Kreasionis met Jupiter se mane gepla

<< < (10/16) > >>

brianvds (December 05, 2012, 16:58:49 PM):
Hehehe, gaan kyk bietjie na die ou se nuutste bydraes:

http://litnet.co.za/Article/oor-jupiter-en-optiese-illusies

Hy is so mal soos 'n fokken haas. Ek kan nou sien wat aangaan: hy probeer sowaar nie my vrae ontwyk nie; sy kennis van die vakgebied is so min dat hy nie besef waarom my argumente absoluut fataal is vir sy idees nie. Hy verstaan nie eers die mees basiese aspekte van hoe gravitasie werk of waarom planete in 'n baan om die son bly nie.

Nou ja, nou weet ek nie of ek dan maar moet moed opgee met hom nie. Sulke doelbewuste, stiksienige onkunde is frustrerend. So nou wonder ek: antwoord ek sy skrywe vir die voordeel van moontlike waarnemers van die debat, of skryf ek hom nou maar af?

Sal sien of ek tyd en energie het vir nog...
BoogieMonster (December 05, 2012, 17:04:47 PM):
Die jammer deel is, hierdie tipe ouens sal gou gou agterkom jy't opgegee en dan koning kraai.

Dis nie jou skuld nie, en ek dink nogsteeds jy moet maar die handdoek ingooi. Dis net sad, is al.
cr1t (December 06, 2012, 12:13:49 PM):
Die jammer deel is, hierdie tipe ouens sal gou gou agterkom jy't opgegee en dan koning kraai.

Dis nie jou skuld nie, en ek dink nogsteeds jy moet maar die handdoek ingooi. Dis net sad, is al.


Die beste wat ons kan doen is nie om mense te oortuig hulle is verkuerd nie, maar net liewers hulle te wys hoe om meer rasionaal te dink.
Maar met die man is so ver in 'n hoek dat hy nooit sal kan verander nie. Miskien is dit maar better om kinders te wys hoe om te dink en die groot mense uit te los.
Faerie (December 06, 2012, 12:40:39 PM):

maar net liewers hulle te wys hoe om meer rasionaal te dink.

Ag, as daar maar net 'n pil was om hiermee te help. Dis godsonmoontlik (pun not intended) om hierdie tipe te probeer reghelp.
Mefiante (December 10, 2012, 23:01:14 PM):
Brianvds, I posted a response at LitNet to challenge fruitcake Kobus de Klerk’s assertion that the shadow of a spacecraft should be visible on a photograph of a large portion of Jupiter. My response is framed in terms of photographic resolution.

However, I neglected to point out that, in the offered pictures, even if it was possible, the photos themselves hadn’t been amplified enough to show the expected detail.

Moreover, there’s an inherent contradiction in de Klerk’s view: On the one hand, he maintains that we cannot be sure we’re seeing the Jovian moons, even with powerful hi-res telescopes, while at the same time saying that we can magnify an image sufficiently to discern the shadow of a small spacecraft. On the latter premise, we should be able positively to identify any Jovian moon after appropriate magnification. But de Klerk cannot have it both ways, as he demands. Either we can resolve an image sufficiently to reveal adequate detail, or we cannot.

Not that such inconsistencies can ever be sufficient to prod a wake-up from the imaginative confabulations that we have seen from de Klerk so far — please feel free to point them out, should you so wish. More invention is sure to follow but I have noticed that de Klerk appears to be increasingly frustrated with your counters… so, good job!

'Luthon64

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Skeptic Forum Board Index

Non-mobile version of page