Touchy subjects at public events

On Mon, 08 Sep 2003 14:12:31 GMT, "mark d. doiron"
wrote:

no matter how well-versed one may feel in either their scientific or
religous convictions, i find that there's no point for two folks in the
above situation to argue the issue. that's because neither has the faintest
hope of budging the other, and there's lots of possibility of injured
feelings.

I think the issue can be addressed in a sensitive and matter-of-fact
manner without being offensive. I am glad in my own life that I was
respectfully challenged with the facts of astronomy as I was raised in
what many in this group would consider a fundamentalist environment.

As I stated in another message, I usually answer such questions with a
very high level Cepheid and Hipparcos (parallax) intro and hopefully
any person with questions in their own mind can go dig into the
subject a little deeper on both sides.

And I usually find the age question much more palatable than the UFO
ones. When UFOs come up, I find a way to make a graceful exit as quick
as possible. ;-)

---
Michael McCulloch

"Doogie Hoosier" wrote in message
m...
"mark d. doiron" wrote in message
...

no matter how well-versed one may feel in either their scientific or
religous convictions, i find that there's no point for two folks in the
above situation to argue the issue. that's because neither has the
faintest
hope of budging the other...

Methinks guys like him have very strong hopes of making guys like me
"see the light." But you're right, and I don't argue with them.

Right. What they're wanting is to hijack your observing session and use it
as a platform for themselves.

But they do give you opportunities to explain why we believe Andromeda is 2
million light years away (for instance). It takes a few steps, but...
(slightly simplified for popular audiences):


We know how far the moon is because we've been there.


We know how far the rest of the Solar System is because we know how these
objects move relative to each other, and with one accurately known distance
(Earth-Moon), all the others can be deduced.


We know how far a few dozen stars are because of parallax. That is, when we
view them from one side of the earth's orbit and then from the other, we see
them shift relative to the background stars, just as your finger shifts as
you move your head. Thus we can deduce their distances relative to the
earth's orbit.


From their distances, we can deduce their true brightnesses and correlate
this with other physical characteristics. In particular, some stars
(Cepheids) vary in brightness in a regular way, and this correlates how big
and bright they are.


So if we can observe the variations of Cepheids anywhere, we can figure out
their true brightness, and by comparing this to their apparent brightness,
we can figure out how far away they are.


This works even when we can see individual stars in other galaxies -- as we
can, in M31, with 60-inch and larger telescopes.


And that's why we think M31 is 2 million light years away.

"bwhiting" wrote in message
...
Yes, wasn't Usher's exact moment stated as Oct. 23, 4004 BC
at 9:30 am? It's a shame no one asked him if that was EST, GMT,
Pacific Daylight Time, or Chinese Standard time?? ;-)

No. Usher just left it as a year. It was subsequently "refined" by other
people.

Regards,

Chris

Mike, here is how to handle the UFO question real quick...I ask the
questioner, well, where are they now? Invariably, the answer is
something like...gone, left, no one knows, etc.

"You mean to tell me that creatures made a 40 year trip thru
interstellar space, expending all that time, materials, energy,
cost, just to make a couple of crop circles (or one pass over Lake
Michigan, abduct a lowly human, etc...whatever the current fad is)
and then LEFT? When we go to Mars eventually, taking a year to get
there, expending all that time, energy, cost, are we going to make one
pass over the highest mountain and then say, OK guys...pack it in...time
to go home!!?
Of course not...we are going to land, explore, experiment, etc.
Doesn't make much sense, does it?
Land one in my backyard in broad daylight, then I'll believe it,
but until then....forget it!" (this usually shuts them up cold
when they finally comprehend the folly of it).
Clear Skies,
Tom W.

PS...if the questioner continues, like more advanced, better propulsion,
etc. I inform them....I don't care if you are shoveling coal into
a furnace, or using matter anti-matter conversion engines, it still
takes the same amount of energy and time to go from point A to point B,
so it doesn't matter how advanced they are...it still one hell of a
wasted expenditure of energy and time, just for one pass over Lake Erie.
(and that usually ends the conversation about UFO's)



And I usually find the age question much more palatable than the UFO
ones. When UFOs come up, I find a way to make a graceful exit as quick
as possible. ;-)

---
Michael McCulloch

Now since Cain is one of the two sons of the first man, where the heck
did Cain's wife come from ? ????



Paterson, NJ.

"Michael A. Covington" wrote in message ...
"Doogie Hoosier" wrote in message
m...
"mark d. doiron" wrote in message
...

no matter how well-versed one may feel in either their scientific or
religous convictions, i find that there's no point for two folks in the
above situation to argue the issue. that's because neither has the
faintest
hope of budging the other...

Methinks guys like him have very strong hopes of making guys like me
"see the light." But you're right, and I don't argue with them.

Right. What they're wanting is to hijack your observing session and use it
as a platform for themselves.

But they do give you opportunities to explain why we believe Andromeda is 2
million light years away (for instance). It takes a few steps, but...
(slightly simplified for popular audiences):


We know how far the moon is because we've been there.


We know how far the rest of the Solar System is because we know how these
objects move relative to each other, and with one accurately known distance
(Earth-Moon), all the others can be deduced.


We know how far a few dozen stars are because of parallax. That is, when we
view them from one side of the earth's orbit and then from the other, we see
them shift relative to the background stars, just as your finger shifts as
you move your head. Thus we can deduce their distances relative to the
earth's orbit.


From their distances, we can deduce their true brightnesses and correlate
this with other physical characteristics. In particular, some stars
(Cepheids) vary in brightness in a regular way, and this correlates how big
and bright they are.


So if we can observe the variations of Cepheids anywhere, we can figure out
their true brightness, and by comparing this to their apparent brightness,
we can figure out how far away they are.


This works even when we can see individual stars in other galaxies -- as we
can, in M31, with 60-inch and larger telescopes.


And that's why we think M31 is 2 million light years away.

Be prepared for the following:

How do YOU KNOW how bright a "Sefid" is?

Have YOU ever been to another star?

Have YOU ever measured the distance to a "Sefid"?

Have YOU ever been to another galaxy? How do YOU know there are
"Sefids" there?

What make you think the scientists aren't lying about it?

You gonna take the word of a human scientist over the Word of God?

Have YOU ever been to the moon? How do you know ANYBODY has been
there?

Etc. etc. etc. And they always think they are so smart.

Sometimes it's not worth the bother. Best to wait until some curious
person actually *asks* the question.

CL
From: Craig Levine
CL
Subject: Touchy subjects at public events
CL
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 11:13:47 GMT
CL
Organization: Aliant Internet

Yet the optics retail business is controlled by such people! If
you chat with one of the saelchaps, when buying a scope to reveal
galaxies in the millions of light years distance range, they'll
cheerfully accept your business.
The answer to the 'conflict' is that the information in the light
that makes it look like it was emitted millions/billions of years ago,
was imprinted at the one instant of creation 6,000 yers ago.
You probably know the scriptures do not straight out give a 'date'
of creation. The lineage had to be traced, by human interpretation,
and that ended up in the 6,000 year range. Whether this is right or
not is an other issue.

CL In a similar vein, I was getting my eyes tested about four years ago.
CL The eye doc and I were chatting, and he asked if there were any
CL special requirements that needed to be accounted for in the
CL prescription, coatings i.e. do I spend a lot of time in front of a
CL computer etc. I mentioned astronomy and he said he was fascinated by
CL what's up there to. Great. He asked me what I get out of the hobby,
CL and one thing I mentioned was how it makes you think: The Andromeda
CL Galaxy - the light you see left the galaxy at about the same time our
CL distant ancestors left the trees. He flat-out said that he did not
CL believe that. Everything was created 6000 years ago. Man and dinosaur
CL existed together. Evolution is false. He wasn't preachy or trying to
CL convert me, but he was firm in his convictions.
CL
CL Hooo-boy. I haven't gone back.
CL
CL Cheers,
CL
CL - Craig
CL

---
þ RoseReader 2.52á P005004

"Doogie Hoosier" wrote in message
...
bwhiting wrote in message
...
Doogie Hoosier wrote:

bwhiting wrote in message
...

Yes, wasn't Usher's exact moment stated as Oct. 23, 4004 BC
at 9:30 am? It's a shame no one asked him if that was EST, GMT,
Pacific Daylight Time, or Chinese Standard time?? ;-)
Tom W.

My recollection is that Bishop Ussher wasn't taken very seriously for the
first hundred years or more after the published the calculation.
Admittedly, before geological or astronomical evidence was understood, many
people thought the earth was only a few thousand years old. (St. Augustine
was one exception -- he recognized at the beginning of the Middle Ages that
the earth might be very ancient.)

Then, in the 1800s, elaborate systems for interpreting Old Testament
prophecy became popular, mainly in America, and the 4004 B.C. date was an
integral part of such systems.

Please don't judge Christianity by the anti-intellectuals who heckle you at
star parties... who seem to forget that brains are part of God's creation
too!

In message , bwhiting
writes
Doogie Hoosier wrote:

bwhiting wrote in message
...

Yes, wasn't Usher's exact moment stated as Oct. 23, 4004 BC
at 9:30 am? It's a shame no one asked him if that was EST, GMT,
Pacific Daylight Time, or Chinese Standard time?? ;-)
Tom W.
Greenwich Mean.

Actually, I don't think GMT even existed as yet, in Bishop Usher's
day...wasn't that around 1800 or so, with British Shipping, and such?

The Royal Greenwich Observatory was responsible for providing time
synchronisation across London from around the 1700's onwards.

So GMT existed (clocks were a bit flakey) but the problem for time
keeping was that every locality more or less kept local solar time so
that almost every other decent sized cityMT also existed
independently.

It was were only sorted out after the railways made fast travel between
different local time zones an issue. ISTR Some west country gent
appearing "late" in a London court but armed with exceptionally smart
lawyers.

Regards,
--
Martin Brown

Steve wrote in message .. .

Now since Cain is one of the two sons of the first man, where the heck
did Cain's wife come from ? ????


Steve

I'm guessing here... How bout Africa?

Michelle Stone
Custom Telescopes by Plettstone
http://www.plettstone.com