Two 'earth like' planets don't exist

[MadeFromDust]

Looks like a couple more bite the dust:

US scientists said Thursday two distant Earth-like planets, which some believed might be able to harbor life, do not actually exist and that astronomers were confused by a star's sunspots.

http://news.yahoo.com/two-earth-planets-dont-exist-211632207.html?soc_src=mediacontentstory

 

[SlyPokerDog]

The bible says god created earth, not earths.

 

[3RA1N1AC]

the vast ocean of planet zorbo was raging with the intensity of a pot of boiling water, only more likely to burn you, due to the high acid content. me and my fellow carbon farmers were used to it, but we had a greenhorn on our twinpod. his name was snargleflax and dadgum, he was greener than a snooku leaf in second spring. the other day he actually asked me what the skyhook was for! hahahahahahahahahahahaha

suddenly, with a roar befitting a zylonic percator, the twinpods engine module slipped into 1st gear, and the craft lurched forward onto its bow, nearly vertical. sad to say, the last sight poor snargleflax saw as he flew into the boiling swirls of sweet melting death, was the rest of the crew, secure in their safety strap-ons, laughing maniacally at his misfortune

you see, now we all got to split his credit share, as there were only 11 of us left...me thinks that carl is next to go, hopefully. he is often lackadaisical with his support beam traction application.

yo ho, life on the burning sea, with a bottle of plog, yo ho! its a mighty fine life for me

dems the breaks kid

 

[BlazerCaravan]

Science is the art of accepting that you're wrong gracefully.

 

[Further]

Science is the art of accepting that you're wrong gracefully.

First of all, I'm never wrong, and secondly, I never graceful.

But I may be unright and clumsy.

 

[crandc]

Science is the art of accepting that you're wrong gracefully.

Repped. Science is based on best available evidence, which can change. This is the difference between evidence based and religious based. I'm not sure what OdenRoyLMA2 is thinking, that a hypothesis being disproven disproves all science and proves the bible literally true? Not quite!

 

[Denny Crane]

If all they're seeing is sunspots or other phenomena, there are a whole lot of scientists with egg on their faces.

 

[PDXFonz]

First of all, I'm never wrong, and secondly, I never graceful.

But I may be unright and clumsy.

Wtf is happening to that elephant?

 

[BlazerCaravan]

If all they're seeing is sunspots or other phenomena, there are a whole lot of scientists with egg on their faces.

It's only "egg on their faces" if they're embarrassed, or if there's some implication that their being wrong is somehow bad.

 

[Denny Crane]

It's only "egg on their faces" if they're embarrassed, or if there's some implication that their being wrong is somehow bad.

They've been pretty sure they've found all these planets.

 

[BlazerCaravan]

They've been pretty sure they've found all these planets.

Your point, please?

 

[Denny Crane]

Haven't we accepted in faith that they did find these planets?

 

[BlazerCaravan]

Haven't we accepted in faith that they did find these planets?

But it really, really, REALLY doesn't matter what "we" do.

What matters is that the scientific process still occurs: that findings are checked, re-checked, found wrong or confirmed. If all scientists stopped this process, that would matter. What non-scientists do or don't do with the information is completely irrelevant.

Some findings were found to be mistaken false positives. That's FANTASTIC! That means the findings are closer to correct than they've EVER BEEN! Isn't that exciting?

 

[julius]

Haven't we accepted in faith that they did find these planets?

No. We've seen that they think they've found planets, but most of us realize that these planets (if they do exist) are so far away that in reality, it's a theory that they exist.

Seems like you're grasping at anything to prove something.

 

[Denny Crane]

No. We've seen that they think they've found planets, but most of us realize that these planets (if they do exist) are so far away that in reality, it's a theory that they exist.

Seems like you're grasping at anything to prove something.

Who's ever said, "wait, I think those planets you're finding may not be planets after all?" Now, of course, but not during the time when hundreds were found.

Someone needs to be a bit more skeptical and realize that if a bunch of the science is based upon an assumption that turns out wrong in the end, all you've done is built a house of cards.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

I get what Denny is saying, none of those planets exist so they can't have global warming. If those false planets don't have global warming then neither does the earth.

Scientists - 0
Denny - 1

 

[Denny Crane]

Not at all.

More like, if we think the dimming of a star is caused by a planet passing between it and us, but it's really sun spots, then we're not at all seeing planets. Maybe none of the planets we think we've found can actually believed to be planets.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Not at all.

More like, if we think the dimming of a star is caused by a planet passing between it and us, but it's really sun spots, then we're not at all seeing planets. Maybe none of the planets we think we've found can actually believed to be planets.

The wobble > The dim.

 

[Denny Crane]

The wobble > The dim.

That's a nice hypothesis.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

That's a nice hypothesis.

Thank you.

I also have one about the 9/11 hijackers trained at the commercial flight simulators in Saudi Arabia.

 

[MARIS61]

Haven't we accepted in faith that they did find these planets?

Not I.

Atheists don't accept anything on faith.

 

[crandc]

No one accepts on "faith" in science. The evidence seemed to indicate certain conclusions. When better evidence became available it was discovered that the initial conclusions were incorrect. That is very standard science and no one has egg on their face. When I was in college doing summer research, my initial data showed some interesting results regarding mutation rates. But as I repeated the experiments over the summer, the data no longer supported any such results; the initial values were clearly outliers. I was disappointed (hey, what college student does not want to publish a paper in a scientific journal!) but my professor said that's how science works, most initial hypotheses do have to be junked on further review. The only ones who have egg on their faces are those who claim immovable faith in an infallible millennia-old book.

 

[Eastoff]

The wobble > The dim.

That's a nice hypothesis.

No but seriously, Sly is correct.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

No but seriously, Sly is correct.

I need to add that to my signature.

 

[Minstrel]

I need to add that to my signature.

Pretty soon your sig will be longer than any of your posts.

And by "pretty soon," I mean probably now.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Pretty soon your sig will be longer than any of your posts.

And by "pretty soon," I mean probably now.

Yes.