30 Jan 17
Originally posted by humyIt amazes me that anyone with any knowledge can make such a statement.
what you don't seem to grasp is the large number of accidents that are needed to produce life would almost inevitably occur somewhere in the vast universe which has billions of Earth-like planets.
Science on human life: duh, given a billion years, duh, and a billion more accidents, duh, presto....human life.
And you say design is unreasonable?
30 Jan 17
6 edits
Originally posted by chaney3I say it is extremely improbable given the current evidence against Godditit especially your particular brand of anti-evolution Godditit because of the evidence and proof of evolution.
And you say design is unreasonable?
If, extremely hypothetically. and when that evidence changes and very clearly points the other way, then I will believe Goddidit. We go wherever the evidence points. If you want to convince any of us, you must show us EVIDENCE of Goddidit. If you have no such evidence, time to revise your beliefs and you are really wasting your time trying to convince us rational people of your irrational beliefs; that will NEVER happen and you are delusional for thinking it might.
30 Jan 17
Originally posted by humyWhat evidence do you have against Goddidit?
No, I say it is improbable given the current evidence against Godditit.
If very hypothetically and when that evidence changes and points the other way, then I will believe Goddidit. We go wherever the evidence points. If you want to convince any of us, you must show us EVIDENCE of Goddidit.
Your only "evidence" thus far has been accident upon accident upon accident. With a few maybe's and possibly's to throw in as well.
You have nothing, except for your 'billion years', which produces more magic than Merlin.
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 29601
30 Jan 17
Originally posted by chaney3Seriously Chaney, go away and read up on these things. (For your own edification). People are not just spouting off random thoughts here. Brains 'the size of planets' have provided these explanations.
It amazes me that anyone with any knowledge can make such a statement.
Science on human life: duh, given a billion years, duh, and a billion more accidents, duh, presto....human life.
And you say design is unreasonable?
Seriously.
30 Jan 17
1 edit
Originally posted by chaney3The very essence of closed minded religiosity. You are certain you know everything about the Moon without having done any research.
I have not done the research yet, but I am certain that I will be correct.
You claim that if the moon was 100,000 miles closer to earth, it wouldn't mean that much.
Where did I say that. Stop lying.
I am not dodging your questions on purpose, as I am fighting on all fronts here.
You are dodging on purpose. It is obvious. Every time I ask you something about the moon, you switch to talking about human life. You wouldn't 'be fighting on all fronts' if you didn't keep trying to change the topic to dodge the questions.
Can you please tell me, one at a time, and I will try to answer? If you are willing.
1. What is special about the moons orbit with regards to eclipses? (do you even know what the moons orbit is or how eclipses work?)
30 Jan 17
Originally posted by Ghost of a DukeYou seem arrogant here Ghost, and I resent it greatly.
Seriously Chaney, go away and read up on these things. (For your own edification). People are not just spouting off random thoughts here. Brains 'the size of planets' have provided these explanations.
Seriously.
You have not produced one reasonable shred of proof on this thread about anything.
"Probability" is the only thing you have offered. It is weak and lacks anything scientific.
30 Jan 17
Originally posted by chaney3True arrogance is going from this:
You seem arrogant here Ghost, and I resent it greatly.
I'm really quite surprised about this development in our discussion. I will admit that I have always 'assumed' that if the moon were much closer to earth, it would spell disaster, and am currently not able to reply without doing some research.
to this:
I have not done the research yet, but I am certain that I will be correct.
although 'arrogance' might not be quite the right word.
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 29601
30 Jan 17
Originally posted by chaney3While you've offered no more than my pet hamster when he looks at the piece of cheese that's fallen on the floor and believes it was meant to be there.
You seem arrogant here Ghost, and I resent it greatly.
You have not produced one reasonable shred of proof on this thread about anything.
"Probability" is the only thing you have offered. It is weak and lacks anything scientific.
And to say probability lacks anything scientific just betrays the depth of your ineptitude. (Go ahead, resent that greatly).
30 Jan 17
Originally posted by Ghost of a DukeProbabilty, guesses, assumptions, and accidents are all you have.
While you've offered no more than my pet hamster when he looks at the piece of cheese that's fallen on the floor and believes it was meant to be there.
And to say probability lacks anything scientific just betrays the depth of your ineptitude. (Go ahead, resent that greatly).
If you don't count Elvis burnt toast, hamsters and cheese.
I have yet to see science.
Just because you claim that a massive planetary collision may have happened, with no proof, that just so happened to form our moon, and its orbit, along with the distance away the sun is, by accident, doesn't mean that your entire accidental universe theory must be believed by anyone who finds your claim more absurd than a notion of design.
Design makes more sense than your theory of accidents and UNprobables.
31 Jan 17
Originally posted by chaney3Someone, you mean like Fritz 10? So you admit I would not be playing you as if we were over a real board at a pub or something. Nice. Or maybe you think God is on your side. If that is the case why are you wallowing in low numbers in your rating? BTW, it won't be anywhere near a billion years before the end of eclipses I just used that for the easy math.
I can see that you're ignoring the eclipses we DO have now as design, by trying to focus attention on what may happen in a billion years. My guess is that if the moon moves, then earth and sun will somehow move in harmony as designed, which will produce eclipses as always.
Hey....do you have any idea what would happen if the moon was 100,000 miles closer ...[text shortened]... iend, you should think twice before challenging me at chess, for I have 'someone' on my side. 😉
It is just your religious dogma insisting the moon will always do perfect eclipses. What exactly are they for? It has been doing that for millions of years, way before humans or Neandertals or homo Habilis came on the scene, hundred million years ago it was clunking along creating eclipses. It is just your arrogance that the human race is worth such kind of attention that drives you.
31 Jan 17
Originally posted by twhiteheadThe sun is 400 times larger than the moon.
The very essence of closed minded religiosity. You are certain you know everything about the Moon without having done any research.
[b]You claim that if the moon was 100,000 miles closer to earth, it wouldn't mean that much.
Where did I say that. Stop lying.
I am not dodging your questions on purpose, as I am fighting on all fronts here. ...[text shortened]... orbit with regards to eclipses? (do you even know what the moons orbit is or how eclipses work?)[/b]
The sun is also, 400 times further away from the moon.
The above 'coincidence' would not matter if the path of the moon did not cross paths with the sun.......but it does.
The orbit of the moon puts it directly in the path of the sun, producing an eclipse.
So, you are relying on 2 monumental accidents. And I don't buy it. Design is more likely.
Maybe.....you don't even see an eclipse as something special? Your ho-hum attitude would indicate that you are downplaying design so much that you will regard an eclipse as "no big deal"?
If so, we don't have much to discuss, because I believe that an eclipse is an extraordinary relationship between sun and moon. And designed.
31 Jan 17
Originally posted by chaney3You are right. We have nothing to discuss. Have it your way, you win, the moon will remain just as it is for the next 10 billion years, and even then there will be these incredible eclipses. Are you happy now?
The sun is 400 times larger than the moon.
The sun is also, 400 times further away from the moon.
The above 'coincidence' would not matter if the path of the moon did not cross paths with the sun.......but it does.
The orbit of the moon puts it directly in the path of the sun, producing an eclipse.
So, you are relying on 2 monumental accidents. A ...[text shortened]... I believe that an eclipse is an extraordinary relationship between sun and moon. And designed.
31 Jan 17
I will add one more monumental accident.
Ghost has said that the moon was formed by some sort of "monumental planetary collision" with earth.
How 'lucky' that after this alleged collision, the moon was not only 400 times smaller than the sun, but ended up in the orbit it did, to cross paths with the sun.
Too many accidents. I cannot believe the extent some will go to refute design.