ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 21st January 2020, 04:56 AM   #41
Tolls
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,971
Who knows what they'll argue.
This is only their third post, and the first one for 2 and a half years.
Tolls is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st January 2020, 05:09 AM   #42
zooterkin
Nitpicking dilettante
Administrator
 
zooterkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Berkshire, mostly
Posts: 44,565
Originally Posted by Tolls View Post
Who knows what they'll argue.
This is only their third post, and the first one for 2 and a half years.
See the links pzkpfw shared. While I'm in general agreement with you that it's usually best to wait and see what someone is actually going to argue, in this case I strongly suspect we'll just get a re-run of the same nonsense.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.Bertrand Russell
Zooterkin is correct Darat
Nerd! Hokulele
Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232
Ezekiel 23:20
zooterkin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st January 2020, 05:24 AM   #43
Puppycow
Penultimate Amazing
 
Puppycow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 24,653
So then is the argument that light traveling through empty space doesn't affect the empty space itself? If so, yeah that's basically true but only to the extent that empty space is truly empty. Which it isn't completely. There's a bit of dust still floating around out there.
__________________
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare
Puppycow is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st January 2020, 05:25 AM   #44
Tolls
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,971
Well, it was more that I wouldn't actually expect them to return.
Tolls is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st January 2020, 06:08 AM   #45
dann
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 9,374
I think it might bring Solon back if we post something about MSG sensitivity.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...8#post11893648
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...4#post11893684

I'll start:
'Chinese Restaurant Syndrome' - what is it and is it racist? (BBC, Jan. 16, 2020)
MSG in Chinese food isn't unhealthy - - you're just racist, activists say (CNN, Jan. 19, 2020)
SciShow: The Truth About MSG and Your Health
YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE
__________________
/dann
"Stupidity renders itself invisible by assuming very large proportions. Completely unreasonable claims are irrefutable. Ni-en-leh pointed out that a philosopher might get into trouble by claiming that two times two makes five, but he does not risk much by claiming that two times two makes shoe polish." B. Brecht
"The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions." K. Marx

Last edited by dann; 21st January 2020 at 06:15 AM.
dann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st January 2020, 06:11 AM   #46
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 88,413
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Also if I take a hammer outside the atmosphere does it still hurt if I smack myself in the face with it? Is there any empirical proof of this?
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st January 2020, 06:37 AM   #47
Dr.Sid
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Olomouc, Czech Republic
Posts: 2,361
Originally Posted by Mojo View Post
I’ve seen something like this before. I think the underlying claim might be that the heat and light we feel and see is somehow caused by an interaction between (cold, dark) particles* emitted by the sun and the Earth’s atmosphere.

*ETA: What I’ve managed to find after a brief search says that it’s “electric rays” causing friction in the atmosphere, so maybe we’re in Electric Universe territory.
But what question it's trying to answer, which cannot be answered by normal physics ?
Dr.Sid is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st January 2020, 07:17 AM   #48
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 23,560
Originally Posted by pzkpfw View Post
For reference:

ht tps://forum.cosmoquest.org/showthread.php?118217-Imaging-the-Suns-photosphere&highlight=solon

ht tps://forum.cosmoquest.org/showthread.php?115869-Seeing-Stars&highlight=

ht tps://forum.cosmoquest.org/showthread.php?140184-solon-s-fluorescence-process-thread&highlight=

etc

If I remember rightly, he thinks there's no "light" in space, and it's something magic in the atmosphere that turns whatever it is into visible light.

(Mangled URL's as I don't have the posting history yet.)
Thought it looked familiar
Captain_Swoop is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st January 2020, 07:32 AM   #49
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 19,232
The radiators on the ISS are always like this:

O ----------


and not like this

O |||||||

Could just be conspiracy though, I guess...
__________________
Up the River!

Anyone that wraps themselves in the Union Flag and also lives in tax exile is a [redacted]
3point14 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st January 2020, 07:45 AM   #50
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 14,713
Originally Posted by Puppycow View Post
So then is the argument that light traveling through empty space doesn't affect the empty space itself? If so, yeah that's basically true but only to the extent that empty space is truly empty. Which it isn't completely. There's a bit of dust still floating around out there.


Yes, I guess so. He's perhaps leaping to the (incorrect) conclusion that "space" is black and really cold.... and if the Sun were pumping out all this light and heat it should have lit and heated up "space" as well.......

Yet as you say, "space" only appears black because there's no matter there for the Sun's light to illuminate (though as you also say, "space" isn't truly totally black, on account of the tiny concentration of dust floating around which hasn't yet been captured by any of the planets' gravities).

I suppose this is also an apposite time to bring up the point that no object (that's to say, no object which does not generate its own electromagnetic energy in the visible spectrum) can be said to have "colour". A red billiard ball for example is not, of course, innately "red". Rather, it's the case that when one shines white light onto it, it absorbs all wavelengths of visible light except red - which it effectively reflects back outwards. And hence we see it (in white light) as "red"*.


* When I did my 30m scuba training, one of the things the instructor did as a (somewhat whimsical, but nonetheless very effective) test was to put a largeish ripe tomato into his BCD, then produce it when we were at 30m. At that depth, practically all the red end of the light spectrum has been removed by the water (which is of course why deep water often appears blue....). Before the dive, the instructor told me he'd produce an object at 30m and he wanted me to guess what it was. And of course - even though it was by no means really dark at 30m - all you can see is a black sphere. Could just as easily have been a black billiard ball.
LondonJohn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st January 2020, 09:00 AM   #51
halleyscomet
Penultimate Amazing
 
halleyscomet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 10,210
Originally Posted by pzkpfw View Post
If I remember rightly, he thinks there's no "light" in space, and it's something magic in the atmosphere that turns whatever it is into visible light.
Those links are a hoot. This has got to be one of my favorites:

Quote:
The light on the Lunar nearside is produced almost fully by a fluorescence process occurring on and above the lunar surface, and is not directly from the Sun, as there are no experiments that show the Sun emitting any transverse E/M radiation. The very thin, but much higher than expected electron density of the Lunar mesosphere, believed to be from ionised levitating dust, allows for very little 'conversion' of the Suns X-ray or EUV planewave emissions to light or heat.
We need to find a way to get Solon and Bjarne to have a debate. It would be hilarious to read.
__________________
Look what I found! There's this whole web site full of skeptics that spun off from the James Randy Education Foundation!

Last edited by halleyscomet; 21st January 2020 at 09:01 AM.
halleyscomet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2020, 12:46 AM   #52
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Nor Flanden
Posts: 31,740
Originally Posted by Dr.Sid View Post
But what question it's trying to answer, which cannot be answered by normal physics ?

“Where’s my Nobel Prize?”
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2020, 12:55 AM   #53
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 89,822
Originally Posted by halleyscomet View Post
Those links are a hoot. This has got to be one of my favorites:



We need to find a way to get Solon and Bjarne to have a debate. It would be hilarious to read.
If there was light in space it wouldn't be black!
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2020, 09:55 AM   #54
Crossbow
Seeking Honesty and Sanity
 
Crossbow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Charleston, WV
Posts: 12,839
Originally Posted by Solon View Post
I am searching for empirical scientific evidence that the Sun emits any heat (thermal infrared) or visible light when observed from outside of Earths atmosphere or outside of any other planet or moons atmosphere.
Acceptable proof would include a photograph of the Sun from clear space (not low Earth orbit) taken with the same type of equipment and exposure settings that we would use when photographing the Sun from Earths surface. e.g. film or digital camera and neutral density filter.
Direct measurement of the Suns heat using the same type of equipment that we use from Earths surface, e.g. a pyrheliometer.
Comments and observations on the appearance of the Sun from anyone who has been outside of low Earth orbit e.g. the Apollo astronauts.

Thank you.
By the way 'Solon', with your keen eye for detail, you may have overlooked the obvious fact that when the Apollo astronauts visited the Moon over fifty years ago, they were able to see where they able to see where they were going on the Moon and they were able to see the Earth thanks to the vast amounts of visible light that was produced by the Sun.
__________________
On 22 JUL 2016, Candidate Donald Trump in his acceptance speech: "There can be no prosperity without law and order."
On 05 FEB 2019, President Donald Trump said in his Sate of the Union Address: "If there is going to be peace and legislation, there cannot be war and investigation."
On 15 FEB 2019 'BobTheCoward' said: "I constantly assert I am a fool."
A man's best friend is his dogma.
Crossbow is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2020, 01:54 PM   #55
Solon
Student
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Vancouver Island
Posts: 35
Thanks for the many opinions expressed in the preceeding posts, but I see nothing that can be classed as empirical evidence. I'm sure you all know the definition of such. I am probably the biggest skeptic of all though, and with any subject, I do not believe what any so called experts claim, regardless of all the letters of qualification they may have after their names. I am quite capable of doing my own research.
In many cases though it is easier to look at what information is NOT available than what is available, and in the case of heat and light from the Sun it is the most simple experiments that have NOT been performed that is the give away. No photographs of the Sun from space taken with the same equipment that thousands of people use daily to view the Sun, something very wrong with that.
So yes, it is my belief that it is the interaction of the non-visible shorter wavelength solar emission with matter that creates visible wavelength light, which is a well known and empirically supported science.

abaddon:
"Is 36,000 miles orbit sufficient? How about 1,000,000 miles?"

Geostationary would be a good altitude to conduct some experiments, outside of the Van Allen belts. What a shame with all the satellites out there that none of them look AWAY from Earth, and do not carry a conventional camera even if they did. The direction of the view IS important, as to be looking in a direction where the line of sight to the Sun passes through any substantial amount of matter will not produce 'clean' results. The same applies to 1,000,000 miles too, or even 93,000,000 miles.

The Parker solar probe does not carry a conventional camera and solar filter.

Your eyes would see none of what SOHO detects, instrumentation is my specialty, but of course a true skeptic would need to do their own research and not believe what someone else tells them!

Last edited by Solon; 22nd January 2020 at 01:55 PM.
Solon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2020, 02:02 PM   #56
Dr.Sid
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Olomouc, Czech Republic
Posts: 2,361
I call troll, as usual.
Dr.Sid is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2020, 02:07 PM   #57
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 9,699
Solon, if you do not take the 'so called expert's word for it, who's possible evidence would you accept, considering the source?
__________________

Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect -Mark Twain

Truth is not what you want it to be; it is what it is, and you must bend to its power or live a lie -Miyamoto Musashi
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2020, 02:15 PM   #58
halleyscomet
Penultimate Amazing
 
halleyscomet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 10,210
Originally Posted by Dr.Sid View Post
I call troll, as usual.


I agree.
__________________
Look what I found! There's this whole web site full of skeptics that spun off from the James Randy Education Foundation!
halleyscomet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2020, 02:20 PM   #59
zooterkin
Nitpicking dilettante
Administrator
 
zooterkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Berkshire, mostly
Posts: 44,565
Originally Posted by Crossbow View Post
By the way 'Solon', with your keen eye for detail, you may have overlooked the obvious fact that when the Apollo astronauts visited the Moon over fifty years ago, they were able to see where they able to see where they were going on the Moon and they were able to see the Earth thanks to the vast amounts of visible light that was produced by the Sun.
And took many photos, using that light.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.Bertrand Russell
Zooterkin is correct Darat
Nerd! Hokulele
Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232
Ezekiel 23:20
zooterkin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2020, 02:32 PM   #60
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 19,653
Originally Posted by Solon View Post
abaddon:
"Is 36,000 miles orbit sufficient? How about 1,000,000 miles?"

Geostationary would be a good altitude to conduct some experiments,
Why? What experiments could be performed there that could not be performed elsewhere?

Originally Posted by Solon View Post
outside of the Van Allen belts.
Irrelevant to visible light.

Originally Posted by Solon View Post
What a shame with all the satellites out there that none of them look AWAY from Earth,
Why should they, that is not their task.

Originally Posted by Solon View Post
and do not carry a conventional camera even if they did.
What extra information would a conventional camera provide?

Originally Posted by Solon View Post
The direction of the view IS important, as to be looking in a direction where the line of sight to the Sun passes through any substantial amount of matter will not produce 'clean' results.
Which is avoided by the likes of DISCOVR or STEREO missons to name just two.

Originally Posted by Solon View Post
The same applies to 1,000,000 miles too, or even 93,000,000 miles.
1,000,000 miles is not outside the VABs? Really?

Originally Posted by Solon View Post
The Parker solar probe does not carry a conventional camera and solar filter.
False. Look up WISPR.

Originally Posted by Solon View Post
Your eyes would see none of what SOHO detects,
Why should they?

Originally Posted by Solon View Post
instrumentation is my specialty, but of course a true skeptic would need to do their own research and not believe what someone else tells them!
Then why were you unaware of WISPR, or STEREO or DISCOVR? I do not believe your claim to expertise at all.

Even moreso because I am a member at cosmoquest as well as here.

Sorry. I am with Dr. Sid and halleyscomet.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...
abaddon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2020, 02:44 PM   #61
Crossbow
Seeking Honesty and Sanity
 
Crossbow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Charleston, WV
Posts: 12,839
Originally Posted by Solon View Post
Thanks for the many opinions expressed in the preceeding posts, but I see nothing that can be classed as empirical evidence. ... remainder of posting snipped because of its nonsense ...
You do not know what you are talking about.
__________________
On 22 JUL 2016, Candidate Donald Trump in his acceptance speech: "There can be no prosperity without law and order."
On 05 FEB 2019, President Donald Trump said in his Sate of the Union Address: "If there is going to be peace and legislation, there cannot be war and investigation."
On 15 FEB 2019 'BobTheCoward' said: "I constantly assert I am a fool."
A man's best friend is his dogma.
Crossbow is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2020, 03:19 PM   #62
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 26,428
Originally Posted by Solon View Post
Thanks for the many opinions expressed in the preceeding posts, but I see nothing that can be classed as empirical evidence.
That is very wrong, Solon. This is empirical evidence.
Quote:
Empirical evidence is the information received by means of the senses, particularly by observation and documentation of patterns and behavior through experimentation.[1] The term comes from the Greek word for experience, ἐμπειρία (empeiría).
Many astronauts from Yuri Gagarin onward have observed light from the Sun from orbits around the Earth outside of Earths atmosphere. The ISS astronauts are currently doing just that!
The Apollo astronauts observed light from the Sun outside of Earths atmosphere, in transit to/from the Moon and from the Moon.
The ISS houses SOLAR which measures light from the Sun outside of Earths atmosphere.
There are spacecraft designed to measure light from the Sun (TRACE, STEREO, SOHO, Parker Solar Probe) which measure light from the Sun outside of Earths atmosphere.
There are spacecraft which have measured light from the Sun outside of Earths atmosphere indirectly, e.g. the lighting of asteroids and comets by the Sun.

Originally Posted by Solon View Post
I am quite capable of doing my own research.
Unfortunately this thread suggests that you are not capable of doing your own research. You asked a question that a few minutes of research would answer. There are millions of images of the Sun taken by solar observation spacecraft. View Current Solar Images has a list of solar image viewers.

Originally Posted by Solon View Post
...the same equipment that thousands of people use daily to view the Sun
Do you expect mobile devices to be used in the ISS and spacecraft ! What scientists use daily to view the Sun here on Earth is basically what the spacecraft use outside of Earths atmosphere. The astronauts who have and are observing light from the Sun outside of Earths atmosphere do use the same "equipment" - eyes.

A fantasy that matter absorbing "non-visible shorter wavelengths" will emit visible light which is not supported by "well known and empirically supported science". Most matter that absorbs any light will heat up and emit non-visible infrared light. An exception is fluorescence where some material absorbing ultraviolet light emits visible light.

"none of them look AWAY from Earth" ignorance, e.g. Hubble looks away from the Earth.

"conventional camera" ignorance. (Or maybe a delusion? I hope you are not demanding that solar observation spacecraft need to have film cameras !). Solar observation spacecraft have conventional, digital cameras.

"The Parker solar probe does not carry a conventional camera and solar filter." ignorance: WISPR. No mention of filters but that does not stop WISPR observing light from the Sun outside of Earths atmosphere. We already have images of the solar corona.

"Your eyes would see none of what SOHO detects" irrelevance. Solar and Heliospheric Observatory observes light from the Sun outside of Earths atmosphere.

Last edited by Reality Check; 22nd January 2020 at 05:04 PM.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2020, 04:53 PM   #63
Myriad
Hyperthetical
 
Myriad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Betwixt
Posts: 15,924
And are we really going to disregard space observations of the visible light from stars, which by all available evidence are similar to the Sun (with the degree of similarity depending on the size/class of star) but just farther away?
__________________
A zømbie once bit my sister...
Myriad is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2020, 04:58 PM   #64
Myriad
Hyperthetical
 
Myriad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Betwixt
Posts: 15,924
Oh, and an explanation of how fluorescence within the moon's atmosphere creates the illusion of incident sunlight, without diffusing that light to any noticeable degree (as can be seen from the sharp high-contrast shadows in all Apollo lunar surface photographs) would be interesting to read, and necessary for Solon's hypothesis to be consistent with the empirical findings.
__________________
A zømbie once bit my sister...
Myriad is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2020, 05:04 PM   #65
halleyscomet
Penultimate Amazing
 
halleyscomet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 10,210
Heat and Light from the Sun

Originally Posted by Myriad View Post
Oh, and an explanation of how fluorescence within the moon's atmosphere creates the illusion of incident sunlight, without diffusing that light to any noticeable degree (as can be seen from the sharp high-contrast shadows in all Apollo lunar surface photographs) would be interesting to read, and necessary for Solon's hypothesis to be consistent with the empirical findings.


Right. Like anyone who believes the crap Solon is pretending to peddle ever thinks things through.

Nonsense like this is like Creationism. It’s not real science, just pissing and moaning about things they wish weren’t real. Take Solon’s demand for just the right camera to be used. They’ll never be able to give a good reason why only that kind of camera would provide the proof they want. They just want to piss and moan and pretend they have a “gotya” rationale.
__________________
Look what I found! There's this whole web site full of skeptics that spun off from the James Randy Education Foundation!

Last edited by halleyscomet; 22nd January 2020 at 05:10 PM.
halleyscomet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2020, 05:15 PM   #66
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 26,428
Originally Posted by Solon View Post
I am quite capable of doing my own research.
Some more evidence that you are not capable of doing your own research is the "Solon" (presumably you) who started threads on CQ many years ago. If that is you then you have not learned anything from research in almost 9 years.
Imaging the Suns photosphere (2011-Jul-15) starts with incredibility about the HMI package on the Solar Dynamics Observatory which is a spacecraft measuring light from the Sun outside of Earth's atmosphere !
Goes onto ignorance that there are no images of "a round disk sun" taken from space because you are incapable of finding any of the millions of such images.

Seeing Stars (2011-May-23) has a OP mentioning "This image taken from the ISS, with a Nikon D1" which is certainly a conventional camera! Not the only camera on the ISS - List of cameras on ISS.

solon's fluorescence process thread (2012-Dec-09) is in the conspiracy theory area so not even science. Mentions your "The light on the Lunar nearside is produced almost fully by a fluorescence process occurring on and above the lunar surface" fantasy.

The above thread refers to Conjunctions (2012-Feb-05) also in the conspiracy theory area.
The only "science" from Solon seems to be a deluded crank who thinks most stars are planets, etc. (the ATM area is against the mainstream ideas).

From these threads your fantasy was and is probably still is that "much of the light we see from the Moon is the result of X-ray energy plane waves, or quasi plane waves being lensed, wavelength shifted, and turned into transverse waves, so that we can actually see them with our eyes, or cameras, or simple telescopes" + whatever you imagine fluorescence does.

Last edited by Reality Check; 22nd January 2020 at 05:59 PM.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2020, 06:20 PM   #67
Crossbow
Seeking Honesty and Sanity
 
Crossbow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Charleston, WV
Posts: 12,839
Originally Posted by Myriad View Post
And are we really going to disregard space observations of the visible light from stars, which by all available evidence are similar to the Sun (with the degree of similarity depending on the size/class of star) but just farther away?
And to make things even stranger, 'Solon' would have us to believe that for some bizarre reason that the only receiver of all of the vast amounts of energy that are produced by the Sun is the planet Earth.

However, for such an incredibly wrong idea to be true, then that would mean that the Sun has some sort of method for constantly focusing its energies to us on Earth as the Earth has been orbiting the Sun for the last few billion years.

While such an idea may make sense to some people, but for me this idea has to be about the most stupid idea that I have ever heard of.
__________________
On 22 JUL 2016, Candidate Donald Trump in his acceptance speech: "There can be no prosperity without law and order."
On 05 FEB 2019, President Donald Trump said in his Sate of the Union Address: "If there is going to be peace and legislation, there cannot be war and investigation."
On 15 FEB 2019 'BobTheCoward' said: "I constantly assert I am a fool."
A man's best friend is his dogma.
Crossbow is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2020, 09:05 PM   #68
cjameshuff
Critical Thinker
 
cjameshuff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 280
Originally Posted by Mojo View Post
I’ve seen something like this before. I think the underlying claim might be that the heat and light we feel and see is somehow caused by an interaction between (cold, dark) particles* emitted by the sun and the Earth’s atmosphere.

*ETA: What I’ve managed to find after a brief search says that it’s “electric rays” causing friction in the atmosphere, so maybe we’re in Electric Universe territory.
Definitely in Electric Universe territory, look at his comment history on physorg.com since he left BAUT/CQ. Even there, his idea (as far as his vaguely conceived gibberish qualified) was that electromagnetic transverse radiation required a medium and could not pass through vacuum. Something something hand-waving Compton scattering of electrons (there's the EU part!) turned light from invisible plane waves into transverse waves when it entered Earth's atmosphere...never mind that plane waves are just waves of any type with planar wavefronts, that all electromagnetic radiation consists of transverse waves (which can be planar, spherical, or whatever you want), that Compton scattering doesn't do that, etc.

Back on CQ, he'd dismiss any image he was shown because it couldn't be proven that it wasn't using some magical "wavefront sensor", that it was taken outside Earth's ionosphere (a requirement that sprang into being when he was shown images from LEO), that the instrument didn't have "gratings" (presumably diffraction gratings?) to convert the plane waves to transverse ones...at one point he proposed that the close inspection the Shuttle windows got after each flight wasn't to make sure they wouldn't blow out into vacuum on the next one due to impactor damage, but was to repair the "gratings" secretly placed on the windows so the astronauts could see outside.

He's also never really explained why there would be a worldwide conspiracy to hide the opacity of the vacuum to normal electromagnetic radiation in the first place.
cjameshuff is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd January 2020, 02:26 AM   #69
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 21,626
Originally Posted by Solon View Post
Thanks for the many opinions expressed in the preceeding posts, but I see nothing that can be classed as empirical evidence.
Because you don't want to find any.

Originally Posted by Solon View Post
I am probably the biggest skeptic of all though,

Yet you believe you're "sensitive" to MSG.

Originally Posted by Solon View Post
I am quite capable of doing my own research.
Go and do some then.

Originally Posted by Solon View Post
No photographs of the Sun from space taken with the same equipment that thousands of people use daily to view the Sun, something very wrong with that.
Ah the conspiratorial drivel.


Originally Posted by Solon View Post
So yes, it is my belief that it is the interaction of the non-visible shorter wavelength solar emission with matter that creates visible wavelength light, which is a well known and empirically supported science.
Bollocks.
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd January 2020, 02:31 AM   #70
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 21,626
Originally Posted by Crossbow View Post
You do not know what you are talking about.
Assuming it's the same person, and the posting style is identical, there's a nut active in the EU clogosphere using that handle who's being spouting the same drivel for years, including the same lies about images
Originally Posted by Solon???
Here is an image of the Sun, from Earth.
http://mcalisterium.files.wordpress....861-edit-2.jpg
200 mm lens ISO 50 f/13 1/8000 sec 10 stop ND filter 12:03 p.m.
What would the Sun look like, using the same set-up, from space? And why does no such image exist?
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd January 2020, 08:03 AM   #71
JeanTate
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 3,321
Originally Posted by Solon View Post
Thanks for the many opinions expressed in the preceeding posts, but I see nothing that can be classed as empirical evidence. I'm sure you all know the definition of such.
<snip>
Hmm ...

The online Mirriam-Webster dictionary gives these are definitions of "empirical":

1. originating in or based on observation or experience [as in] empirical data
2. relying on experience or observation alone often without due regard for system and theory [as in] an empirical basis for the theory
3. capable of being verified or disproved by observation or experiment [as in] empirical laws
4. of or relating to empiricism

When you use the term "empirical evidence", which of these four meanings of "empirical" do you use?
JeanTate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd January 2020, 08:16 AM   #72
Wolrab
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,645
Since the only way of testing this theory is observing the sun without any radiation being filtered through an atmosphere, and a spacesuit contains air between the visor and the eyes, I suggest having an astronaut (maybe solon will volunteer) step out of an airlock naked and report his observations.
__________________
"Such reports are usually based on the sighting of something the sighters cannot explain and that they (or someone else on their behalf) explain as representing an interstellar spaceship-often by saying "But what else can it be?" as though thier own ignorance is a decisive factor." Isaac Asimov
Wolrab is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd January 2020, 11:07 AM   #73
halleyscomet
Penultimate Amazing
 
halleyscomet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 10,210
Originally Posted by Wolrab View Post
Since the only way of testing this theory is observing the sun without any radiation being filtered through an atmosphere, and a spacesuit contains air between the visor and the eyes, I suggest having an astronaut (maybe solon will volunteer) step out of an airlock naked and report his observations.
No good. He'd just claim that the intraocular fluid is causing the same magical unicorn fart reaction he thinks is occurring in the atmosphere.

He claims to have what is fundamentally a religious belief. Science will not sway him.
__________________
Look what I found! There's this whole web site full of skeptics that spun off from the James Randy Education Foundation!
halleyscomet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd January 2020, 12:16 PM   #74
sts60
Illuminator
 
sts60's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,399
Hi, Solon! Long time since seeing you on the Conjunctions thread at Cosmoquest.

So, you never really answered the questions over in that thread. Or resolved the numerous contradictions in your arguments. Nor the numerous times you moved the goalposts after your latest “no evidence” claim was instantly refuted.

Now you’ve come in here with another goalpost move - “atmosphere” in place of “ionosphere”. But never mind, there were already examples provided on CQ of cameras outside any atmosphere showing images of the Sun. The kind of equipment equaled or surpassed by numerous Earthbound photographers. Please don’t come here pretending that wasn’t already pointed out to you.

And no, plane waves aren’t a special kind of EM wave, as we pointed out to you a bunch of times. There merely a representation of the transverse waves from distant objects.
sts60 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd January 2020, 12:17 PM   #75
sts60
Illuminator
 
sts60's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,399
Poor Solon ran away from the evidence over on CQ so fast that he kept running into himself going the other way. That led to numerous instances of him contradicting himself.
sts60 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd January 2020, 12:33 PM   #76
sts60
Illuminator
 
sts60's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,399
Originally Posted by cjameshuff View Post
Definitely in Electric Universe territory, look at his comment history on physorg.com since he left BAUT/CQ. Even there, his idea (as far as his vaguely conceived gibberish qualified) was that electromagnetic transverse radiation required a medium and could not pass through vacuum. Something something hand-waving Compton scattering of electrons (there's the EU part!) turned light from invisible plane waves into transverse waves when it entered Earth's atmosphere...never mind that plane waves are just waves of any type with planar wavefronts, that all electromagnetic radiation consists of transverse waves (which can be planar, spherical, or whatever you want), that Compton scattering doesn't do that, etc.

Back on CQ, he'd dismiss any image he was shown because it couldn't be proven that it wasn't using some magical "wavefront sensor", that it was taken outside Earth's ionosphere (a requirement that sprang into being when he was shown images from LEO), that the instrument didn't have "gratings" (presumably diffraction gratings?) to convert the plane waves to transverse ones...at one point he proposed that the close inspection the Shuttle windows got after each flight wasn't to make sure they wouldn't blow out into vacuum on the next one due to impactor damage, but was to repair the "gratings" secretly placed on the windows so the astronauts could see outside.

He's also never really explained why there would be a worldwide conspiracy to hide the opacity of the vacuum to normal electromagnetic radiation in the first place.
I posted before I saw your excellent summary; thank you.

Heh, I pointed out to him that I’ve been in several Shuttles, on the pad and in the OPF, and no they don’t have “gratings” on their windows. Of course, that was an example of how his frantic goalpost-shifting caused him to contradict himself, since by his own claim the Shuttle wouldn’t need such “gratings” since it was already operating in the ionosphere.

Solon, why are you so determined to cling to your beliefs that you ignore evidence and contradict yourself? What’s the point?
sts60 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd January 2020, 01:23 PM   #77
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 45,710
Originally Posted by Solon View Post
So yes, it is my belief that it is the interaction of the non-visible shorter wavelength solar emission with matter that creates visible wavelength light, which is a well known and empirically supported science.
I'm curious about how you think this process works. Does the sun emit at just one frequency, that the atmosphere converts into a broad spectrum? Does it emit a blackbody spectrum but just at higher temperature? What exactly is doing the frequency/wavelength conversion? Does any gas down-convert? Is it specific gasses in our atmosphere? Does the conversion produce random wavelengths, or only specific wavelengths? So many questions about your model.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd January 2020, 01:45 PM   #78
halleyscomet
Penultimate Amazing
 
halleyscomet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 10,210
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
I'm curious about how you think this process works. Does the sun emit at just one frequency, that the atmosphere converts into a broad spectrum? Does it emit a blackbody spectrum but just at higher temperature? What exactly is doing the frequency/wavelength conversion? Does any gas down-convert? Is it specific gasses in our atmosphere? Does the conversion produce random wavelengths, or only specific wavelengths? So many questions about your model.
__________________
Look what I found! There's this whole web site full of skeptics that spun off from the James Randy Education Foundation!
halleyscomet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd January 2020, 01:45 PM   #79
RecoveringYuppy
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 9,803
Originally Posted by Solon View Post
So yes, it is my belief that it is the interaction of the non-visible shorter wavelength solar emission with matter that creates visible wavelength light, which is a well known and empirically supported science.
So why can't that process happen on or in the Sun?
RecoveringYuppy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd January 2020, 01:51 PM   #80
Pope130
Illuminator
 
Pope130's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Oregon
Posts: 3,278
Wouldn't this require the atmospheric molecules which emit visible light to do so exactly at, and only at, 180 degrees to the source of the waves which excite them for the sun to appear as a discrete object, rather than as a diffuse glow? By example, hold a sheet paper up toward a distant light source. The paper is illuminated evenly, and shows no image of the source.
Pope130 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:37 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.