Originally Posted by steveksux
I'm referring to the shiny round thing in the image. The buildings in the foreground are not made of gasses clumping together.
It is possible to see it from Earth with the naked eye. But you have to look in the daytime.
(btw- The photo thing didn't escape me. At least you have a sense of humor.
Neither you nor I were around to witness the creation of the Sun. It may very well be a star, or it may be totally different from other stars in the universe, but one thing is for sure, you are utilizing what you believe to have occurred (i.e., theory)
coupled with a light smattering of historical science, which is no where even close to an actual, empirically scientific explanation for the "birth" of stars as promoted by the Big Bang, Oscillating Universe, and or any of the Stellar evolution theories.
let me bring you up to speed
empirical - adjective - \im-ˈpir-i-kəl\
1: originating in or based on observation or experience
2: relying on experience or observation alone often without due regard for system and theory