The distance of stars is based on the assumption of how big stars are and therefore how far away they have to be for their light to reach the earth. So...what if the stars are much closer than we think? If they are, then the calculations are way off. Scientists also sitll don't know if the light from the stars is reflected light from the sun or powered by hydrogen gas which is just a guess.
40 comments
The distance to the stars is not based on your silly assumption. Parallax, red shift and other methods are used to measure the distances to celestial objects.
You know, it's people like this that are the reason I don't have my flying car and my vacation on the moon yet. In the 50's they promised me a flying car and a vacation on the moon. Cairco, you owe me a flying car and a vacation on the moon.
What I suspected, you never heard of maths, radiotelescopes and the such, did you?, how do you think THE NASA OPERATES?
Yes... if the stars are much closer than we think, then the calculations that tell us that the stars are billions and trillions of miles away would be way off. Thankfully, they aren't, so you've proved exactly nothing. This is just another useless "what if".
Actually Adrian, you're also wrong.
Zipperback:
We know our sun is 93 million miles away, and we've measured the reflectivity of the moon's surface with our own light sources; armed with that information, we can work out how bright reflected sunlight would be at any given distance by observing solar reflection from the moon, which we've visited, so we know pretty well how far away that is. Further out than Pluto, Sol isn't much brighter than the other stars -- and solar reflection from Pluto is so faint we'll never see it from here without very powerful telescopes. The stars have to be generating their own light. It's rational to believe that other stars operate on the same or similar principles to our own, and ours can only be a fusion reaction based on its temperature and energy emissions. If the stars were as close as you believe they are, we'd all be dead.
Niali: Not only that, but the light from other stars bears a variety of different absorption spectra besides that of the sun, indicating that they are composed of different energy levels and elemental constituents, clearly coming from specific individual sources. This claim that scientists cannot even tell for sure whether stars generate their own light is, I believe, the single stupidest and most specious claim I have ever seen from Carico -- and that is saying a LOT!
To translate for everyone above (because I'm not certain Carico's mind could grasp the explanations):
Do not even touch astronomy, astrophysics, or anything else remotely to do with "up", Carico.demolish you.
Carico again, Mountain of fail
While I usually direct my posts as if it's author might read it, theres no point with carico. Carico will never learn about reality, I feel sorry for Carico and what's happened to her brain
Parallax...red shift...standard candles...Light lag. Scientist aren't as blind as you think they are. They can actaully look into the sky and tell you about more then you every could tell us about the universe looking into the Bible.
It is a book of Faith NOT a Book of Science
Quit getting to two mixed up
As an astronomer, I can only give you two words of advice:
ABSOLUTE. MAGNITUDE.
Look it up you blinkered, thick, pig-ignorant cunt .
"The distance of stars is based on the assumption of how big stars are and therefore how far away they have to be for their light to reach the earth. So...what if the stars are much closer than we think? If they are, then the calculations are way off. Scientists also sitll don't know if the light from the stars is reflected light from the sun or powered by hydrogen gas which is just a guess."
So, that interview for the job of senior astronomer/astrophysicist at NASA/JPL didn't work out for you eh, Carico? I wonder why...?!
Hey, Carico, here's an experiment you can carry out to help scientists with that 'powered by hydrogen gas' guess: sit yourself in a room filled half with hydrogen, half with oxygen and then -- quickly, before hyperoxia sets in -- strike a match.
Wow. Normally I would point out that astronomers have a number of methods to determine how far away stars are. Normally I'd point out that one of the most important methods for figuring out how far away stars are is the use of standard candles, which are objects with a known luminosity. That means that measuring the distance of stars relies more on brightness than size. There are also several different types of standard candles, so even within one method of measuring the distance of stars, you still have a number of different ways to measure how far away stars are, Normally I'd also follow this up by cautioning that I know absolutely nothing about astronomy and say that if you were interested, you really ought to ask someone who knows or read a book on the topic, because there is a good chance I might misrepresent astronomy because I'm so largely ignorant.
However, I don't think I need to add a disclaimer about my ignorance of the subject in this case because I'm dealing with someone who is so ignorant of astronomy that she thinks that stars might simply be reflecting the light of the sun. I wouldn't need to add a disclaimer about how my explanations might be faulty because I don't even know where to start explaining how wrong this is. I wouldn't even bother to so much as tell Carico to read a book, because I seriously question the ability of anyone this stupid to comprehend even the most basic of scientific explanations.
How is it that everything Carico writes seems to take stupidity and ignorance to such new, unexplored, vast and dizzying heights?
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
