beecee

Yep, agreed. No arguments from me.

I did give a link to possible evidences of multi verses and such. OK, you raise some seemingly interesting points. But isn't implementing any ID or deity simply taking a short cut? Isn't it simply on most occasions a "god of the gaps" argument applied to areas of multi verses, the quantum foam etc where science admits to no hard theory level evaluation as yet? as opposed to the soap box preaching of hell and brimstone torment if we don't believe? Let me say that my Mrs is highly religious, originally from Fiji where religion is a staple part of the culture [and previously they were head hunters!!] Also I have never really started giving any religious person the science club, unless and until they use their religion and/or deity to deride science. Then I get out my club!! The thread re Tyson that has been closed had simply developed into a science derision crusade by our friend.

Something worth noting from the article I linked to...https://phys.org/news/2019-06-ten-chernobyl-television-series-artistic.html 6. The divers "The three heroic men who worked to drain the tanks of water below the primary containment chamber to prevent nuclear fuel coming into contact with water which was believed would cause an explosion did so in vain. Subsequent analysis found that the tanks were already mostly empty, and the interaction of the melting fuel with the water might even have helped cool it". From the highlighted parts, it seems that this supposed "inaccuracy" in the movie was not really inaccurate at all. It was believed at that time! and the error was not found until later as hinted with "the subsequent analysis". So the movie portrayal adhering to the actions and beliefs of the day were correct! Whether or not it was subsequently declared as "in vain" Any other comments on the relative points?

https://www.space.com/18811-multiple-universes-5-theories.html 5 Reasons We May Live in a Multiverse: The thing is, multiverses and such are put as speculation and accepted as speculation at this time. When the question of some deity is raised, it is raised and fanatically in most cases argued for as a 100% certainty.

I'm neither thin skinned or religious despite being an ex Catholic Altar Boy! But while parallel universes and simulations etc may be unfalsifiable at this time, they are still scientific speculations...and as far as my knowledge goes, falls into the same category as Hawking Radiation. It has been speculated that various anomalies in spacetime, are evidence for other universes.https://www.space.com/32728-parallel-universes.html Whereas any concept of god or other divine deity, falls under the banner of the supernatural and/or paranormal which is unscientific. But hey, my thinking on the matter could be wrong, so I'm open for correction/s. And of course as is the case mostly observed, when these types come here, they invariably hop on their soap boxes and start conducting anti science crusades. And afterall, it is a science forum and the scientific methodology must prevail.

Any creator or magical spaghetti monster or ID of any description, while certainly also speculative, is not a scientific answer. Or is this the hidden agenda that is driving you on this crusade?

Are you going to have enough intestinal fortitude to answer my question? I dont accept any hypothetical about the universe being a simulation. And while you continue ranting, and failing to recognise that Tyson was also speculating on the nature of reality, you'll simply continue ranting. My speculative scenario is that the BB arose from the quantum foam which can be defined as nothing. What's your speculative scenario? C'mon, I'm really interested to hear!

I dont accept any hypothetical about the universe being a simulation. And while you continue ranting, and failing to recognise that Tyson was also speculating on the nature of reality, you'll simply continue ranting. My speculative scenario is that the BB arose from the quantum foam which can be defined as nothing. What's your speculative scenario? C'mon, I'm really interested to hear!

You appear to have not read any of the replies. Tyson was speculating. He did not state anything as fact....Parallel universe is more speculating.

We have no evidence for god or any other magical spaghetti monster. Which answers my last question...that is you are trolling?

You seem to be making a host of ignorant statements? Or are you just trolling?

Wrong. DeGrasse Tyson was simply speculating. He was not claiming anything as fact. We also have speculation re parallel universes. In actual fact our knowledge, science and GR stops at t+10-43 seconds post BB. You need to accept that the scientific methodology involves speculation as the first step towards formulating scientific theories. Even SR/GR and the BB at one time were just speculation. Let's hope that the replies you are receiving will prompt you to start learning and gaining some knowledge about that which you so readily criticise.

https://www.aei.mpg.de/18498/03_Einstein_Telescope Einstein Telescope: The Einstein Telescope (ET) is a design concept for a third-generation gravitational-wave (GW) detector, which will be 10 times more sensitive than current instruments. Like the first two generations of GW detectors, the concept for the Einstein Telescope is based on the measurement of tiny changes (far less than the size of an atomic nucleus) in the lengths of two connected arms several kilometres long, caused by a passing gravitational wave. Laser beams passing down the arms record their periodic stretching and shrinking as interference patterns in a central photo-detector. The first generation of these interferometric detectors built a few years ago (GEO600, LIGO, Virgo and TAMA) successfully demonstrated the proof-of-principle and constrained the gravitational wave emission from several sources. The next generation (Advanced LIGO and Advanced Virgo), which were constructed until late 2015, have made the first direct detection of gravitational waves from a pair of black holes spiralling into each other. This discovery heralded the new field of GW astronomy. However, these detectors will not be sensitive enough for very precise astronomical studies of the GW sources. A multi-detector: The strategy behind the ET project is to build an observatory that overcomes the limitations of current detector sites by hosting more than one GW detector. It will consist of three nested detectors, each composed of two interferometers with arms 10 kilometres long. One interferometer will detect low-frequency gravitational wave signals (2 to 40 Hz), while the other will detect the high-frequency components. The configuration is designed to allow the observatory to evolve by accommodating successive upgrades or replacement components that can take advantage of future developments in interferometry and also respond to a variety of science objectives.

Yep agreed, but that's not the point I'm trying to make. Perhaps we could order in the military on a possible death mission, and of course the Fireman, who were the first respondents, did not actually realize the enormity of what they were undertaking. I'm speaking of the cleaning up and containment. Would a Western nation ask for volunteers? LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL As luck would have it, an article today on Chernobyl in physorg...... https://phys.org/news/2019-06-ten-chernobyl-television-series-artistic.html the article concludes thus....... A cautionary tale It is important not to underestimate the consequences of the Chernobyl disaster. Studies have found an increase in thyroid cancer, mainly due to the failure of the Soviet authorities to prevent consumption of products contaminated with short-lived radioactive iodine-131 in the weeks after the accident. Recent analyses of affected populations up to 2015 found 5,000 out of a total of 20,000 thyroid cancer cases to be due to radiation. Fortunately, though serious, thyroid cancer is treatable in 99% of cases. Some reports suggest that the consequences of relocating hundreds of thousands of people, the economic consequences of abandonment of land and the understandable fear of radiation have had greater negative effects than the direct health consequences of radiation. Chernobyl the series is amazing to watch, and the reconstruction of events before and during the accident was remarkable. But we should remember that it is a drama, not a documentary. In the years since 1986, many myths have been perpetuated about the accident, and these myths have unquestionably hindered the recovery of the affected populations. More than 30 years on, this recovery continues. If it is to have any chance of success it must be based not on the emotion and the drama, but on the best available scientific evidence. Evidence which shows that, except at the extreme doses which plant operators, firemen and helicopter pilots received during the Chernobyl disaster, the risks of radiation are tiny compared to other health risks we all face in our lives.

If an incident like this had of occurred in Europe, Britain, the USA or Australia, what action do you think may have been taken with relation to the men ordered in both atop and under the reactor for cleaning and confinement issues? Order in the military? Volunteers?

It's simply unidentified as the Navy says in its briefing.. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence....Carl Sagan.

My main concern and motive with starting this thread and the current movie being discussed, is how close it is to the events that transpired, and of course the science that is concerned with nuclear fission and what can happen when short cuts are taken, or unsafe operational procedures are performed, and obviously the after effects. Sadly for at least two interesting parties, those issues have escaped them. One of those issues I raised early in this thread was about the mistaken idea I had that radiation poisoning was not contagious as was portrayed in the movie. That was corrected by pavelcherepan with an appropriate link showing my error in thinking, and which btw added more evidence to the general opinion that the movie was pretty close to being on target in expressing the actual events that transpired along with the depiction of the science involved.

UFO's are real. Around 5% of sightings remain as UFO's...that is Unidentified and not readily explained by atmospheric conditions etc. Please note that the U in UFO means unidentified, and gives no cause to extrapolate that to of alien origins.

I am surprised with one certainly, the other is just par for the course and his usual methodology, and bias towards myself. Just done some more research and found other movies made about the Chernobyl Incident https://www.inverse.com/article/14834-5-powerful-films-about-chernobyl 1. The Russian Woodpecker (2015) 2. Chernobyl Heart (2003) 3. White Horse (2008) 4. The Battle of Chernobyl (2006 5. Chernobyl 3828 (2011) ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Sadly I have not seen any of them, but will certainly make an effort to at least get what I can and compare to the latest excellent movie that certainly aligns pretty close to the events that transpired. Anyone else seen any of them? Again, my main concern and motive with the current movie being discussed, is how close it is to the events that transpired, and of course the science that is concerned with nuclear fission and what can happen when short cuts are taken, or unsafe operational procedures are performed, and obviously the after effects. Sadly for at least two interesting parties, those issues have escaped them.

If the cap fits...... I didn't say anything about your assessment. I said,"Quite a bit? Not according to others that have watched it, nor to the general consensus of how history records it. Certainly as pavelcherepan accurately said, some obvious liberties taken which is agreed on but again very close to what transpired"  Obviously your assessment to use your words, is not the general consensus which are my words. You presented the link, which implies you agree. You were correct. Kinda supports my "tainted/blinkered" assessment and your usual nonsensical pedant approach to myself.

Yep it was a 5 part series and I watched it all. And as already agreed it was also a movie as opposed to a doco that you obviously would have seen me admit to if not somewhat tainted in your view. Quite a bit? Not according to others that have watched it, nor to the general consensus of how history records it. Certainly as pavelcherepan accurately said, some obvious liberties taken which is agreed on but again very close to what transpired. That did not take away from the excellent presentation and the efforts to align with how history has recorded it. No I don't accept it was pushing any Soviet propaganda, and it seems obvious that you have mistakenly arrived at that conjecture, due to the actual accuracy of the movie in presenting the facts that the Soviets did try and downplay what happened...at least up to the moment when the radiation was detected by Sweden??? from memory and another nation also from memory. You are of course entitled to your opinion of it being slow moving, but what actually did you expect? I expected nothing more then a reasonably accurate account of what transpired and I was happy that this is what was presented in the movie. Perhaps you should have watched Star Wars? All entertainment, television, radio, movies etc that pertain to show some aspect of history, need to dramatize...nothing new here. And of course you are correct et pet in that this man made catastrophe could have been much worse. ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: https://www.hbo.com/chernobyl/episode-scripts Read the Chernobyl Scripts From Writer and Executive Producer Craig Mazin Experience the miniseries in a whole new light. Check out the production scripts that made Mazin’s and the crew’s shared vision come to fruition. Chernobyl, about the 1986 Soviet nuclear disaster, has been hailed as one of the most powerful shows of 2019 so far — even earning the number one spot on IMDb's Top 250 TVshows of all time. Now, audiences can experience the drama’s five-episodes in a unique way. Writer and executive producer Craig Mazin has released all five production scripts to read for free. Check them out below to see how Mazin’s and the crew’s shared vision came to fruition. Script | Episode 1, “1 : 23 : 45” Script | Episode 2: “Please Remain Calm” Script | Episode 3: “Open Wide, O Earth” Script | Episode 4: “The Happiness Of All Mankind” Script | Episode 5: “Vichnaya Pamyat” If you’re looking to learn more about the Chernobyl disaster, follow Craig Mazin’s conversation on Twitter to discover more resources

No wrong. I didn't declare unreservedly that you could do anything. I was addressing the forum, not you in particular. And of course I also stated earlier on that the movie also highlighted the fact that the USSR attempted to hide aspects of the accident and downgrade it to some extent. And obviously I assumed nothing about you watching anything, again simply saying that those that did or have intentions of watching it, could then gauge how close it was to what actually transpired. Which was pretty close in actual fact.

https://phys.org/news/2019-06-einstein-relativity-document-gifted-nobel.html Einstein's relativity document gifted to Nobel museum: Physicist Albert Einstein declared his opposition to the "H" bomb and to the arms race between the US and USSR in 1950 The Nobel Museum in Stockholm has been gifted Albert Einstein's first paper published after he received the Nobel Prize in 1922 and discussing his then still controversial relativity theory. Swedish businessman Per Taube bought the handwritten two-page document at an auction for 1.2 million krona (110,000 euros) in December last year. more at link..... <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nice to see the papers gifted to the Nobel Museum. And the following extract highlights again the scientific methodology and how necessarily all hypothetical models need to run the gauntlet of acceptance just as even Einstein's papers did.

My apologies, I was presuming you knew a little bit of history from not so long ago. But again after some research along with the general consensus of opinion, the movie does a pretty good job of telling it as it was.

https://phys.org/news/2019-06-york-world-ambitious-carbon-reduction.html New York to get one of world's most ambitious carbon reduction plans: New York state lawmakers on Wednesday passed one of the world's most ambitious laws aimed at countering climate change, under which fossil fuel power plants and gasoline cars will be phased out by 2050. more at link...... <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then we have this....... https://phys.org/news/2019-06-trump-weaken-obama-climate-policy.html Trump moves to weaken Obama climate policy, bolster coal industry: The Trump administration on Wednesday unveiled its final plan to rewrite a major Obama-era climate change policy, replacing proposed regulations that cracked down on coal-burning power plants with a weaker alternative. more at link...... I suppose that the extract from the second article does temper somewhat, Trump's enthusiasm for trashing climate control measures. "The Clean Air Act obligates the federal government to regulate greenhouse gas emissions and the Trump administration may have difficulty convincing the courts that its rule is the best way to do that".