The origin of "LIFE" itself (demons, create, creationism)

[Rafius]

Originally Posted by stuckinbalad

In this article, it clearly states the fluctuation of the earth's orbit about the sun (the 3,000,000 miles in question) takes place over the course of 22-26,000 years, not 1 year.

From the article linked (and I am not a huge fan of Wiki since it is not a peer reviewed source, but since you posted it, I will use it):

On a very long time scale, the dates of the perihelion and of the aphelion progress through the seasons, and they make one complete cycle in 22,000 to 26,000 years


This could certainly explain away such things and Ice ages and warming trends, but the yearly flux would be much smaller than this I would presume...

Please note the word "annual" in the article.

"Currently, the annual perihelion happens at about 14 days after the December Solstice, thus making January 4 the average date of perihelion. The perihelion that currently occurs in early January places the Earth at a distance of about 147,098,070 kilometers (about 91,402,500 miles) from the sun, which can also be expressed as about 0.98329 astronomical units (AU). (The eccentricity of the orbit also varies slowly over many millennia.)

Likewise, the annual aphelion that currently occurs in early July happens about 14 days after the June Solstice. At this time, the distance of the aphelion is currently about about 152,097,700 kilometers (94,509,130 miles), which can also be expressed as about 1.01671 AU."


This means that annually, the distance of the Earth to the Sun varies from 91,402,500 miles to 94,509,130 miles....a difference of some 3,106,630 miles.

I am sure this was overlooked and not presented in a disingenuous manner...

It was neither overlooked or presented in a disingenuous manner. But I'm very glad you brought it up because, once again, it proves that advocates of 'Intelligent Design' like yourself, really don't even have a basic grasp of the subjects they are trying to dismiss. You prove again that you really 'out of your depth' here kid....and you want us to consider the validity of your arguments??? Yeah right!!

[Tmolus]

Originally Posted by stuckinbalad

In this article, it clearly states the fluctuation of the earth's orbit about the sun (the 3,000,000 miles in question) takes place over the course of 22-26,000 years, not 1 year.

From the article linked (and I am not a huge fan of Wiki since it is not a peer reviewed source, but since you posted it, I will use it):

On a very long time scale, the dates of the perihelion and of the aphelion progress through the seasons, and they make one complete cycle in 22,000 to 26,000 years

This could certainly explain away such things and Ice ages and warming trends, but the yearly flux would be much smaller than this I would presume...

I am sure this was overlooked and not presented in a disingenuous manner...

You are misreading what you quote.

The annual dates of the perihelion and aphelion, respectively, make a calendar circuit over a roughly 24,000-year period. However, the annual perihelion of the Earth (early January at present) is 91.4 million miles, while the annual aphelion of the Earth (early July at present) is 94.5 million miles. That's a variance of 3.1 million miles, or 3.3%, of the mean Earth-Sun distance (one AU).

So, it - the article linked - clearly states that the fluctuation in the average distance of the Earth from the Sun (or, more precisely, the Earth-Sun distance at the respective positions of the Earth during the periapsis and apoapsis of the ellipse that is the Earth's orbit about the Sun) exceeds 3 million miles and takes place over the course of one year.

In fact, the article couldn't be more clear:

Currently, the annual perihelion happens at about 14 days after the December Solstice, thus making January 4 the average date of perihelion. The perihelion that currently occurs in early January places the Earth at a distance of about 147,098,070 kilometers (about 91,402,500 miles) from the sun, which can also be expressed as about 0.98329 astronomical units (AU). (The eccentricity of the orbit also varies slowly over many millennia.)
Likewise, the annual aphelion that currently occurs in early July happens about 14 days after the June Solstice. At this time, the distance of the aphelion is currently about about 152,097,700 kilometers (94,509,130 miles), which can also be expressed as about 1.01671 AU.

But since you don't like the linked article, here's another source:

January Earth Perihelion

Is the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration a sufficient source for you?

[stuckinbalad]

OK, so this is why I don't like wikipedia, since it clearly states the perihelion and aphelion flux over a course of 22-26,000 years....I guess that means the difference gets larger and smaller than the annual 3,000,000 miles....??? (just using what you linked)

I read that incorrectly, I will admit that, but astronomy is not my thing. I will admit that too...

However, it does not make an argument to say that just because the earths distance to sun varies by 3M miles annually that the argument is closed.

And Rafius, why bring up person attacks and call me "out of my depth kid" when first you don't know who I am, what I am, or how old I am....

It really doesn't add to your argument at all....and quite honestly really turns the discussion off...

Now, please give me more details about how this discussion is "over" as you put it Tmolus, I thnk it was you wasn't it?

[Rafius]

Originally Posted by stuckinbalad

From the article linked (and I am not a huge fan of Wiki since it is not a peer reviewed source, but since you posted it, I will use it):

You can always refer to the references at the bottom of every wiki article.

On a very long time scale, the dates of the perihelion and of the aphelion progress through the seasons, and they make one complete cycle in 22,000 to 26,000 years

What the above is referring to is the dates of the closest and furthest points to the Earth. For example, ....
In 2011 the Sun is nearest on Jan 3 and furthest away July 4.
In 2012 the Sun is nearest on Jan 5 and furthest away July 5.
In 2013 the Sun is nearest on Jan 2 and furthest away July 5.
2014 January 4 and July 4
2015 January 4 and July 6

...and so on.

Those date change each year and it will be between 22,000 and 26,000 years before the dates are the same as they were in 2011 i.e Jan 3 and July 4

[stuckinbalad]

Originally Posted by Rafius

It was neither overlooked or presented in a disingenuous manner. But I'm very glad you brought it up because, once again, it proves that advocates of 'Intelligent Design' like yourself, really don't even have a basic grasp of the subjects they are trying to dismiss. You prove again that you really 'out of your depth' here kid....and you want us to consider the validity of your arguments??? Yeah right!!

Rafius, I am curious as to the credentials you have which allow you to state I am out of my depth and a kid...

[stuckinbalad]

Originally Posted by Rafius

You can always refer to the references at the bottom of every wiki article.

What the above is referring to is the dates of the closest and furthest points to the Earth. For example, ....
In 2011 the Sun is nearest on Jan 3 and furthest away July 4.
In 2012 the Sun is nearest on Jan 5 and furthest away July 5.
In 2013 the Sun is nearest on Jan 2 and furthest away July 5.
2014 January 4 and July 4
2015 January 4 and July 6

...and so on.

Those date change each year and it will be between 22,000 and 26,000 years before the dates are the same as they were in 2011 i.e Jan 3 and July 4

Just saying here, not trying to refute what you said, that numerically, it seems like that is an awful long time to repeat itself when we are dealing with such a small number of possible days....

22-26,000 years is a whole lot of days of variation unless the dates and seasons switch throughout those years....

Seems odd to me, but thats OK.

[Tmolus]

Originally Posted by stuckinbalad

OK, so this is why I don't like wikipedia, since it clearly states the perihelion and aphelion flux over a course of 22-26,000 years....I guess that means the difference gets larger and smaller than the annual 3,000,000 miles....??? (just using what you linked)

No, it doesn't. It clearly states that the dates of the perihelion and aphelion progress through the calendar over the course of 24,000 years. It is very clear in this. Both Rafius and I quoted this. It is clear. It is similarly clear from the NOAA link I quoted.

And, no, the difference (between the perihelion and the apelion) does not get smaller/larger over this period. Nothing says that. You're yet again misreading it.

I read that incorrectly, I will admit that, but astronomy is not my thing. I will admit that too...

However, it does not make an argument to say that just because the earths distance to sun varies by 3M miles annually that the argument is closed.

No, but the fact that the Sun's luminosity increases as the Sun ages does.

And Rafius, why bring up person attacks and call me "out of my depth kid" when first you don't know who I am, what I am, or how old I am....

It really doesn't add to your argument at all....and quite honestly really turns the discussion off...

Now, please give me more details about how this discussion is "over" as you put it Tmolus, I thnk it was you wasn't it?

I said no such thing.

[Rafius]

Originally Posted by stuckinbalad

OK, so this is why I don't like wikipedia,

Don't blame wiki just because you don't understand what you are trying to dismiss. The article is quite clear and accurate.

since it clearly states the perihelion and aphelion flux over a course of 22-26,000 years....I guess that means the difference gets larger and smaller than the annual 3,000,000 miles....??? (just using what you linked)

No, it doesn't mean that at all. Please refer to my last post.

I read that incorrectly, I will admit that, but astronomy is not my thing. I will admit that too...

Then you would be well advised to keep clear of it and not use it to support your belief in 'fine-tuning'. Stick to what you know.

However, it does not make an argument to say that just because the earths distance to sun varies by 3M miles annually that the argument is closed.

What is 'closed' is the ludicrous claim put forward earlier that the distance between the Earth and the Sun has been placed with pinpoint accuracy by an intelligent designer to such an extent that we would all perish if it were any closer to us or further from us.

And Rafius, why bring up person attacks and call me "out of my depth kid" when first you don't know who I am, what I am, or how old I am....

...because 'out of your depth' is EXACTLY what your are. By your own admission, astronomy is not your strong point, yet you are using it to support your belief in a 'fine-tuned' universe. It is not a 'personal attack', it is a valid observation...you ARE out of your depth because you are arguing against something that you do not understand.

[Tmolus]

Originally Posted by stuckinbalad

OK, so this is why I don't like wikipedia, since it clearly states the perihelion and aphelion flux over a course of 22-26,000 years....I guess that means the difference gets larger and smaller than the annual 3,000,000 miles....??? (just using what you linked)

I read that incorrectly, I will admit that, but astronomy is not my thing. I will admit that too...

However, it does not make an argument to say that just because the earths distance to sun varies by 3M miles annually that the argument is closed.

And Rafius, why bring up person attacks and call me "out of my depth kid" when first you don't know who I am, what I am, or how old I am....

It really doesn't add to your argument at all....and quite honestly really turns the discussion off...

Now, please give me more details about how this discussion is "over" as you put it Tmolus, I thnk it was you wasn't it?

You are free to explain the width of the habitable zone in AUs and then explain why the habitable zone is only so wide. But such an explanation will have to contend with the location of the Earth over the course of the year. It will also have to contend with the previously weaker luminosity of the Sun (due to its progression through the Main Sequence), because the gist of the 'habitable zone' argument holds that were Earth x many miles further from the Sun, runaway global glaciation would ensue due to decreased energy received from the sun.

Nor, again, does this address the sheer number of galaxies and stars and planets in the observable universe, nor the pitfalls of disregarding the Anthropic Principle, nor the fact that long odds (even if they can be shown) do not preclude events.

[Rafius]

Originally Posted by Tmolus

You are free to explain the width of the habitable zone in AUs and then explain why the habitable zone is only so wide. But such an explanation will have to contend with the location of the Earth over the course of the year. It will also have to contend with the previously weaker luminosity of the Sun (due to its progression through the Main Sequence), because the gist of the 'habitable zone' argument holds that were Earth x many miles further from the Sun, runaway global glaciation would ensue due to decreased energy received from the sun.

Nor, again, does this address the sheer number of galaxies and stars and planets in the observable universe, nor the pitfalls of disregarding the Anthropic Principle, nor the fact that long odds (even if they can be shown) do not preclude events.

Now don't go confusing him with science Tmolus.