RE: The universe appears "old", but it is still less than 10,000 years old
December 3, 2013 at 5:20 pm
(This post was last modified: December 3, 2013 at 5:30 pm by orogenicman.)
orogenicman Wrote:Except that there is no evidence whatsoever that that is the case.
warped one Wrote:It’s a convention!! You do not look for evidence that supports the metric system over the imperial system.
Utter nonsense. It is not a convention. There is simply no evidence for your claim. AT ALL.
orogenicman Wrote:Yes it is, because there is only one observer, not two. The experiments for two-way speed of light measures the round trip speed of light between two points, hence the synchronization issue. This experiment eliminates that problem by only using one point of measurement. In other words, the starting and stopping point is at the same location, thus there is no synchronization issue. That they used mirrors to get the light back to the origin is irrelevant to the measurement because light reflecting off of a mirrored surface doesn't change velocity, only vector direction. That the entire apparatus rotates and they get the same results verifies the Michelson-Morley experiment. You should also read the last link.
warped one Wrote:No, that is still measuring the round-trip speed of light. Under ASC the light would leave the observer at 1/2C and return instantaneously after bouncing off of the reflector.
If you think that means it is measuring the two-way speed of light, you are mistaken. The problem with one-way speed of light measurements is one of synchronizing clocks at different locations. Because the measurement is being taken at the same location at different times, There is no synchronization issue. And as I have already pointed out, if there was a difference in velocities, there would also be a difference in frequencies; but there is no such shift. Rotating the apparatus in a gravity field and getting the same results proves the constancy of the velocity in all directions, and verifies (for the umpteenth time) the Michelson-Morley experiment.
And no sir, there is no evidence whatsoever that light in a vaccum ever travels at 1/2C and even less that it ever bounces off of anything resulting in it travelling instantaneously. None. Nada. Making shit up is not evidence. We call it dishonesty. Even if you are lying for Jesus, it is still a lie.
Optimistic Mysanthrope Wrote:I'm not sure that is the claim per se. I was under the impression that there is no common ancestor for plants and animals, for instance.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/articl...n-ancestor
Quote:One researcher put the basic biological assumption of a single common ancestor to the test--and found that advanced genetic analysis and sophisticated statistics back up Darwin's age-old proposition.
A new statistical analysis takes this assumption to the bench and finds that it not only holds water but indeed is overwhelmingly sound.
'The difference between a Miracle and a Fact is exactly the difference between a mermaid and seal. It could not be expressed better.'
-- Samuel "Mark Twain" Clemens
"I think that in the discussion of natural problems we ought to begin not with the scriptures, but with experiments, demonstrations, and observations".
- Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
"In short, Meyer has shown that his first disastrous book was not a fluke: he is capable of going into any field in which he has no training or research experience and botching it just as badly as he did molecular biology. As I've written before, if you are a complete amateur and don't understand a subject, don't demonstrate the Dunning-Kruger effect by writing a book about it and proving your ignorance to everyone else! "
- Dr. Donald Prothero
-- Samuel "Mark Twain" Clemens
"I think that in the discussion of natural problems we ought to begin not with the scriptures, but with experiments, demonstrations, and observations".
- Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
"In short, Meyer has shown that his first disastrous book was not a fluke: he is capable of going into any field in which he has no training or research experience and botching it just as badly as he did molecular biology. As I've written before, if you are a complete amateur and don't understand a subject, don't demonstrate the Dunning-Kruger effect by writing a book about it and proving your ignorance to everyone else! "
- Dr. Donald Prothero
