16 Oct 12
Originally posted by KellyJayit doesn't matter how many times it's been blown out and started again. we can still tell approximately how long it's been burning in total, and with enough knowledge, we could probably even tell how long the current flame has been burning.
Yes, you can get much from the candle, but you don't know how many times it has
been blown out and restarted, so how long the current flame has been lit will
be a beyond your math.
Kelly
18 Oct 12
Originally posted by VoidSpiritA candle is manmade. So what if you can tell how long it has been burning? Who cares?
it doesn't matter how many times it's been blown out and started again. we can still tell approximately how long it's been burning in total, and with enough knowledge, we could probably even tell how long the current flame has been burning.
20 Oct 12
Originally posted by Proper KnobThe issue you have as I have stated is you don't know what it looked like when
This analogy doesn't fit your particular scenario.
We can work out how long the candle has burnt for if it is burnt in one continuous go, but you are correct in that i if blow out the candle for a day/week/month/year and then come back and light it i we wouldn't be able to measure the interim period when it was not lit. Do you see the problem here tho ...[text shortened]... ger[/i]? Your analogy is demonstrating the the universe, could be, older. It's back to front.
it started so you don't know what to look at to measure that type of time. You
do have ideas with items that have started and stopped within our grasp where
we have been able to look at it from beginning to end, but with the universe
you don't have that.
Kelly
21 Oct 12
Originally posted by KellyJayYou didn't actually address my concerns. For instance, I am still wondering why you endorse something that purports to be an answer to a question, when on the other hand, you say this question has no good answers.
The issue you have as I have stated is you don't know what it looked like when
it started so you don't know what to look at to measure that type of time. You
do have ideas with items that have started and stopped within our grasp where
we have been able to look at it from beginning to end, but with the universe
you don't have that.
Kelly
?
21 Oct 12
Originally posted by LemonJelloI say just by looking at it you'll come up with no good answers, you need knowledge
You didn't actually address my concerns. For instance, I am still wondering why you endorse something that purports to be an answer to a question, when on the other hand, you say this question has no good answers.
?
that can only be given by knowing the answer to when it was lit which could only
come from one in the know. So if you have an answer and it is nothing but another "it
could have happen this way" you've made up another possible story nothing more.
One of the main complaints against scripture's version is that people say it nothing
but a story made up by men that lived long ago that hasn't changed with time. If
it is just another story made up by man than it is just that, another story made up
by man. If on the other hand if there is a Creator of the universe and through Him
a story was told, no matter how much time passes will not change into an error
due to the age of the story either.
Kelly
21 Oct 12
Originally posted by KellyJay
I say just by looking at it you'll come up with no good answers, you need knowledge
that can only be given by knowing the answer to when it was lit which could only
come from one in the know. So if you have an answer and it is nothing but another "it
could have happen this way" you've made up another possible story nothing more.
One of the main compla ...[text shortened]... much time passes will not change into an error
due to the age of the story either.
Kelly
We can work out how long the candle has burnt for if it is burnt in one continuous go, but you are correct in that i if blow out the candle for a day/week/month/year and then come back and light it i we wouldn't be able to measure the interim period when it was not lit. Do you see the problem here though? How is this analogy comparable to your view that the universe is younger? Your analogy is demonstrating the the universe, could be, older. It's back to front.ProperKnob
I can demonstrate for any one candle how long it can and will burn for. No matter how many times you blow it out, it cannot burn through in less than that time. In any event, the universe has not come off line for maintenance and there is no mechanism to make that possible. So let's drop your analogy and agree it fails to make your case.
We know some things and can work with what we know. While there are other things we do not know, that does not prevent us knowing what we do know. Your desparate argument that there will always be something we do not know does not in reality have the slightest relevance or importance, since we do not need to know everything. If you reduce knowledge to your absolutely unjustified level of skepticism then you really have nothing to say on any subject whatever.
When the Americans vote for a president next month, we will know to a reasonable accuracy level (given their rubbish methodology for counting votes which is a laughing stock) how many votes are cast so we will know how the American people (the ones allowed to register) have voted, and we will know who wins the election, but we will not know how most individual Americans voted and unless they tell us, and we trust their account, we never can know. But we do not need to know.