Satirical logic for the atheistic mind

[Godscreated]

I disagree, scientist are drawing conclusions about planets they have never seen

Scientists are creating hypotheses about bodies that have been measured (e.g. the intensity of light dips as the body passes in front of the star). They do this based on what they know about things that can unequivocally be measured, such as the atmosphere of the planet as the light changes as it passes across the star and comparing it to what we know about our own planet. From this they can draw hypotheses about what has produced the atmosphere. For example if it suggests an oxygen rich atmosphere, it is indicative of life. But if not, at the very least it has water.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraterre...atmosphere

 I never said we had not discovered planets, that very well may be the truth, the real problem is no one has seen a planet outside our solar system. The Hubble telescope can't even take a clear picture of Pluto and it is the best we have so how is it that any true conclusions can be drawn for a planet that we can't see. We have no idea what those great distances do to our view in deep space. Guess work is all it is.

GC

[Amarok]

Again you show you have no idea what your talking about

[I_am_not_mafia]

 I never said we had not discovered planets, that very well may be the truth, the real problem is no one has seen a planet outside our solar system. The Hubble telescope can't even take a clear picture of Pluto and it is the best we have so how is it that any true conclusions can be drawn for a planet that we can't see. We have no idea what those great distances do to our view in deep space. Guess work is all it is.

Visible light isn't the only way to peer into space. The ALMA radio telescopes for example measures radiowaves to see things obscured by gas clouds. This is used for learning more about star formation.

Astrophysicists do have a very clear idea of what those great distances do to their view. They use this knowledge all the time. For example by taking into account red shift and gravitational lensing. This has all been worked out, tested and works consistently. Occasionally some idea comes up raising the possibility that it doesn't work the way everyone thinks but then it gets tested and found to be incorrect.

I am not an astrophysicist so I can't explain quite why they know the things that they do. But I have worked with them and I do know that they can.

[Amarok]

No ones seen an exoplanet huh ?


Huh 


Huh

---

And i already addressed how they detect planets.Your ignorance does not make it guess work GC .

[Godscreated]

 I never said we had not discovered planets, that very well may be the truth, the real problem is no one has seen a planet outside our solar system. The Hubble telescope can't even take a clear picture of Pluto and it is the best we have so how is it that any true conclusions can be drawn for a planet that we can't see. We have no idea what those great distances do to our view in deep space. Guess work is all it is.

Visible light isn't the only way to peer into space. The ALMA radio telescopes for example measures radiowaves to see things obscured by gas clouds. This is used for learning more about star formation.

Astrophysicists do have a very clear idea of what those great distances do to their view. They use this knowledge all the time. For example by taking into account red shift and gravitational lensing. This has all been worked out, tested and works consistently. Occasionally some idea comes up raising the possibility that it doesn't work the way everyone thinks but then it gets tested and found to be incorrect.

I am not an astrophysicist so I can't explain quite why they know the things that they do. But I have worked with them and I do know that they can.

---

No ones seen an exoplanet huh ?


Huh 


Huh

---

And i already addressed how they detect planets.Your ignorance does not make it guess work GC .

Pretty pictures but you have missed something even astrophysicist say they have never seen a planet outside this solar system. They are looking for planet 9 in this solar system and can't even find it and say they may never. That is this solar system not one 10s of light years away.

[Amarok]

No astrophysics i know say that . And those pictures are planets outside our solar system .And their not alone.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_di...exoplanets

Scientists have taken the first snapshots of another solar system, ushering in a new era in astronomy.
The infrared images show a family of three giant worlds orbiting a young hot star in the constellation of Pegasus, 130 light years from Earth. A light year is the distance light travels in a year - 6trillion miles.
In another development also reported in Science, Nasa's Hubble Space Telescope photographed a single Jupiter-sized planet called Fomalhaut b orbiting a close neighbour of the Sun just 25 light years away.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/a...dawns.html

Your beliefs are wrong 
http://science.sciencemag.org/content/340/6132/572.full

[I_am_not_mafia]

Pretty pictures but you have missed something even astrophysicist say they have never seen a planet outside this solar system.

Why is it more important to observe a planet using visible wave lengths? You mentioned Pluto not being properly seen by Hubble but we knew that it was there and eventually we sent a probe out there (New Horizons) and got pictures back.

Strange how you insist on visible evidence when it comes to planets but not for gods.

[Amarok]

Pretty pictures but you have missed something even astrophysicist say they have never seen a planet outside this solar system.

Why is it more important to observe a planet using visible waves? You mentioned Pluto not being properly seen by Hubble but we knew that it was there and eventually we sent a probe out there (New Horizons) and got pictures back.

Strange how you insist on visible evidence when it comes to planets but not for gods.

And it's a fact he's still wrong we do have visuals

[I_am_not_mafia]

Why can Hubble get detailed views of distant galaxies but not of Pluto?

Galaxies are far away, it's true, but many of them are bigger than they are far, at least by comparison to the worlds within our solar system! Think about that for a moment -- how something that is millions of light-years away can still appear a thousand times bigger than something that's inside our own solar system.

So tempted to post the Father Ted clip ...

Anyway, anyone with experience of photography will understand. Sometimes you need a wide angle lense. Other times you need a zoom lense.

[brewer]

Aids scare morons... I tested positive for HIV in 1992 or 93 and I freely admit of an autoimmune deficiency which can lead to a surplus or tank my white cell count. which again has the same effect as AIDS. You did not 'catch anything as I offered that information.

If it's only an "AIDS scare" then you never had AIDS and no god was necessary. As if god is ever necessary. 

OMG, I had a gangrene scare but it turned out to only be a bad bruise.