Debunking Alleged proofs against modern science

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion centers on the critique of scientific principles by a user presenting arguments against modern science, particularly regarding gravity, the tides, and the age of the universe. Key points include misconceptions about gravitational forces, the nature of redshift, and the validity of historical timelines. The conversation highlights the importance of scientific literacy and the need for clear communication in addressing misconceptions. Participants emphasize the value of evidence-based discussions to counteract misinformation.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of gravitational forces and their effects on objects.
  • Basic knowledge of redshift and its implications in astrophysics.
  • Familiarity with the Copernican principle and its significance in cosmology.
  • Awareness of scientific methods and the importance of peer review in validating theories.
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the principles of gravity and how they apply to celestial bodies.
  • Learn about redshift and its role in measuring the universe's expansion.
  • Explore the Copernican principle and its impact on our understanding of the universe's structure.
  • Investigate the scientific method and the peer review process in validating scientific claims.
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for students, educators, and anyone interested in understanding the fundamentals of modern science and addressing common misconceptions about scientific theories.

Tegewaldt
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
Hello fellow PF'ers!

I have been conversating with a strongly religious character for some time now, and thought i'd present some of his arguments to you. I have myself tried to explain the basics of the problems, but maybe some of you can have a laugh and go into further details as to why he may be wrong on these views.

>>well we could ask a fagmason if he can calculate the weight of the Earth (and they claim they can), then what's the weight of the ocean? so what amount of ((G)) would be necessary to hold the oceans on the ball?
okay say he says 6 gorillion g's. they say that's like some sort of strap force that's holding everything including the oceans on the spinning ball right?
well I'm standing next to the ocean and I'm not squished into a pancake? and a bug flies over the ocean and 6 gorillion g's doesn't squash that?

>>another one:
if the moon causes the tides because of its ((g)) force, why is it if i take a scale to the beach i weigh exactly the same as before the tide?

>>also:
if speed is relative as einswine says, then why use seatbelts in cars? lol

>>if the speed were relative to the car, i wouldn't fly around the inside of the car when it changes direction. the speed is transferred through the seat, which literally pushes me with the car. when we take out the passenger seat and someone drives the car, we fly to the back of the car, weeee

>>the ligo magnetic waves thing was a hoax. their bosses control the info they have to interpret. a week earlier they were hoaxed and ligo even made fun of all of them for believing it

Me:
"Redshifting, as well as the loss of energy from light photons traveling long distances affects the luminosity of the distant stars we see on the night sky. And most of them are so far away, that the expansion of the universe makes the light move away from us faster than it's moving towards us. Therefore, we only (currently) see the light from our closest stars"

>>yeah but the redshift scientists just got nosed because what they're publishing suggests that we're at the center of the universe (aha! angainst the "copernican principle", nihilism)...so the nose found out about them and they are shut down. can't namenames at the moment but the gist is the professor doing red shift things these days was shut down because he has been forced into the conclusion that we are in the center

>>we only have around six thousand years of human history. all the other history is fabricated from methods that are illogical and easily invalidated.
we can also add the oldest tree in the world is about five thousand years old

Have a good one
Disclaimer: I'm a High School student, so my arguments may be unprecise
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi @Tegewaldt

We cannot have an argument with a third party in absentia. It becomes frustrating for all parties involved.

If you yourself have specific questions, such as the scientific evidence for a specific theory, or the evidence against alternative theories then we can certainly discuss that. Also, you can encourage your friend to sign up here, although he or she should pay attention to the rules and recognized that they are enforced. We aren't here to argue, but we are here to educate and would enjoy explaining why scientists accept the current mainstream theories.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: m4r35n357

Similar threads

  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
3K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 69 ·
3
Replies
69
Views
17K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
7K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
5K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K