Godlike Productions - Discussion Forum
Users Online Now: 1,828 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 753,127
Pageviews Today: 1,380,454Threads Today: 655Posts Today: 11,360
03:26 PM


Back to Forum
Back to Forum
Back to Thread
Back to Thread
REPORT ABUSIVE REPLY
Message Subject The SUN is not a STAR -- Stars are not Suns, their light is different than the Sun. (SCIENCE IS A LIAR)
Poster Handle cloud.neko
Post Content
STARS don't shine yellow like the Sun, stars shine like the Moon. If stars were suns and were billions of miles further away than our sun, they "would" seem smaller but their color would not change, they would still shine the color of the Sun, yellow!

*
*

Stars would also be seen in the daytime, our blue sky would be sprinkled with specs of yellow, but stars are only seen at night after the sun has crossed over into the sunset.

*
*

No my friends the stars shine with the same light of the moon, same color, same intensity in respect to their sizes. The moon doesn't reflect the "sunshine" or then even stars should reflect this nighttime "sunshine" but they don't.

*
*
*

And stars twinkle, "I've never seen the sun twinkle, or the moon."

GOD made the stars twinkle (wink wink) so that you would not be fooled, so don't be a fool, and don't get fooled by Greek science.


"Stars twinkle because of turbulence in the atmosphere of the Earth. As the atmosphere churns, the light from the star is refracted in different directions."
[link to curious.astro.cornell.edu]


Ha, ha, ha, why does the "turbulence" only apply to the stars?


- The sun is outside of earth's atmosphere.
- The moon too is outside of earth's atmosphere.


Don't let the Greeks get you!
 Quoting: Tweety 643129



Yet again, here is Punisher with another bullshit post.


Again, you will NEVER be taken seriously with this pseudo science by anyone unless you can provide:

1: Verifiable data about your education such as diplomas held (other than your GED) and the school(s) from which you obtained them ( other than a Cracker Jack box).

2: Research data that is your own. See, the data against you is accepted in the scientific community and independent research is ongoing but it is acceptable to cite the research of others to support your theory when you are in-line with conventional science. In your case, you are fighting an uphill battle and will NEED verifiable and reproducible data that supports your theory other than copying and pasting mismatched pieces from scientific websites out of context.

3: At least 1 article of your own that has been reviewed by your peers and published in some sort of scientific journal.


This is just a small example as to how REAL science works, it isn't some mumbo-jumbo witch doctor crap. Real science is observable and experimental with reproducible results.

Keep trying Punisher, but no one really cares about your theories nor will you get conventional science to convert over.
 
Please verify you're human:




Reason for reporting:







GLP