The Goldilocks Zone
The Starmaker
it boils down to the keywords "just right".
The "Goldilocks Zone" is just another word for
"The Creation Zone".
Cause God looked at the Earth he created and...
"and God saw that it was good." -Genesis 1
another word for "just right".
The 'scientific community' don't like to envoke the Bible...
so they turn to 'fairy tales'...
The Starmaker
When Albert Einstein first heard about the Big Bang, he didn't like it
because it sounded too much like the Bible...
He told the big bang guy (Monsignor GeorgesLemaītre),
"Get the fuck out of here with that bible shit!"
Will in New Haven
> Okay, I figured out this "Goldilocks" scam...
>
> it boils down to the keywords "just right".
>
> The "Goldilocks Zone" is just another word for
>
> "The Creation Zone".
>
> Cause God looked at the Earth he created and...
>
> "and God saw that it was good." -Genesis 1
>
> another word for "just right".
>
> The 'scientific community' don't like to envoke the Bible...
> so they turn to 'fairy tales'...
What the fuck is "envoke," you illiterate loser?
--
Will in New Haven
>
> The Starmaker
>
> When Albert Einstein first heard about the Big Bang, he didn't like it
> because it sounded too much like the Bible...
>
> He told the big bang guy (Monsignor GeorgesLema tre),
dlzc
On Feb 24, 12:42 pm, The Starmaker <starma...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> Okay, I figured out this "Goldilocks" scam...
>
> it boils down to the keywords "just right".
>
> The "Goldilocks Zone" is just another word for
>
> "The Creation Zone".
>
> Cause God looked at the Earth he created and...
>
> "and God saw that it was good." -Genesis 1
>
> another word for "just right".
>
> The 'scientific community' don't like to envoke
> the Bible... so they turn to 'fairy tales'...
Not exactly, but probably close enough. We'd have enough in common
with organisms that grew up in a temperature / pressure range similar
to our own, that we could swap concepts based on physical examples.
Hard to do, if they see at different wavelengths, hear at different
frequencies, consider our atmosphere to be dangerously toxic, and so
on.
Consider too that if we did not make an occasional bow to Genesis, the
fundies would feel the need to convert us. No point in swerving the
boat around, if we appear to be moving it in the "right" direction in
the long run.
David A. Smith
David Johnston
>
I don't believe you've ever figured out anything.
The Starmaker
>
> On Feb 24, 2:42 pm, The Starmaker <starma...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> > Okay, I figured out this "Goldilocks" scam...
> >
> > it boils down to the keywords "just right".
> >
> > The "Goldilocks Zone" is just another word for
> >
> > "The Creation Zone".
> >
> > Cause God looked at the Earth he created and...
> >
> > "and God saw that it was good." -Genesis 1
> >
> > another word for "just right".
> >
> > The 'scientific community' don't like to envoke the Bible...
> > so they turn to 'fairy tales'...
>
> What the fuck is "envoke," you illiterate loser?
Learn English...
summon into action or bring into existence.
Dorothy J Heydt
No, no. He said, "God is subtle, but he is not malicious." Also
"God doesn't throw dice." Hey, he grew up in the late nineteenth
century.
--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
Should you wish to email me, you'd better use the gmail edress.
Kithrup's all spammy and hotmail's been hacked.
Paul Colquhoun
Learn to spell.
The words are "Invoke" or "Evoke".
"Envoke" is a brand of herbicide:
http://www.syngentacropprotection.com/prodrender/index.aspx?prodid=904
--
Reverend Paul Colquhoun, ULC. http://andor.dropbear.id.au/~paulcol
Asking for technical help in newsgroups? Read this first:
http://catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html#intro
Just Plain Nasty
@ix.netcom.com:
> Will in New Haven wrote:
>>
>> On Feb 24, 2:42 pm, The Starmaker <starma...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>> > Okay, I figured out this "Goldilocks" scam...
>> >
>> > it boils down to the keywords "just right".
>> >
>> > The "Goldilocks Zone" is just another word for
>> >
>> > "The Creation Zone".
>> >
No, you dolt. As explained in the original link that you cited, the
Goldilocks Zone is the portion of the cosmos where the conditions for
life to evolve are "just right", as in the Goldilocks and the Three Bears
fairy tale.
>> > Cause God looked at the Earth he created and...
>> >
>> > "and God saw that it was good." -Genesis 1
>> >
>> > another word for "just right".
>> >
>> > The 'scientific community' don't like to envoke the Bible...
>> > so they turn to 'fairy tales'...
>>
The Bible _IS_ a fairy tale.
>> What the fuck is "envoke," you illiterate loser?
>
> Learn English...
>
> summon into action or bring into existence.
>
If anyone needs to learn English, it's you! The word that means "summon
inot action or bring into existence" is INVOKE. "Envoke" is not a word in
the English dictionary, which you'd know if you could be bothered to use
one.
--
Just Plain Nasty - Sometimes, the truth hurts.
The Starmaker
The speling police.
You lack communication English skills. Understanding the English language means *knowing* what a person is
saying, not How he says it. You just don't have an understanding of the English language either. You're Just Plain Nasty!
>
> --
> Just Plain Nasty - Sometimes, the truth hurts.
The truth is, you're insane according to Einstein's definition of..insanity.
The Starmaker
>
> In article <4D66B4...@ix.netcom.com>,
> The Starmaker <star...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> >Okay, I figured out this "Goldilocks" scam...
> >
> >it boils down to the keywords "just right".
> >
> >The "Goldilocks Zone" is just another word for
> >
> >"The Creation Zone".
> >
> >Cause God looked at the Earth he created and...
> >
> >
> >"and God saw that it was good." -Genesis 1
> >
> >
> >another word for "just right".
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >The 'scientific community' don't like to envoke the Bible...
> >so they turn to 'fairy tales'...
> >
> >
> >The Starmaker
> >
> >
> >When Albert Einstein first heard about the Big Bang, he didn't like it
> >because it sounded too much like the Bible...
> >
> >He told the big bang guy (Monsignor GeorgesLemaītre),
> > "Get the fuck out of here with that bible shit!"
>
> No, no. He said, "God is subtle, but he is not malicious." Also
> "God doesn't throw dice." Hey, he grew up in the late nineteenth
> century.
Where's your dog Toto?
The Starmaker
>
> On Thu, 24 Feb 2011 12:52:37 -0800, The Starmaker <star...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> | Will in New Haven wrote:
> |>
> |> On Feb 24, 2:42 pm, The Starmaker <starma...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> |> > Okay, I figured out this "Goldilocks" scam...
> |> >
> |> > it boils down to the keywords "just right".
> |> >
> |> > The "Goldilocks Zone" is just another word for
> |> >
> |> > "The Creation Zone".
> |> >
> |> > Cause God looked at the Earth he created and...
> |> >
> |> > "and God saw that it was good." -Genesis 1
> |> >
> |> > another word for "just right".
> |> >
> |> > The 'scientific community' don't like to envoke the Bible...
> |> > so they turn to 'fairy tales'...
> |>
> |> What the fuck is "envoke," you illiterate loser?
> |
> | Learn English...
> |
> | summon into action or bring into existence.
>
> Learn to spell.
>
> The words are "Invoke" or "Evoke".
>
> "Envoke" is a brand of herbicide:
> http://www.syngentacropprotection.com/prodrender/index.aspx?prodid=904
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=envoke
2. to invoke emotion.
Who invented The Spel Police?
The Starmaker
>
> In article <4D66B4...@ix.netcom.com>,
> The Starmaker <star...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> >Okay, I figured out this "Goldilocks" scam...
> >
> >it boils down to the keywords "just right".
> >
> >The "Goldilocks Zone" is just another word for
> >
> >"The Creation Zone".
> >
> >Cause God looked at the Earth he created and...
> >
> >
> >"and God saw that it was good." -Genesis 1
> >
> >
> >another word for "just right".
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >The 'scientific community' don't like to envoke the Bible...
> >so they turn to 'fairy tales'...
> >
> >
> >The Starmaker
> >
> >
> >When Albert Einstein first heard about the Big Bang, he didn't like it
> >because it sounded too much like the Bible...
> >
> >He told the big bang guy (Monsignor GeorgesLemaītre),
> > "Get the fuck out of here with that bible shit!"
>
> No, no. He said, "God is subtle, but he is not malicious." Also
> "God doesn't throw dice." Hey, he grew up in the late nineteenth
> century.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8b/Einstein-cartoon1.jpg/220px-Einstein-cartoon1.jpg
He looks dangerous to me...
Michael A. Terrell
Paul Colquhoun wrote:
>
> On Thu, 24 Feb 2011 12:52:37 -0800, The Starmaker <star...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> | Will in New Haven wrote:
> |>
> |> On Feb 24, 2:42 pm, The Starmaker <starma...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> |> > Okay, I figured out this "Goldilocks" scam...
> |> >
> |> > it boils down to the keywords "just right".
> |> >
> |> > The "Goldilocks Zone" is just another word for
> |> >
> |> > "The Creation Zone".
> |> >
> |> > Cause God looked at the Earth he created and...
> |> >
> |> > "and God saw that it was good." -Genesis 1
> |> >
> |> > another word for "just right".
> |> >
> |> > The 'scientific community' don't like to envoke the Bible...
> |> > so they turn to 'fairy tales'...
> |>
> |> What the fuck is "envoke," you illiterate loser?
> |
> | Learn English...
> |
> | summon into action or bring into existence.
>
> Learn to spell.
>
> The words are "Invoke" or "Evoke".
>
> "Envoke" is a brand of herbicide:
> http://www.syngentacropprotection.com/prodrender/index.aspx?prodid=904
That explains his brain damage. :)
--
You can't fix stupid. You can't even put a band-aid on it, because it's
Teflon coated.
Ubiquitous
>Okay, I figured out this "Goldilocks" scam...
>
>it boils down to the keywords "just right".
>
>The "Goldilocks Zone" is just another word for
>
>"The Creation Zone".
>
>Cause God looked at the Earth he created and...
>
>
>"and God saw that it was good." -Genesis 1
And you posted this off-topic article here because?
--
"If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the
21st century."
The future of science
> "Get the fuck out of here with that bible shit!"
Neither is God in the universe nor is not.
God is in the universe but not of it.
Mitch Raemsch
Lofty Goat
> <snip> The 'scientific community' don't like to envoke the Bible... so
> they turn to 'fairy tales'... <snip>
What's the difference?
Seriously, I don't get it. If one ignores the errors in spelling,
grammar, science, reasoning and historical fact, this reads like the
punchline to that old that math joke: "... for sufficiently large values
of '2'."
-- RLW
Hunter
<star...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
---
There is no such word as "envoke". The Urban dictionary is a
dictionary for street colloquialisms, not officially taught English.
Such as axed:
1. Axed
An African American word for asked.
Jerome axed his mother for some money to go to the store.
by Maxwell Dec 17, 2004 share this
2. axed
1)Fired. Terminated from employment.
2) Cancellation of plans. Often because of outside circumstances.
1) "Homeboy got axed for goofing off at work."
2) "Yo, they axed the concert cuz the singer was all high."
by Jack Steranko Nov 29, 2003 share this
3. Axed
To die and or suffer a horrible fate & or meet some grisly end.
Did you hear about James? He got axed last night by Carey, she shot
him in the head then burned his body!
killed murdered maimed died slain
by Fusion235 Jun 12, 2007 share this
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=axed
------>Hunter
"No man in the wrong can stand up against
a fellow that's in the right and keeps on acomin'."
-----William J. McDonald
Captain, Texas Rangers from 1891 to 1907
The Starmaker
I'm from Brooklyn, ...I got wat is called 'street smarts'. Don't try talking 'official English' in brooklyn, you can get killed.
The Starmaker
Okay, let me put it this way...
The laws of English are not the same everywhere.
The laws of Physics are not the same everywhere.
The laws of physics only pertain to this region area. It's different in other regions.
The further out you go, you have to rewrite the rules...
You go to Brooklyn, ...you have to change the way you walk, talk, drive..
There is no such thing as 'official English'.
There is no Goldilocks Zone in other regions...
There is only one Earth...
What are you looking for another planet for, is the rent to damn high here?
The Starmaker
Looking for water? Next time it rains, stick out a plastic cup.
Paul Colquhoun
True, there is the civilised version, and the uneducated version.
| The laws of Physics are not the same everywhere.
|
| The laws of physics only pertain to this region area. It's different in other regions.
|
| The further out you go, you have to rewrite the rules...
If you have any proof of this, or even convincing evidence, you may be
up for the Nobel Prize.
| You go to Brooklyn, ...you have to change the way you walk, talk, drive..
|
| There is no such thing as 'official English'.
|
| There is no Goldilocks Zone in other regions...
Are you saying that there are no other regions in the entire universe,
this galaxy and millions of others, where a body can orbit with a
temperature suitable for liquid water to form on it's surface?
| There is only one Earth...
By definition.
| What are you looking for another planet for, is the rent to damn high here?
Curiosity, for the moment.
| The Starmaker
|
| Looking for water? Next time it rains, stick out a plastic cup.
Hunter
<star...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
-----
Since I live in New York City myself I know how dumb that statement
is.
DouhetSukd
> I'm from Brooklyn, ...I got wat is called 'street smarts'. Don't try talking 'official English' in brooklyn, you can get killed.
Not sure you got any version of smarts, dude. Not spelling ones, for
sure. And spare me the tough Brooklyn act, though it is a good try at
appearing less stupid.
The goldilocks thing is not necessarily religious in nature, you
nitwit. It just says that, at least for our type of lifeforms, the
conditions that allow us to live are very, very specific and have
little probability of happening.
However, there are many many star systems and we are finding more and
more planets. Even a low probability sometimes pays off across many
throws of the dice. And any species in our position could then think
itself unique.
Some religious folks use Goldilocks to further their position, yes.
But they only get away with it because few point out the flaw in their
argument.
You certainly wouldn't much damage with your "evokations".
The Starmaker
There are certain regions in NY I wouldn't advise you to explore...
The Starmaker
>
> On Feb 25, 1:57 pm, The Starmaker <starma...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
> > I'm from Brooklyn, ...I got wat is called 'street smarts'. Don't try talking 'official English' in brooklyn, you can get killed.
>
> Not sure you got any version of smarts, dude. Not spelling ones, for
> sure.
version 1.0
> And spare me the tough Brooklyn act, though it is a good try at
> appearing less stupid.
>
> The goldilocks thing is not necessarily religious in nature, you
> nitwit. It just says that, at least for our type of lifeforms, the
> conditions that allow us to live are very, very specific and have
> little probability of happening.
>
> However, there are many many star systems and we are finding more and
> more planets.
Give me a break with your "we are finding more and more" ...I heard that line before.
You guys cannot even agree what a planet is, or a definition...how can you possibly find
something you don't know the definition of?
Now a planet is a dot on the sun?
The Starmaker
*Your* 'laws of physisc'...those things you invent, are not even laws..
they appear to be 'laws'...but they are not. So it's easy to find
different
'laws of physics' in other regions. That which you call 'laws of
physics' are simply..
things that don't move. Like a fly caught in a web...
You go to London, and the driver seat is on the right side...and they
drive on the left side.
And it's not because it's a law.
>
> | You go to Brooklyn, ...you have to change the way you walk, talk, drive..
> |
> | There is no such thing as 'official English'.
> |
> | There is no Goldilocks Zone in other regions...
>
> Are you saying that there are no other regions in the entire universe,
> this galaxy and millions of others, where a body can orbit with a
> temperature suitable for liquid water to form on it's surface?
There you guys go again with this 'water thing'...
If you're looking for a planet with water, just get their weather
report. If you see clouds, chance of rain..
More than a foot of snow is forecast for the higher elevations of
Nevada, Arizona, Utah and Colorado this weekend. Snowflakes could even
fly in Las Vegas.
After hammering California with low elevation snow and flooding rain, a
storm system is moving on to drop disruptive snow across portions of
Utah, Arizona, New Mexico, and Colorado through Sunday.Eastern New
Mexico and West Texas will escape a storm system's low-elevation snow
and severe thunderstorms on Sunday, but not its potentially damaging
winds and resultant high fire danger. Extremely rare opportunities for
snow will continue for San Francisco and Sacramento into tonight, then
even down into some valleys around Los Angeles Saturday. Global
warming...give me a break, it's fuckin freezing here!!!
T Guy
> > | The Starmaker wrote:
> > |>
> > |> Hunter (Hunter) wrote:
> > |> >
> > |> > On Thu, 24 Feb 2011 15:21:58 -0800, The Starmaker
Name three.
One would be a start.
> You go to London, and the driver seat is on the right side...and they
> drive on the left side.
> And it's not because it's a law.
Why is it, then?
DouhetSukd
> Give me a break with your "we are finding more and more" ...I heard that line before.
>
> You guys cannot even agree what a planet is, or a definition...how can you possibly find
> something you don't know the definition of?
>
> Now a planet is a dot on the sun?
Hey, Brooklyn-dude, you are so smart! You totally, totally showed up
how stupid us science-dweebs are with that very clever call on our bs.
I am soooo impressed I'll just leave you at envoking lots more street
smarts out of your nether orifice. Must smell nice in your
neighborhood.
The Starmaker
all of them.
>
> > You go to London, and the driver seat is on the right side...and they
> > drive on the left side.
> > And it's not because it's a law.
>
> Why is it, then?
incidental.
The Starmaker
okay, i figured out this 'unusual weather'...
it's not global warming
it's not Human produced carbon dioxide
it's not man made c02
it's not Al Gore
The reason why it's snowing in Los Angeles..
the reason why it's fuckin freezing here...
it's because...of electro and magantic forces..
the North Pole is moving towards Los Angeles!
That cannot be disputed.
The Starmaker
Hunter
<star...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
------
Why? Did you realize how thoughtless your previous answer was?
>.
>The laws of English are not the same everywhere.
----
But there is accepted English and there is no word "envoke". I mean I
am not a spelling or grammar Nazi especially since I make many
mistakes in both many times, but I don't reject the rules, I do
accept that there are rules in standard English. I don't disregard
them and say they don't matter.
>
>The laws of Physics are not the same everywhere.
----
How can you reject the laws of physics? They are the same everywhere
(except passed the event horizon of a Blackhole and into its core,
then all bets are off) The laws of Physics is the same around a stat 1
billion light years away as they are on Earth.. Now if we were to
discuss a different parallel universe.....
>
>The laws of physics only pertain to this region area. It's different in other regions.
----
Nonsense. They are the same anywhere (except inside the aforementioned
Blackhole) If you can't understand that then this is why you don't
understand even the basics of science particularly biology or the
cosmos. Do you believe the Earth is flat?
>
>The further out you go, you have to rewrite the rules...
----
No you don't. Where the hell do you get that? I am not saying we know
the laws of physics totally. We will have a much better understanding
of physics 100 years from now and know doubt some things we believe
are rock solid now will not be then and even probably would be totally
wrong, Such is the nature of scientific knowledge, it marches on, but
if there is one thing for sure and immutable is that the laws of
physics ae the same everywhere. From our Earth to the next Galaxy-at
least in *this* Universe.
>
>You go to Brooklyn, ...you have to change the way you walk, talk, drive..
----
Human behavior and the laws of physics aren't the same thing. This is
the basis of your misunderstanding if you believe they are the same.
>
>There is no such thing as 'official English'.
-----
There is accepted English. I guess since you don't accept the rules of
English it is not surprising you don't pay attention to scientific
laws of nature.
>
>There is no Goldilocks Zone in other regions...
----
You mean in other solar systems? Yes they are. If a planet happens to
be the right distance from its star and its close to the size of Earth
(aroun 80% the size of Earth to about 1.5 to 2 times the size of
Earth) then the chance of life as we understand it will arise. The
variation would be the size and brightness of the star so the distance
and thickness of the Goldilocks Zone will vary, but it will be there.
>
>There is only one Earth...
----
Only one Earth, but chances are there are many Earth *like* planets,
almost certainly millions of them in our own Galaxy alone. I don't
know what you are going to do when we find one in a few years. Sort of
like when we got our first pictures of Earth from high orbit showing
once and for all it was round. Of course there are STILL flat Earth
crazies around despite this.
>
>What are you looking for another planet for, is the rent to damn high here?
>
>The Starmaker
-----
Why are you afraid that there could be others else where?
>
>Looking for water? Next time it rains, stick out a plastic cup.
----
Or on the Moon or on Mars, of course we have to actually dig for it.
If mankind had your curiosity we still be living in caves. After all
why learn architecture when a cave would do just fine?
The Starmaker
who said anything about New York City?
The Starmaker
I'm from Brooklyn, I don't even know where New York City is at!!!!
Is it uptown somewhere? You know, take the IRT to manhattan and get off
42nd street ...is that it?
The Starmaker
The Starmaker
my theory is, people who say they live in new york city actually live in manhattan...but since most people
who live in manhattan don't know how to spell 'manhattan' (or pronounce it), so say they live in new york city.
The Starmaker
You seem to be one of those....'wishful thinkers' that seems to overpopulate the 'scientific community'.
The Starmaker
Is the 'speed of light' a law of physics? It's not 'constant'...and the
number
you people 'set' if for is not the same in other regions.
>
> >
> > > You go to London, and the driver seat is on the right side...and they
> > > drive on the left side.
> > > And it's not because it's a law.
> >
> > Why is it, then?
>
> incidental.
they always drive on the wrong side of the road, they're british!
they probably brush their teeth the wrong way too...
and the women are ugly.
Hunter
<star...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
---
We've-that is humanity-have been finding planets left and right and
since you didn't refute the points I made you seem to have blinders
on. As for being int he scientific community the closest I've come is
the Science Channel on cable tv. Were are you getting your "ideas"?
dlzc
On Mar 1, 9:44 am, Hunter <buffhun...@my-deja.com> (Hunter) wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 18:17:29 -0800, The Starmaker
...
> >You seem to be one of those....'wishful
> >thinkers' that seems to overpopulate the
> >'scientific community'.
>
> ---
> We've-that is humanity-have been finding
> planets left and right and since you didn't
> refute the points I made you seem to have
> blinders on. As for being int he scientific
> community the closest I've come is the
> Science Channel on cable tv. Were are you
> getting your "ideas"?
Did you see the movie "Wanted"? I figure he's got some code for
deciphering belly button lint...
David A. Smith
The Starmaker
"Where do I get my "ideas"? From the same place the 'scientific community' gets theirs...
they look at the dark and they say..."That must be 'dark energy'!" They are in the 'guessing business'.
They 'guess' and it becomes Science 101. Before you know it, everyone is talking about 'dark energy'...
and if you dispute it or question it...they build atomic bombs and wipe out your entire race.
They are 'mad scientist'.
The Starmaker
The Starmaker
You forgot to add..
More and more information is pointing to the fact
piling on the edvience, piling on the understanding...
What's the count so far?...
There are 50 billion planets in the Milky Way galaxy?
"Left and right" is an understatement...
these people are magicians...
Do you want to know how many Earth's they already found? Or, what they call 'an Earth'?
A planet that is twice the size as the Earth is called "Super Earth"!!!
(i think the 'scientific community' got the idea from McDonalds...Super Size it!)
In otherwords...any fuckin thing near a sun, ..they gonna call it Earth. Earth Like, Super Earth, Super Size Earth, ...sky's the limit.
They might as well change the Headline to:
There are 50 billion Earths in the Milky Way galaxy
News at 11.
The Starmaker
How many people are on Earth? Take a sampling from China...
using the 'scientific community' rithmetic...there is a zillion people on Earth.
The future of science
> Hunter (Hunter) wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 18:17:29 -0800, The Starmaker
> > <starma...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
> > >Hunter (Hunter) wrote:
>
> > >> On Fri, 25 Feb 2011 14:24:12 -0800, The Starmaker
> > >> <starma...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
> > >> >The Starmaker wrote:
>
> > >> >> Hunter (Hunter) wrote:
>
> > >> >> > On Thu, 24 Feb 2011 15:21:58 -0800, The Starmaker
> > >> >> > <starma...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
> > >> >> > >Paul Colquhoun wrote:
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
According to science all stars are going to die with the universe.
We have to rely on God.
Mitch Raemsch
Hunter
<star...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
----
Last I looked Brooklyn is part of New York City and has been so since
1898.
Hunter
<star...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
-----
Well their guessing has produce things like nuclear reactors based on
scientific knowledge since atomic power is based on E=mc2. We have
gone to the moon and sent probes to other planets based on their
"guesses". GPS takes into account the "theory" of relativity.
Thanks for admitting you just pull it out of your ass though.
Hunter
<star...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
------
I thought you said grammar and spelling rules don't matter? And to be
specific I was born in Manhattan but I have lived in the Bronx since I
was 9 years old. And yes the Bronx is part of New York City since you
are so provincial and don't know wehre that is.
The Starmaker
Boy, you learn something new everyday...
The Starmaker
Where do you think the 'scientific community' got the idea 'dark matter' from?
Or "Super Size Earth"?
Hunter
<mitchr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On Mar 1, 3:29=A0pm, The Starmaker <starma...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>> Hunter (Hunter) wrote:
>>
>> > On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 18:17:29 -0800, The Starmaker
>> > <starma...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>>
>> > >Hunter (Hunter) wrote:
>>
>> > >> On Fri, 25 Feb 2011 14:24:12 -0800, The Starmaker
>> > >> <starma...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>>
>> > >> >The Starmaker wrote:
>>
>> > >> >> Hunter (Hunter) wrote:
>>
>> > >> >> > On Thu, 24 Feb 2011 15:21:58 -0800, The Starmaker
>> > >> >> > <starma...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>>
>> > >> >> > >Paul Colquhoun wrote:
>>
>> > >> >> > >> On Thu, 24 Feb 2011 12:52:37 -0800, The Starmaker <starma...=
>@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>> > >> >> > >> | Will in New Haven wrote:
>> > >> >> > >> |>
>> > >> >> > >> |> On Feb 24, 2:42 pm, The Starmaker <starma...@ix.netcom.co=
>m> wrote:
>> > >> >> > >> |> > Okay, I figured out this "Goldilocks" scam...
>> > >> >> > >> |> >
>> > >> >> > >> |> > it boils down to the keywords "just right".
>> > >> >> > >> |> >
>> > >> >> > >> |> > The "Goldilocks Zone" is just another word for
>> > >> >> > >> |> >
>> > >> >> > >> |> > "The Creation Zone".
>> > >> >> > >> |> >
>> > >> >> > >> |> > Cause God looked at the Earth he created and...
>> > >> >> > >> |> >
>> > >> >> > >> |> > "and God saw that it was good." -Genesis 1
>> > >> >> > >> |> >
>> > >> >> > >> |> > another word for "just right".
>> > >> >> > >> |> >
>> > >> >> > >> |> > The 'scientific community' don't like to envoke the Bib=
>le...
>> > >> >> > >> |> > so they turn to 'fairy tales'...
>> > >> >> > >> |>
>> > >> >> > >> |> What the fuck is "envoke," you illiterate loser?
>> > >> >> > >> |
>> > >> >> > >> | Learn English...
>> > >> >> > >> |
>> > >> >> > >> | summon into action or bring into existence.
>>
>> > >> >> > >> Learn to spell.
>>
>> > >> >> > >> The words are "Invoke" or "Evoke".
>>
>> > >> >> > >> "Envoke" is a brand of herbicide:
>> > >> >> > >>http://www.syngentacropprotection.com/prodrender/index.aspx?p=
>rodid=3D904
>>
>> > >> >> > >http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=3Denvoke
>> > >> >> > >2. to invoke emotion.
>>
>> > >> >> > >Who invented The Spel Police?
>> > >> >> > ---
>> > >> >> > There is no such word as "envoke". The Urban dictionary is a
>> > >> >> > dictionary for street colloquialisms, not officially taught Eng=
>lish.
>>
>> > >> >> I'm from Brooklyn, ...I got wat is called 'street smarts'. Don't =
>try talking 'official English' in brooklyn, you can get killed.
>>
>> > >> >Okay, let me put it this way..
>> > >> ------
>> > >> Why? Did you realize how thoughtless your previous answer was?
>> > >> >.
>> > >> >The laws of English are not the same everywhere.
>> > >> ----
>> > >> But there is accepted English and there is no word "envoke". I mean =
>I
>> > >> am not a spelling or grammar Nazi especially since I make many
>> > >> mistakes in both many times, but I don't reject the rules, =A0I do
>> > >> accept that there are rules in standard English. I don't disregard
>> > >> them and say they don't matter.
>>
>> > >> >The laws of Physics are not the same everywhere.
>> > >> ----
>> > >> How can you reject the laws of physics? They are the same everywhere
>> > >> (except passed the event horizon of a Blackhole and into its core,
>> > >> then all bets are off) The laws of Physics is the same around a stat=
> 1
>> > >> billion light years away as they are on Earth.. Now if we were to
>> > >> discuss a different parallel universe.....
>>
>> > >> >The laws of physics only pertain to this region area. It's differen=
>t in other regions.
>> > >> ----
>> > >> Nonsense. They are the same anywhere (except inside the aforemention=
>ed
>> > >> Blackhole) If you can't understand that then this is why you don't
>> > >> understand even the basics of science particularly biology or the
>> > >> cosmos. Do you believe the Earth is flat?
>>
>> > >> >The further out you go, you have to rewrite the rules...
>> > >> ----
>> > >> No you don't. Where the hell do you get that? I am not saying we kno=
>w
>> > >> the laws of physics totally. We will have a much better understandin=
>g
>> > >> of physics 100 years from now and know doubt some things we believe
>> > >> are rock solid now will not be then and even probably would be total=
>ly
>> > >> wrong, =A0Such is the nature of scientific knowledge, it marches on,=
> but
>> > >> if there is one thing for sure and immutable is that the laws of
>> > >> physics ae the same everywhere. From our Earth to the next Galaxy-at
>> > >> least in *this* Universe.
>>
>> > >> >You go to Brooklyn, ...you have to change the way you walk, talk, d=
>rive..
>> > >> ----
>> > >> Human behavior and the laws of physics aren't the same thing. This i=
>s
>> > >> the basis of your misunderstanding if you believe they are the same.
>>
>> > >> >There is no such thing as 'official English'.
>> > >> -----
>> > >> There is accepted English. I guess since you don't accept the rules =
>of
>> > >> English it is not surprising you don't pay attention to scientific
>> > >> laws of nature.
>>
>> > >> >There is no Goldilocks Zone in other regions...
>> > >> ----
>> > >> You mean in other solar systems? Yes they are. If a planet happens t=
>o
>> > >> be the right distance from its star and its close to the size of Ear=
>th
>> > >> (aroun 80% the size of Earth to about 1.5 to 2 times the size of
>> > >> Earth) then the chance of life as we understand it will arise. =A0Th=
>e
>> > >> variation would be the size and brightness of the star so the distan=
>ce
>> > >> and thickness of the Goldilocks Zone will vary, but it will be there=
>.
>>
>> > >> >There is only one Earth...
>> > >> ----
>> > >> Only one Earth, but chances are there are many Earth *like* planets,
>> > >> almost certainly millions of them in our own Galaxy alone. I don't
>> > >> know what you are going to do when we find one in a few years. Sort =
>of
>> > >> like when we got our first pictures of Earth from high orbit showing
>> > >> once and for all it was round. Of course there are STILL flat Earth
>> > >> crazies around despite this.
>>
>> > >> >What are you looking for another planet for, is the rent to damn hi=
>gh here?
>>
>> > >> >The Starmaker
>> > >> -----
>> > >> Why are you afraid that there could be others else where?
>>
>> > >> >Looking for water? Next time it rains, stick out a plastic cup.
>> > >> ----
>> > >> Or on the Moon or on Mars, of course we have to actually dig for it.
>> > >> If mankind had your curiosity we still be living in caves. After all
>> > >> why learn architecture when a cave would do just fine?
>>
>> > >> ------>Hunter
>>
>> > >You seem to be one of those....'wishful thinkers' that seems to overpo=
>pulate the 'scientific community'.
>> > ---
>> > We've-that is humanity-have been finding planets left and right
>>
>> You forgot to add..
>>
>> More and more information is pointing to the fact
>>
>> piling on the edvience, piling on the understanding...
>>
>> What's the count so far?...
>> There are 50 billion planets in the Milky Way galaxy?
>>
>> "Left and right" is an understatement...
>>
>> these people are magicians...
>>
>> Do you want to know how many Earth's they already found? Or, what they ca=
>ll 'an Earth'?
>>
>> A planet that is twice the size as the Earth is called "Super Earth"!!!
>>
>> (i think the 'scientific community' got the idea from McDonalds...Super S=
>ize it!)
>>
>> In otherwords...any fuckin thing near a sun, ..they gonna call it Earth. =
>Earth Like, Super Earth, Super Size Earth, ...sky's the limit.
>>
>> They might as well change the Headline to:
>>
>> There are 50 billion Earths in the Milky Way galaxy
>>
>> News at 11.
>>
>> The Starmaker
>>
>> How many people are on Earth? Take a sampling from China...
>>
>> using the 'scientific community' rithmetic...there is a zillion people on=
> Earth.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
>According to science all stars are going to die with the universe.
>
>We have to rely on God.
>
>Mitch Raemsch
-----
Since that will take 100s of billions even trillions of years for the
last star to wink out. The Sun itself will die in 5 billion years
taking the Earth with it so we don't have to worry about it.
David Johnston
> > Thanks for admitting you just pull it out of your ass though.
>
> Where do you think the 'scientific community' got the idea 'dark matter' from?
>
> Or "Super Size Earth"?
The idea of dark matter came from astronomers observing stars reacting
to gravity sources that could not themselves be seen. Super-size
"earths" were detected by their gravitational influence on the stars
they orbited.
Hunter
<star...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
---
Here is the explaination of the theory, and scientist will tell you it
is still just a theory:
In astronomy and cosmology, dark matter is matter that is inferred to
exist from gravitational effects on visible matter and background
radiation, but is undetectable by emitted or scattered electromagnetic
radiation.[1] Its existence was hypothesized to account for
discrepancies between measurements of the mass of galaxies, clusters
of galaxies and the entire universe made through dynamical and general
relativistic means, and measurements based on the mass of the visible
"luminous" matter these objects contain: stars and the gas and dust of
the interstellar and intergalactic medium.
According to observations of structures larger than galaxies, as well
as Big Bang cosmology interpreted under the Friedmann equations and
the FLRW metric, dark matter accounts for 23% of the mass-energy
density of the observable universe. In comparison, ordinary matter
accounts for only 4.6% of the mass-energy density of the observable
universe, with the remainder being attributable to dark energy.[2][3]
From these figures, dark matter constitutes 80% of the matter in the
universe, while ordinary matter makes up only 20%.
Dark matter was postulated by Fritz Zwicky in 1934 to account for
evidence of "missing mass" in the orbital velocities of galaxies in
clusters. Subsequently, other observations have indicated the presence
of dark matter in the universe; these observations include the
rotational speeds of galaxies, gravitational lensing of background
objects by galaxy clusters such as the Bullet Cluster, and the
temperature distribution of hot gas in galaxies and clusters of
galaxies.
Dark matter plays a central role in state-of-the-art modeling of
structure formation and galaxy evolution, and has measurable effects
on the anisotropies observed in the cosmic microwave background. All
these lines of evidence suggest that galaxies, clusters of galaxies,
and the universe as a whole contain far more matter than that which
interacts with electromagnetic radiation. The largest part of dark
matter, which does not interact with electromagnetic radiation, is not
only "dark" but also, by definition, utterly transparent.[4]
As important as dark matter is believed to be in the cosmos, direct
evidence of its existence and a concrete understanding of its nature
have remained elusive. Though the theory of dark matter remains the
most widely accepted theory to explain the anomalies in observed
galactic rotation, some alternative theoretical approaches have been
developed which broadly fall into the categories of modified
gravitational laws, and quantum gravitational laws.[5]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter
>
>Or "Super Size Earth"?
----
Its Super Earth and it only referes to the mass of the planet, from
twice the mass to 10 times the mass. Nothing more and we have found
531 confirmed planets that meet that description.
Wayne Throop
: As important as dark matter is believed to be in the cosmos, direct
: evidence of its existence and a concrete understanding of its nature
: have remained elusive. Though the theory of dark matter remains the
: most widely accepted theory to explain the anomalies in observed
: galactic rotation, some alternative theoretical approaches have been
: developed which broadly fall into the categories of modified
: gravitational laws, and quantum gravitational laws.[5]
:
: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter
Depends on what is meant by "direct". We'd normally count as "direct"
the observation of light either emitted or scattered from an object.
Dark matter doesn't interact with light in the usual ways, but it still
interacts with light via gravitation. There's at least one case where
two galaxies collided, and the non-dark matter got displaced from the
dark matter, and gravitational lensing shows where the dark matter is,
and no "normal" matter is.
I'd say that's fairly direct. About as direct as seeing somebody
in silouette from a light source behind them. True, the light is
interacting with gravity which is interacting with the dark matter,
rather than the light interacting with the dark matter. But it's
still quite direct, as such things go.
Mind you, I'd still count dark matter interacting with normal
matter which interacts with light which we interact with is indirect.
(The orbital speed distributions in galaxies, for example.) And even,
dark matter lensing more than expected for the viisible normal matter.
(Lensing around normal galaxies, for example.) But lensing with nothing
else around, and reason to expect dark matter there is fairly direct.
IMO. About the only thing more direct might be a directly detecting
gravitational interactions. But then... even a gravitational detector
would be doing something like shining lasers on very precisely aligned
masses, so lensing is only *slightly* less direct.
Wayne Throop thr...@sheol.org http://sheol.org/throopw
Hunter
<star...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
----
Yes the more we have evidence the more we understand.
>
>What's the count so far?...
>There are 50 billion planets in the Milky Way galaxy?
-----
That is the estimate from the Kepler telescope We have found only 531
actual planets so far, with a further 1,235 planet candidates and we
will find more.
>
>"Left and right" is an understatement...
------
Yes it could be since there could be more than 50 billion planets
After all our Milky Way Galaxy has about 300 billion stars in it
>
>these people are magicians...
----
No they just counted.
>
>Do you want to know how many Earth's they already found? Or, what they call 'an Earth'?
>
>A planet that is twice the size as the Earth is called "Super Earth"!!!
-----
It is super because of its size about twice the size of Earth to 10
times the mass. Nothing more. We have found about 35 of them.
>
>(i think the 'scientific community' got the idea from McDonalds...Super Size it!)
----
super-prefix
Definition of SUPER-
1a (1) : over and above : higher in quantity, quality, or degree than
: more than <superhuman> (2) : in addition : extra <supertax> b (1) :
exceeding or so as to exceed a norm <superheat>
(2) : in or to an extreme or excessive degree or intensity
<supersubtle> c : surpassing all or most others of its kind
<superhighway>
2a : situated or placed above, on, or at the top of <superlunary>;
specifically : situated on the dorsal side of b : next above or higher
<supertonic>
3: having the (specified) ingredient present in a large or unusually
large proportion <superphosphate>
4: constituting a more inclusive category than that specified
<superfamily>
5: superior in status, title, or position <superpower>
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/super-
Definition 4 fits the best America is a superpower, did McDonalds
come up with that?
>
>In otherwords...any fuckin thing near a sun, ..they gonna call it Earth. Earth Like, Super Earth, Super Size Earth, ...sky's the limit.
----
No any planet from twice the mass of Earth to 10 times the mass. The
smallest we have found so far is 3.3 times the mass of Earth.
>
>They might as well change the Headline to:
>
>There are 50 billion Earths in the Milky Way galaxy
>
>News at 11.
-----
They never claimed 50 billion Earths, just about 35, but there are
very likely billions of super Earths
>
>The Starmaker
>
>How many people are on Earth? Take a sampling from China...
>
>using the 'scientific community' rithmetic...there is a zillion people on Earth.
-----
What does the population of Earth has to do with the number of stars
in the universe? Considering how many stars there are in the Galaxy,
about 300 billion with about 20 % of them being like our Sun (60
billion) and given how fast we have found the super Earths there will
be billions of planets close to the size of Earth with a few billion
the near exact size of Earth. After all we have one in our own solar
system, called Venus which is 80.15% of the size of Earth.