Creationism is a mental illness (Page 227)

zeffur: There are no time dilation laws. Prove time dilation actually occurs at relativistic speeds.. you can't. All you can prove is light curvature... an optical illusion.

Moving atomic clocks within a strong gravitational field isn't time dilation--it's an opportunity to calibrate the clocks at different altitudes from earth--they aren't moving at relativistic speeds--hence such claims do not actually support Einstein's claims. Time on the opposite side of the universe is still the same time--regardless of where you place the man-made time counting device.

As usual, you don't KNOW anything worth knowing & you certainly don't have any verified truth to offer...

Prattle on in vain, dummy...that's all that you ever do...

zeffur: re: "Monkyboi: Zeftur only says there is no proof because he's never actually researched evolution and knows nothing about it. "

Any time you can provide us with unbiased irrefutable evidence that evolution has been proven true or substantiated with a cogent explanation that is based on unbiased & verified facts, you let us know.

We'll be waiting for the Nobel Prize announcement--which will NEVER occur because A. you are a nitwit & ignoramus & B. evolution is an indefensible pile of imaginary crapola from every perspective...If it was real then you could prove it--which everyone KNOWS that you cannot do--that's why it is locked in pseudoscientific theory fairy tale land... No real original microbe, no real common ancestors, no series of proven mutations that can show kind-level evolution has ever occurred--you've got NOTHING true to offer. Evolution is nothing but absurd imaginary atheistic & nitwit beliefs--nothing more...

BelgianStrider: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_dilation

https://www.physlink.com/Education/Askexperts/ae433.cfm#:~:text=There%20are%20several%20direct%20proofs%20of%20time%20dilation.,passage%20of%20time%20than%20the%20one%20at%20rest.%29

https://www.energy.gov/science/doe-explainsmuons

OOOOOOOPS

Z's theory, negating time dilation - also claiming it is "not proved"-, does have real problems with extreme tiny short living objects called "muons".

Z also better stops to use his GPS systems and all his electrronic devices too, as they do contradict his theory that gravity has no impact on time dilation.

Z also needs to come with a mathematical model that contradicts Einstein's mathematical model. (Good luck Z).



Z tells us that science is "real" when it is "observable, predictable, testable, measurable, repeatable".

Einstein's model is "observable, predictable, testable, measurable, repeatable".
Though this "science" is, following Z, not correct !

Ain't Z's attitude very strange and full of double standards on that specific point ? (oooooooh ! That might be the "real relativity theory". The theory of "double standards" ).

BelgianStrider: Well for our amusement; Z just shows us again he is an anti-science YEC knowing nada about Einstein's theories and "observable, predictable, testable, measurable, repeatable" evidences of it.

TheloniousSphereMonk: Zefturd....do your own research, lazy sloth.

zeffur: re: "Monkyboi: ...do your own research..."

I'll take that as a tacit admission of failure on your part because we both know if you had proof, you'd be posted it here as fast as you can. It doesn't exist & you are still dumb & ignorant.

zeffur: re: "Bsr: Z's theory, negating time dilation - also claiming it is "not proved"-, does have real problems with extreme tiny short living objects called "muons".
"
"In nature, subatomic particles called muons are created by cosmic ray interaction with the upper atmosphere. At rest, they disintegrate in about 2 x 10E-6 seconds and should not have time to reach the Earth's surface. Because they travel close to the speed of light, however, time dilation extends their life span as seen from Earth so they can be observed reaching the surface before they disintegrate."
src: https://www.physlink.com/Education/Askexperts/ae433.cfm#:~:text=There%20are%20several%20direct%20proofs%20of%20time%20dilation.,passage%20of%20time%20than%20the%20one%20at%20rest.%29

I doubt that ^^ is true. Most of the muons are destroyed in the upper atmosphere. Those that occur at lower altitudes are likely a result of stronger cosmic rays penetrating further into earths atmosphere before they undergo collisions & muon decomposition. I'd ask if you have any proof, but I'm certain that you can barely even understand what you read on those websites. lol

re: "Z also better stops to use his GPS systems and all his electrronic devices too, as they do contradict his theory that gravity has no impact on time dilation. Z also needs to come with a mathematical model that contradicts Einstein's mathematical model. (Good luck Z)."

No, actually I don't. I don't have to have a replacement theory for something that has never been proven to be true--that is a dumb.

re: "Z tells us that science is "real" when it is "observable, predictable, testable, measurable, repeatable".

Einstein's model is "observable, predictable, testable, measurable, repeatable".
Though this "science" is, following Z, not correct !"

It is not proven. The time error that you are referring to occurs because GPS satellites have elliptical orbits which take them to different altitudes within the warped space around earth. It is the same cause of the error in atomic clocks. The corrections that are made are based on knowledge of those predictable variances. Once again--there is no relativistic speeds involved & thus no time dilation involved based on Einstein's theory.

You are still wrong, dumb, & believing everything that you read because you have no good common sense to think & understand otherwise.

re: "Ain't Z's attitude very strange and full of double standards on that specific point ? (oooooooh ! That might be the "real relativity theory". The theory of "double standards""

There is no double standard. That is just another false contradiction that you have imagined is real when in fact it isn't real---just like the other zillion times that you've imagined other false contradictions.

TheloniousSphereMonk: Zefturd....you're an idiot if you think a scientific theory can be proven in a chat forum.

zeffur: I'm very realistic. I think you are not very intelligent & you are a dumb posturing fool who has nothing to offer. At least BSr makes an effort to understand--even though he botches what he thinks he knows most of the time... You are just dumb, ignorant, & obviously posturing like the clueless troll that you have always been.

TheloniousSphereMonk: Oh, we're playing the compare game now.

zeffur: That's right--find anything else to deflect to... that's all you've got. Nothing worth considering.

TheloniousSphereMonk: Trust me, he doesn't make an effort to understand you. Your position makes zero sense and this is quite obvious to both him and myself.

BelgianStrider: "TheloniousSphereMonk: Trust me, he doesn't make an effort to understand you. Your position makes zero sense and this is quite obvious to both him and myself.
a few seconds ago "

yup I do totally agree with you.

Z is just an completely indoctrinated anti-science YEC

zeffur: Well gee.. now that you put it that way.. how could anyone possibly disagree with you 2 dummies?

BelgianStrider: "
zeffur: Well gee.. now that you put it that way.. how could anyone possibly disagree with you 2 dummies? "

That means: Z also confirms he is an indoctrinated anti-science YEC

zeffur: It means your combined intelligence is well below average & not even bright or honest enough to realize that God exists...

BelgianStrider:

Z is still not giving mathemathical equations that contradicts Einstein

Ooooooooh; yes, right, Z mentionned this:

"Z also better stops to use his GPS systems and all his electrronic devices too, as they do contradict his theory that gravity has no impact on time dilation. Z also needs to come with a mathematical model that contradicts Einstein's mathematical model. (Good luck Z)."

No, actually I don't. I don't have to have a replacement theory for something that has never been proven to be true--that is a dumb."

Does Z realize how anti-scientific that is ?
Whenever Z is peer reviewing a (scientific) statement and he claim it is not proven true or even false; well, it is expected from him to come with an alternative description, giving a better view.

Thus as Z refuses, to provide us an altenative mathematical model, Z just confirms the following:
- Z has no clue what he is talking about.
- Z does not posses the mathematical knowledge to give an alterrnative mathematical descrription of GRT
- Z even has not a replacement theory for something that he is convinced false. Probably because it puts his bronze aged book in troubles, Thus as it contradicts the word of god it has to be false. How to give a decent alterrnative ? Never mind, out of topic.
- Z thinks it is dumb, and in his point of view it is also correct. It is a classic anti-science YEC position. Though if that position is confirmed with evidences, he never presented them

BelgianStrider: "zeffur: It means your combined intelligence is well below average & not even bright or honest enough to realize that God exists..."

That might be true. (our below average IQ, though no evidences for that)

BUT:

That statement is clearly not a convincing compelling undeniable evidence that can prove god exists.

Nor a scientific observable, predictable, testable, measurable, repeatable observation that can make it a scientific theory of god's existence

We just can catalog that "input" to the classical "ad hominem" falacious argumentation.

Quite simple logic analyse

BelgianStrider: euuuh check mate?

(the question is not for Z of course)

zeffur: No. Just dumb as usual from you. I don't have to have a replacement theory or equations to think time dilation as YOU believe it is not valid/true. I also don't have to prove to you that time is universal. You whining that I do doesn't mean that I do.

So yeah, unless you are playing chess with yourself, you have no checkmate---you've only got your delusional beliefs--so, yeah--nothing new--that's how you roll.

BelgianStrider: "
zeffur: No. Just dumb as usual from you. I don't have to have a replacement theory or equations to think time dilation as YOU believe it is valid/true. I also don't have to prove to you that time is universal. You whining that I do doesn't mean that I do."

Damn', that is just what defines pseudosciences, even anti-sciences.

" I don't have to have a replacement theory or equations to ... "
" I also don't have to prove to (everyone) that ..."

When any guy (whatever his degree might be) states dogmatically that is false and he seemingly does not need to prove or to come with an altenative; we do call that "pseudo-science" (although many pseudo-scientist come up with totally irationality) . It even can go to "anti-science" when they totally refute science.

The thing, in "factual" science, is when peering one's findings, it has to find contradictional data ; even a totaly other theory if necessary. When, at the end, the proposed conjecture with the given scientific data, the mathematical equations, based on observable, predictable, testable, measurable, repeatable evidences for that model, it becomes a "scientific theory". When more and more data correlates with that theory, the different specialities has no importance, that theory gets more and more vaildated and more and more "factual".

That extreme weird part of science called QM has to be mentioned too, those "anti-conservatives" just do the oposite, they predict things before it ever can be observable, predictable, testable, measurable, repeatable. After decades they might get those evidences by "quite sheer of luck " i.e. Higgs Boson."

So Z, when disproving a (factual) theory, he better comes up with real evidences. If not Z is a total moron doing as usual total anti-science

Conclusion.
Quite enough data and testing confirms Einstein's theory. It has been, is and continues to be validated. We can say, with great confidence, the General Relativity Theory is "factual".
Z is claiming it is wrong but has no valid counterarguments, nor conjectures. He is a anti-science YEC and moron.

TheloniousSphereMonk: Zefturd...the fact that we don't make an effort to understand a complete idiot spewing nonesense, such as yourself doesnt make us stupid.

See, this is exactly what makes you stupid: your inability to understand basic concepts.

Nicotina: ^^^ Yes! ^^^

zeffur: re: "BSr: Damn', that is just what defines pseudosciences, even anti-sciences."

Wrong--as usual. You offer NO verified truth--hence there is no sound reason to accept what YOU choose to believe in. And no, no one has to disprove your unproven beliefs. You can believe in flying pigs if you wish & no one has to disprove your belief or provide an alternative belief--they have the option of rejecting your belief as insufficient. Don't like it? No one cares--get over your narcissistic self...

re: "When any guy (whatever his degree might be) states dogmatically that is false and he seemingly does not need to prove or to come with an altenative; we do call that "pseudo-science"...

Actually, we call that disbelief & rejection of a claim that such a person doesn't find sufficiently convincing...

re: "The thing, in "factual" science, is when peering one's findings, it has to find contradictional data ; even a totaly other theory if necessary. When, at the end, the proposed conjecture with the given scientific data, the mathematical equations, based on observable, predictable, testable, measurable, repeatable evidences for that model, it becomes a "scientific theory"."

You can call your belief whatever you want--it isn't proven true. Differences in atomic clocks that aren't approaching the speed of light do not confirm Einstein's theory--no matter how you pretend that they do. They show a device that is sensitive enough to change as it moves through warped space (or some other phenomena).

re: "When more and more data correlates with that theory, the different specialities has no importance, that theory gets more and more vaildated and more and more "factual"."

That ^^ is the problem--you aren't validating anything. You are saying--hey, these damn sensitive clocks don't keep time when they change altitude--what theory can we claim this supports. Well--Einstein's theory involves time dilation--whamo jamo--that's proof Einstein's theory is true!! Of course it isn't proof of that, but nitwits like yourself latch on to it & pretend it is 'more correleating & validating & more actual"--which is obvious code for you being a bandwagon riding mental midget who loves to promote unproven fiction as TRUTH!!!

re: "So Z, when disproving a (factual) theory, he better comes up with real evidences."

I don't have to disprove what has never been proven in the first place. I can disagree with some or all of it & reject some or all of it. Your goofy notions don't matter in the slightest as you have no truth to offer. You only have your biased & bogus beliefs.

re: Conclusion. Quite enough data and testing confirms Einstein's theory. It has been, is and continues to be validated."

Broad sweeping generalizations will almost always make you wrong. This is one of those times. Einstein has been proven wrong in some of his beliefs.

re: "We can say, with great confidence, the General Relativity Theory is "factual"."

Wrong--as usual. You can say some of what is written appears to be valid/true & some of it still cannot be confirmed as valid/true.

re: "Z is claiming it is wrong but has no valid counterarguments, nor conjectures."

That ^^ is just another lie from you. I have made my reasons known--not that you have any honest intellectual capacity to comprehend them...

re: "He is a anti-science YEC and moron."

Wrong--as usual. I accept all real science. Evolution is pseoduoscience & it is nothing but an absurd fairy tale for atheists & other nitwits. Pretend your imaginary beliefs are true all that you want--you can't prove any of your absurd & imaginary beliefs are valid/true & we all know it. Posturing in vain only shows how dishonest/delusional that you truly are.

Do you have ANY verified truth to offer or just more absurd beliefs??

Nicotina: It’s just a theory!