERRORS in Reasoning i.e., (Logical Fallacies).

Until you SHOW how you arrived @ your conclusion 'garage' (lol) so as to Coherently SUPPORT your Ipse Dixit, then it remains a TEXTBOOK... Ad Hominem and Baseless 'bare' Assertion Fallacy.

And what does 'garage' have to do with anything?





Well after you post your method then we'll evaluate whether it was 'REASONable'.





Well if it walks/eats/quacks like a duck...it's a duck. And it's not a 'Cop Out' to point out Logical Fallacies when someone argues Fallaciously It's a 'Cop Out' (aka: Juvenile Diversion ) when the one employing Logical Fallacies complains about the one pointing out the Fallacious Reasoning in response to their coherent arguments. Why (??) well, Logical Fallacies....are Fallacious.





The 'World' isn't... just you and your cohorts as Illustrated/Defined/Documented and explained in detail.





I don't know about 'absolving' anything. Employing (aka: Carpet Bombing) Logical Fallacies (as you and your cohorts have demonstrably done) certainly stops the discussion because there are ERRORS in your Reasoning That's what Logical Fallacies are.






1. You mean... like on a Playground?

2. Well it's a Baseless 'bare' Assertion (Fallacy) and Argument from Ignorance (Fallacy) until the "Claimer" SUPPORTS their Juvenile Caricature.

It's the Acme of Foolishness (Unsound Reasoning) to even attempt to consider 'disproving' Baseless Assertions/Arguments from Ignorance. duh

It's tantamount to somebody claiming that dark matter is created from Invisible 3 Toed Gnomes throwing pixie dust in a black hole behind the Crab Nebula and when Nobody has DISPROVED IT ---concluding that it's TRUE!


Do you have a coherent substantive 'adult' argument?? Or do you wish to continue to feebly bog/mire the discussion in irrelevant minutia in a clumsy attempt to 'CLOAK' your merit-less trainwreck position?? (We SEE You )

Thanks for Illustrating psssst...we already knew.


regards

I like my word salad with a nice topping of nuts.

 

[AdamSK]

In order to be a fallacy something has to be false.

No, not at all. A fallacy is an error in reasoning; the conclusion can still be true.

 

[Tomtomkent]

No... An ad hominim would be "This is wrong BECAUSE I find the author an idiot."
Whereas what was being said was the claim being wrong LEADS to the conclusion of idiocy.

Also: If we can walk outside and see Hubble, we know any claim it is not there is probably wrong, before reading the details of the claim.

At best you can claim why you do not believe it should be there...but again. We can see it. Ergo it is there.

 

[malbec]

No... An ad hominim would be "This is wrong BECAUSE I find the author an idiot."
Whereas what was being said was the claim being wrong LEADS to the conclusion of idiocy.

Also: If we can walk outside and see Hubble, we know any claim it is not there is probably wrong, before reading the details of the claim.

At best you can claim why you do not believe it should be there...but again. We can see it. Ergo it is there.

Problem is you cannot go outside and see Hubble .
Apart from it being billions of miles away by now , it never had any distinguishing marks . Like , a nose sticker saying , " Hello . Just call me Hubble ".

 

[Hans]

Real question about Hubble for our many space experts

When it transmits it data to earth what method is used to do that?

 

[Daniel]

Well, they all got their diploma's from The Youtube University, so that would make sense.

1. Stereotype Fallacy; 'They'.

2. Are you saying a 'Medium' (YouTube) is somehow Fallacious Please Grace us by Explaining HOW ON EARTH you arrived @ this trainwreck...?

This is on YouTube:

"Alright So, today we're gonna shoot down Newtonian Mechanics and Maxwell's Theory. We're like the Press, we build somebody up only to destroy them".
Ramamurti Shankar; Professor of Physics, Yale.
Quantum Mechanics I: The key experiments and wave-particle duality. (2:00 minute mark.)
www.youtube.com/watch?v=uK2eFv7ne_Q

Can you show WHERE the problem is...?


3. Do you have Special evo Mind Powers so as to have the ability to divine how these nameless faceless Stereotype Fallacy 'theys' got their education?

Let's TEST your Bind Conjecture Fallacious Acumen...what's my Favorite Color...?


So, mr. 'One-Liner' flyby: Let's find out where you got your diploma...

If there is no physical barrier between Earth's Atmosphere and Space, which there isn't...

"There's no clear boundary between Earth's atmosphere and space, says Dr Kevin Pimbblet, lecturer in astrophysics at the University of Queensland."
www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2010/01/13/2791372.htm

"There is no definite boundary between the atmosphere and outer space."
www.cs.mcgill.ca/~rwest/link-suggestion/wpcd_2008-09_augmented/wp/e/Earth%2527s_atmosphere.htm

"Some experts believe a definition of the boundary of space is impossible to create. Hans Haubold, senior program office at the UN Office for Outer Space Affairs (OOSA), noted that the atmosphere is too “fuzzy for a physics-based definition to ever be established” (Kois 2004)."
http://commons.erau.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1052&context=stm


Ergo...

How can you have a Vacuum (Space) attached to a Non-Vacuum (Earth) and still retain the Properties of a Vacuum and a Non-Vacuum in the same system, simultaneously....?

Can you explain this in a Law of Entropy context?

If there's a "Non Perfect" Vacuum surrounding the Earth's Atmospheric layers as we are 'TOLD', then there should be a colossal cascading chain of envelopment from the Exosphere to Thermosphere to Mesosphere down to your feet like dominoes faster than you can say "ENTROPY" until equilibrium is reached. Hard Stop!

So @ a minimum sir, How are you still breathing...?

This ALONE takes to the Woodshed and Bludgeons Senseless: "Outer Space"---IN TOTO, big bangs, black holes, "gravity waves" (lol),
"nasa", Moon Landings/Missions, Satellites, Hubble Telescope, Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMB), Every Single Last Codswallop Fraudulent Space Mission, Every Observatory, Every astrophysics/astronomy/cosmology department and Pseudo-Scientist Lying ---("Knowingly") Psychopath associated with them !

Go...?

 

[Tomtomkent]

Problem is you cannot go outside and see Hubble .
Apart from it being billions of miles away by now , it never had any distinguishing marks . Like , a nose sticker saying , " Hello . Just call me Hubble ".

Well, you might not be able to recognise any identifying features, but those of us capable of confirming it is not billions of miles away.

Have you ever tried?

 

[NoahFence]

Real question about Hubble for our many space experts

When it transmits it data to earth what method is used to do that?

Probably just radio waves, yea?

 

[Tomtomkent]

Real question about Hubble for our many space experts

When it transmits it data to earth what method is used to do that?

Four radio antenna on the array. Two broadcast radio signals for Control adjustments to orbits and targetting (like "Don't fall in the ocean") two for pictures. This is all half remembered and probably wrong.

 

[Daniel]

Real question about Hubble for our many space experts

When it transmits it data to earth what method is used to do that?

I'm just spit-balling here but...Is it possible the Telemetry Data can be 'transmitted' from another location?? And the content could be from, let's say... SOFIA (since it's essentially, the same damn telescope!)...?


HST Deputy Missions Operation Manager Mike Myslinski 'nasa' hasn't seen Hubble in 25 Years!! www.youtube.com/watch?v=1eEI7uKgSgA

Robert Bassano: "I have a half a dozen photos that I took off 'nasa's' website for Hubble and SOFIA and when I ran them through MATLAB'S Image Processing Toolbox for comparative analysis those images came from the same source....not from 330 miles above the surface of the Earth."

HST DMOM Mike Myslinski: "That's Interesting."


Mike, how bout

oy vey

 

[malbec]

Well, you might not be able to recognise any identifying features, but those of us capable of confirming it is not billions of miles away.

Have you ever tried?

As you amusingly admit that it has no identifying features , we can retire safe in knowing that it can never be seen .
Why try for the impossible ? Although in terms of a good post , you seem to , several times most days .
Check Mate

 

[Tomtomkent]

As you amusingly admit that it has no identifying features , we can retire safe in knowing that it can never be seen .
Why try for the impossible ? Although in terms of a good post , you seem to , several times most days .
Check Mate

Please quote me stating it has no identifiable features. I said YOU might not be able to spot any identifying features, but those of us capable of confirming it is not billions of miles away...


As in "those of us who can..."

As in: "It really is not difficult."

I am happy to clarify this.

 

[threadworm]

<BS removed>

How can you have a Vacuum (Space) attached to a Non-Vacuum (Earth) and still retain the Properties of a Vacuum and a Non-Vacuum in the same system, simultaneously....?

Can you explain this in a Law of Entropy context?

If there's a "Non Perfect" Vacuum surrounding the Earth's Atmospheric layers as we are 'TOLD', then there should be a colossal cascading chain of envelopment from the Exosphere to Thermosphere to Mesosphere down to your feet like dominoes faster than you can say "ENTROPY" until equilibrium is reached. Hard Stop!

So @ a minimum sir, How are you still breathing...?

Why don't we drop you off on the top of Mount Everest for a couple of hours without an oxygen mask and see how long you can continue to spout this nonsense?

This ALONE takes to the Woodshed and Bludgeons Senseless: "Outer Space"---IN TOTO, big bangs, black holes, "gravity waves" (lol),
"nasa",

Wait - you think you've disproved NASA?

Moon Landings/Missions, Satellites, Hubble Telescope, Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMB), Every Single Last Codswallop Fraudulent Space Mission, Every Observatory, Every astrophysics/astronomy/cosmology department and Pseudo-Scientist Lying ---("Knowingly") Psychopath associated with them !

How about you stop just puking out claims that these things aren't true and prove them? With some actual words, evidence, so on.

How about you tell me why what I see through my telescope is wrong? How about you prove a scientist lied? How about you prove I haven't seen satellites pass overhead, and the ISS, with my own eyes. How about you stop by the Apollo thread and see how well you fare in there?

Your style of 'debate' is transparent trolling. There was a time when people like you desperate for attention (or god forbid people who actually believed what they wrote) actually put some effort into their claims and tried to piece together some sort of narrative for their feeble and contradictory worldview.

Nowadays your run of the mill knee jerk CT troll just has to rolleyes and go yeah right, embolden a few copied and pasted phrases and voila, you're done. It's pathetic.

If I thought the only thing in life I had to give me a sense of self worth was to have people tell me what a moron I was all day I'd give up.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Can you explain this in a Law of Entropy context?

If there's a "Non Perfect" Vacuum surrounding the Earth's Atmospheric layers as we are 'TOLD', then there should be a colossal cascading chain of envelopment from the Exosphere to Thermosphere to Mesosphere down to your feet like dominoes faster than you can say "ENTROPY" until equilibrium is reached. Hard Stop!

So @ a minimum sir, How are you still breathing...?

Gravity. In the absence of a restraining force we could expect the earth's atmosphere to expand and diffuse into space. Gravity is the restraining force.

Why you then demand that people explain what gravity is in terms of entropy you have not made clear. Probably because you assume nobody here can do so. Of course the fact that you have clearly demonstrated incomprehension of even very basic mechanics suggests that you could not meaningfully grasp an explanation even if one was forthcoming. Most people here will be familiar with gravity as modelled by Newton, plenty will also have a grasp of Einstein's description in general relativity. I imagine few of us will even have heard of Verlinde's attempt to model gravity as an entropic force. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropic_gravity So it looks very much as if you are simply demanding the most obscure thing you can come up with in the hope of putting us on the back foot since nobody will understand what you're asking for.

It's irrelevant of course. The point is not in what different ways one can mathematically model gravity. The point is that gravity does indeed hold the planet's atmosphere in place as surely as the sun makes it light in the daytime. You don't need to know how gravity works any more than you need to know how the sun works in order to observe that they do indeed work. A Newtonian description is certainly more than adequate here and your bleating about entropy is the bluff of a scientific illiterate with nothing but a ready stock of cut and paste bait.

 

[ArmillarySphere]

I was in Tibet last summer. Funny enough the air was thin enough that I had problems walking up stairs.

How come stellar navigation works the way it should if the earth is a ball? Traveling straight north/south affects star azimuth angles directly proportional to the distance travelled.

How come the shadow of the earth during a lunar eclipse is always round no matter how high the moon is in the sky?

What's casting that shadow if the sun is in the sky elsewhere on the planet?