04 Apr 14
Originally posted by RJHindsYou mentioned evilution again.
I have no problem with sunhouse and his lifelong learning and his work with technical matters. However, I have been attempting to get him to learn that evolution a.k.a. evil-lution and billions of years in a belief system that is unproven by science.
As evilution is a theory invented by creationists I suggest you to take this up this matter in the spiritual forum.
04 Apr 14
Originally posted by FabianFnasOkay, evolution and billions of years is not proven science, but only a belief by some people. Did I word that better for you?
You mentioned evilution again.
As evilution is a theory invented by creationists I suggest you to take this up this matter in the spiritual forum.
04 Apr 14
Originally posted by RJHindsExcept for the belief part, you don't get that science follows the evidence and if the evidence changes so does the science which you do not have the ability to do, so you use words like belief to justify your own faith, deriding the entire science of evolution in the process in your vain attempt to try to make the two stances equal.
Okay, evolution and billions of years is not proven science, but only a belief by some people. Did I word that better for you?
They are not equal and never will be. When new evidence comes around, science will come around. Till then YOU are the one with the belief not us.
05 Apr 14
Originally posted by sonhouseYou are making the mistake of equating evolution and assigning billions of years of age to objects as real science. However, what I am trying to get through to you is that these are not real science, but what might be called pseudoscience. The theory of evolution and the billions of years dating methods have more big holes than Swiss cheese. I have presented many links to articles and videos that demonstrate the many problems with these. However, you have chosen to ignore that information in order to hold on to your belief system.
Except for the belief part, you don't get that science follows the evidence and if the evidence changes so does the science which you do not have the ability to do, so you use words like belief to justify your own faith, deriding the entire science of evolution in the process in your vain attempt to try to make the two stances equal.
They are not equal ...[text shortened]... dence comes around, science will come around. Till then YOU are the one with the belief not us.
As it happens, I am reading Ted Nield's book on meteorites. On page 50 he has a graphic showing how asteroids are distributed in terms of distance from the sun. There are gaps in the distribution known as Kirkwood Gaps. The gaps are at orbital resonances like 3:1 and 5:2 with Jupiter's orbital period.
"At conjunction it [a hypothetical asteroid in a resonant orbit] would find itself tugged by Jupiter's gravity. Over millions of years, these repeated tugs would tend to pull the object out of the resonant orbit... effectively ruling those particular orbital distances off limits."
Meteorites have spectroscopic signatures that sometimes allow them to be matched to asteroids seen by telescopes, so they are thought to have been chipped off in collisions of asteroids.
Nield goes on to say that in 1992 "the meteorite that wrecked Michelle Knapp's Chevy had in fact been abandoned by its parent--and probably propelled into its Earth-crossing orbit at the same instant--32 million years earlier."
RJ, do you believe your deity put the Kirkwood Gaps in the asteroid belt right from the start of the solar system, to give it the false appearance of great age?
05 Apr 14
3 edits
Originally posted by Paul Dirac IIGood question! Why would such a deity deliberately deceive us by producing fabricated but extremely convincing evidence (not just this bit of convincing evidence but a vast mountain of other convincing evidence! ) of a false history of the universe being millions of years old if 'he'(the deity ) wants us (according to RJ ) to believe the Earth is just a few thousand years old and if it is an 'evil sin' (according to RJ ) to believe the evidence that the universe is a lot older?
As it happens, I am reading Ted Nield's book on meteorites. On page 50 he has a graphic showing how asteroids are distributed in terms of distance from the sun. There are gaps in the distribution known as Kirkwood Gaps. The gaps are at orbital resonances like 3:1 and 5:2 with Jupiter's orbital period.
"At conjunction it [a hypothetical asteroid in ...[text shortened]... oid belt right from the start of the solar system, to give it the false appearance of great age?
Does 'he' WANT perfectly rational people to 'sin' by being deceived by 'his' false evidence and only the morons that ignore such evidence (and are thus morons ) to not 'sin'? -nothing about that makes any sense whatsoever!
Of course, RJ will deny that any such evidence exists, which makes him a moron. If we are to believe him then, his 'deity' will reward him for being such a moron and for denying even the very existence of the evidence provided by his 'deity'.
05 Apr 14
Originally posted by Paul Dirac III see nothing here that proves anything happened 32 million years ago. Assigned ages are based on an opinion, not science fact. Didn't you see the word "probably" there? Maybe you should look that word up in the dictionary.
As it happens, I am reading Ted Nield's book on meteorites. On page 50 he has a graphic showing how asteroids are distributed in terms of distance from the sun. There are gaps in the distribution known as Kirkwood Gaps. The gaps are at orbital resonances like 3:1 and 5:2 with Jupiter's orbital period.
"At conjunction it [a hypothetical asteroid in ...[text shortened]... oid belt right from the start of the solar system, to give it the false appearance of great age?
05 Apr 14
Originally posted by humyIt's the prankster god!
Good question! Why would such a deity deliberately deceive us by producing fabricated but extremely convincing evidence (not just this bit of convincing evidence but a vast mountain of other convincing evidence! ) of a false history of the universe being millions of years old if 'he'(the deity ) wants us (according to RJ ) to believe the Earth is just a few tho ...[text shortened]... ng such a moron and for denying even the very existence of the evidence provided by his 'deity'.
(offensive language)
05 Apr 14
1 edit
Originally posted by KazetNagorraI just watched the video. There is just so much about the Creationists claims that makes absolutely no logical sense whatsoever and he touches on some of that pretty well. Now I think about it, I think the Santa myth actually makes more overall sense ( only just ) even though that is surely ludicrous enough!
It's the prankster god!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jim_HBj7Bdk (offensive language)
05 Apr 14
2 edits
Originally posted by Paul Dirac IIYes. Only religion offers absolute certainty (about the real world ). Not rational absolute certainty but insane delusional moronic absolute certainty but insane delusional moronic absolute certainty is absolute certainty nevertheless.
Only religion offers certainty.
You are 100% sure that God begat a son on Earth. A Muslim is 100% sure that God did not beget a son.
But, to have any level of sane rational objective certainty, you must dump religion for scientific method. He will, of course, deny this.
05 Apr 14
Originally posted by RJHindsLet's see YOUR proof, and don't use your bible. Scientific proof is what we require. You know full well the bible is not proof but just a bunch of man made BS tales. The amazing part is how you believe in Egyptian mythology.
Muslims can't be certain of such a thing because they have no evidence as proof.
