95 | A telescope and a question

Putting right a wrong telescope and seeing if it is possible for an atheist to use the scientific method.

[Dx-ephm]

You are back. So happy. God bless you and give health, Sir.

[calebvanderwolf]

Thank you again my brother.
The dishonesty in science is truly staggering.
You are a brave man for speaking the truth. You have integrity, I'm of the opinion that integrity is the rarest thing on the planet.
Keep speaking out. You are in my prayers.

[roysammons]

Dr Stott, true to the Creator as always, God bless you.

My daughter was recently visiting from Africa (she's a missionary in Uganda) and she held an open day at our house. A Christian family brought a family member that wasn't a Christian. As I listened to him discuss his evolutionary ideas and later I chatted with him myself, he was all over the place. Maybe this, possibly that, it could have been this... on and on he went. He liked to display his big bang ideas and when I told him some top secular scientists don't even believe in the big bang he was stunned. I told him to do his research as it's all clearly found on the Internet. I pointed out the secular scientists "Best in the field theory" and even if they don't agree with things like the BB they will keep it until they can prove it wrong. So much for true science.

I would love this chap to have been able to play back his conversation with me and he would realise how bias he was being. Which leads me to the point that he too would have three 😂

Sorry for such a long comment as I know you are very busy. God bless you in His abundant grace.

[kenvanwyck]

Always a blessing Thanks Brother Stott!!

[knightclan]

Dr. Stott
I'm hoping you could do big picture video summarizing evidence(one or two facts) from each of the major science categories pointing towards a young earth.
More specifically towards a single catastrophic global flood with a single ice age that followed..
Thanks for the work you have done

[BrettCoryell]

8:58 "Not one experiment has given any clue as to where this information could come from without input from intelligence." Three questions: (1) Can you define information; (2) How can you measure it and what are the units; (3) How exactly does an intelligence create information?

[BrettCoryell]

Dr. Stott, thank you for being up front in correcting this very human mistake. Peer review is a good thing and I appreciate your integrity in putting the correction out there. Now let's talk about the bigger problems you didn't correct.

0:57 "The error was the telescope that gave the 10 mas parallax for Polaris. I came to the conclusion a long time ago that astronomy is on the wrong track." This wasn't the only error, though.

What you have shown in this video, by the time we get to the table at timestamp 4:12, is equivalent to taking your car to 6 different mechanics, showing the estimates from 3 of them, and asking us to believe that car repairs are fake because two of the estimates are off by 60%. Consider the following:

1. Why are you handling the error rates as hard boundaries instead of standard deviations? You haven't corrected your point about Hubble and Hipparcos being incompatible because their range of values don't overlap. You made a false statement and should correct all the conclusions you drew from that false statement.
2. Why are you only talking about the difference between Hubble and the LAT? You should look at the weighted average value of all the experiments. I did the math for you in episode 92.
3. Why not conclude the LAT experiment is flawed because it is outside the consensus of all other experiments and has, as you showed in your video, serious experimental difficulties?
4. Why not show the Gaia data in your table? It's by far the most accurate, so why hide it?
5. Why distract people with the size or ellipticity of the orbit? Errors in these experiments are dominated by optical factors, not the orbits.

Dr. Stott, you simply cannot compare multiple experiments without considering all the data and accounting for the different accuracy/error rates of each experiment. You made this same error in the speed of light episodes when you drew conclusions from, what was it, only 6 out of over 100 different speed of light experiments.

You have the academic training to do this the right way. Why aren't you? Is it because you came to a conclusion a long time ago and now you have to fit the facts to your prior conclusion?

[warrenlong]

Good to hear another one of your wonderful videos

[minimummins]

Great video . Thank you and God bless .

[BrettCoryell]

Thank you for the warm welcome back, Dr. Stott. You covered a variety of topics so I have several comments on this episode. Sorry for the spam. I agree with your conclusion that it IS possible for an atheist to do science. I think we also agree both theists and atheists have overturned an accepted paradigm. Both groups have had some people whose work is just not good enough to be accepted. Both have had some people who have been ostracized, perhaps even unfairly.

You've already agreed that just because someone isn't published doesn't mean they are being blacklisted. Therefore, not all people who have lost credibility are geniuses who are shut out by the establishment. That's just a conspiracy mindset. Accusations without good evidence. Each claim needs it own evidence and Hoyle is a good cast study in someone who hurt their own reputation with their own bad behavior and kooky ideas like panspermia that (you agree) never panned out.

[BruceP-of]

I really enjoy your postings. I would like to see some on how geocentricity works practically. Say in comparison to heliocentricity and rocket launches. Aren't they usually going east? If the earth is stationary, why would it make a difference? Thanks so much for what you are doing.

[PremVijay-mb]

thx sir for you all VD❤ iam from indonesia GBU❤

[glywnniswells]

Is there a good web site to view star and planet pics that are just ordinary raw pics as seen by eye through a telescope?

[MyHomeIsOK]

Another great installment Philip! Thanx much for your time and effort putting this together. I'm of the opinion that 1.65K subscribers is just too small for this content. Have you considered collaborating with someone else to expand your audience? John Lennox perhaps?

[BrettCoryell]

Spontaneous generation and abiogenesis are wholly separate topics. Pasteur has nothing at all to do with abiogenesis.

[Loading.....]

Hello Sir Stott, is it according to your accent why you pronounce it as 'Evilution' ? Or that's how you mean it to be?

[rf]

I notice that you are cherry picking from the bible again. My turn. Paul contrived his own theology, giving no credit to anybody. In Galatians he clearly contradicts jesus several times. In 1 Corinthians 4.15 he says "in christ jesus I became your father through the gospel", Paul's own, of course. In 1 Corinthians 15.5 he says jesus appeared to the twelve, after crucifixion. Oddly, Paul did not believe in virgin birth, but hardly anybody did, except pagans.
John says that the last supper took place before Passover and that jesus was crucified on the first day of Passover John 19.14. None of this is "inerrancy" or "infallibilty". That is a fatal contradiction and thus the bible is not the word of god.
This means that god does not exist or that liars are speaking for him.