Many many years from now...

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#101 Jun 5, 2014
replaytime wrote:
According to NASA the universe it is flat, and it is immeasurably vast.
Many years from now(5,000 years, when the knowledge of then makes the knowledge of now look like child's play) they will look back on us and think we were a stupid species with very limited knowledge for saying that about the universe kind of like we do with the people 4,500+ years ago who said that about earth even though they had not the means to know better about earth as we have not the means to know better about the universe.
The difference is that we asked the question of whether the universe is flat and determined a way to test its degree of flatness. Specifically, the flatness of thew universe is measured by a constant called Omega_tot. Flatness corresponds to a value of Omega_tot of exactly 1. The *measured* value is .9995 with a possible error of .0034 (95% confidence interval). So the data is perfectly consistent with a flat universe.

Now, is it *possible* the universe is not flat and that Omega_tot is not exactly 1? Yes. And that will always be a possibility because flatness corresponds to an exact value and all measurements will give a value and a possible error range. So, it Omega_tot turns out to be 1.00231, that would mean the universe is NOT flat, but it would be consistent with our data at this point.

http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/old_new_cos...

Since: Feb 14

Location hidden

#102 Jun 5, 2014
Chimney1 wrote:
Sometimes dissidents are right. Not usually. You are compelled to promote dissidents in general because you are in the game of trying to discredit conventional science in general.
All the dissidents I cite are right, mostly because they point out that there isn't any science to substantiate conventional thought.
Chimney1 wrote:
You believe that if you can prove that the Towers came down via conspiracy or vaccines are harmful, that some of the distrust you thereby sow against science will rub off on evolution, geology, and astronomy etc.
Transparent, even if not to yourself.
It has already been proven that the Twin Towers and Building 7 came down by controlled demolition.
http://everythingimportant.org/9/11/nanotherm...

Since: Feb 14

Location hidden

#103 Jun 5, 2014
Clearly, the validity of many conspiracy theories is a reasonable argument that proves that humans are easily deceived.

Since: Feb 14

Location hidden

#104 Jun 5, 2014
Chimney1 wrote:
You are compelled to promote dissidents in general because you are in the game of trying to discredit conventional science in general.
No, my primary goal is to exalt the three angels messages and to expose the three demons' messages.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#105 Jun 6, 2014
Zog Has-fallen wrote:
It has already been proven that the Twin Towers and Building 7 came down by controlled demolition.
http://everythingimportant.org/9/11/nanotherm...
Total bullshit. You get loonier as the days go by.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#106 Jun 6, 2014
Zog Has-fallen wrote:
<quoted text> Chimney1 cares about being accurate and he is man enough to acknowledge his most obvious errors.

That is better that yourself on two counts.

Since: Feb 14

Location hidden

#107 Jun 6, 2014
MikeF wrote:
Total bullshit.
Please admit that you're not qualified to refute a scientific proof.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#108 Jun 6, 2014
Zog Has-fallen wrote:
<quoted text> Please admit that you're not qualified to refute a scientific proof.
In some cases, that may be true. In this case, I am well qualified to refute bullshit.

Since: Feb 14

Location hidden

#109 Jun 6, 2014
MikeF wrote:
In this case, I am well qualified to refute bullshit.
OK, let’s see you refute The Open Chemical Physics Journal article, Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe, by Niels H. Harrit, Jeffrey Farrer, Steven E. Jones, Kevin R. Ryan, Frank M. Legge, Daniel Farnsworth, Gregg Roberts, James R. Gourley and Bradley R. Larsen, which you moronically asserted was “total bullshit.”

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#110 Jun 6, 2014
Zog Has-fallen wrote:
<quoted text>OK, let’s see you refute The Open Chemical Physics Journal article, Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe, by Niels H. Harrit, Jeffrey Farrer, Steven E. Jones, Kevin R. Ryan, Frank M. Legge, Daniel Farnsworth, Gregg Roberts, James R. Gourley and Bradley R. Larsen, which you moronically asserted was “total bullshit.”
I think you misunderstood. I've asserted YOU are total bullshit. I stand with your church, AJP, Buffy and just about everyone here in that assessment.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#111 Jun 6, 2014
Zog Has-fallen wrote:
<quoted text>OK, let’s see you refute The Open Chemical Physics Journal article, Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe, by Niels H. Harrit, Jeffrey Farrer, Steven E. Jones, Kevin R. Ryan, Frank M. Legge, Daniel Farnsworth, Gregg Roberts, James R. Gourley and Bradley R. Larsen, which you moronically asserted was “total bullshit.”
BTW, this guy are full of it as well but, since it is quitting time, I'll refute them later.
TurkanaBoy

Since: May 14

the Earth Clod

#112 Jun 6, 2014
Zog Has-fallen wrote:
<quoted text> All the dissidents I cite are right, mostly because they point out that there isn't any science to substantiate conventional thought.
<quoted text> It has already been proven that the Twin Towers and Building 7 came down by controlled demolition.
http://everythingimportant.org/9/11/nanotherm...
Zog Has-fallen wrote:
<quoted text>OK, let’s see you refute The Open Chemical Physics Journal article, Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe, by Niels H. Harrit, Jeffrey Farrer, Steven E. Jones, Kevin R. Ryan, Frank M. Legge, Daniel Farnsworth, Gregg Roberts, James R. Gourley and Bradley R. Larsen, which you moronically asserted was “total bullshit.”
When crazy Zog starts quoting or referring to literature, this AUTOMATICALLY brings deceit and distortion. That comes when your troubled muddle head produces thoughts like
"my primary goal is to exalt the three angels messages and to expose the three demons' messages".

Since: Feb 14

Location hidden

#114 Jun 8, 2014
MikeF wrote:
BTW, this guy are full of it as well but, since it is quitting time, I'll refute them later.
I'm still waiting.

“Do not bend, fold, staple or”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

mutilate. Point down range.

#115 Jun 8, 2014
Zog Has-fallen wrote:
<quoted text> I'm still waiting.
I just read several articles debunking this bullshit. You are indeed a mentally ill nut job looking for attention to validate your ego. No wonder your only publications are your arrest record and your whacko blog.

Thermite is not used for building demolition. The reaction is too slow. The temperatures determined in the Harrit article were below the temperature of the thermite reaction and some of the alleged thermitic material was just paint. There was much more information that makes the claim of controlled demolition of the twin towers to be pure nonsense. But to refute the claim, what I have written is more than enough.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#116 Jun 9, 2014
Zog Has-fallen wrote:
<quoted text> No, my primary goal is to exalt the three angels messages and to expose the three demons' messages.
Oh? And which of these messages rules out evolution? And I mean, of course, conventional evolution, not your headstand version of it. Might as well understand the root of your position rather than constantly snipping at the branches.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#117 Jun 9, 2014
Zog Has-fallen wrote:
<quoted text> No, my primary goal is to exalt the three angels messages and to expose the three demons' messages.
For once I took a detour to your site and read your article

The Three Angels' Messages Versus The Three Demons' Messages

Admittedly with a bit of skimming at times.

Your efforts follow the same errors as all other efforts at interpreting "prophecy", whether biblical, nostradamus, or whatever. You take a statement of extreme ambiguity and adapt it to whatever you think fits at the time. So, a two horned beast becomes the corporate / political machine of the USA for example

Back in the 80's when the USSR still struck fear into the free world, Revelation interpreters saw the USSR in everything. Probably back in WW1, the same. Napoleon's time, the same. During the Black death, the same. Always - the same.

Your own discussion is severely restricted to your time and place, and Noam Chomsky's obsessions. The USA, the Pope, Israel etc. Barely a mention of Islam. Or Hinduism, state religion of soon to be the world's most populous country. Or China. Or Russia.

The next generation of End of the Worlders will no longer be so narrowly focused on the West as you are, because as the economic power of other regions grows, they will take the "evil spotlight". Revelations will be reinterpreted according to these rising powers. Islam, perhaps soon to overtake Christianity in sheer numbers. etc.

I don't suppose telling you this will be of any use, as you have fully invested your life and identity in correctly interpreting what is fundamentally nonsensical. The endless joining of meaningless dots reminds me somewhat of John Nash as portrayed in A Beautiful Mind.

Its not that every claim you make is false, its that its put together in an arbitrary way according to what you think some obscure passages MIGHT mean, then self reinforced.

This way of thinking is the epitome of the problems inherent with non-falsifiable claims, the opposite of scientific thinking, and it makes you part of the mess instead of part of the solution. You have devoted your life to interpreting the hallucinatory and incoherent visions of some early Christian nutter, convinced by your need that there is some deep meaning in it.

There ain't.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#118 Jun 9, 2014
Zog Has-fallen wrote:
<quoted text> I'm still waiting.
Tough, Eugene. You're not a priority. I'll get to it when I get to it
The Dude

Wallasey, UK

#119 Jun 9, 2014
Zog Has-fallen wrote:
<quoted text> Please admit that you're not qualified to refute a scientific proof.
BONG!!!!

Well done, Shoob.

Since: Feb 14

Location hidden

#120 Jun 9, 2014
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>I just read several articles debunking this bullshit. You are indeed a mentally ill nut job looking for attention to validate your ego. No wonder your only publications are your arrest record and your whacko blog.
Thermite is not used for building demolition. The reaction is too slow. The temperatures determined in the Harrit article were below the temperature of the thermite reaction and some of the alleged thermitic material was just paint. There was much more information that makes the claim of controlled demolition of the twin towers to be pure nonsense. But to refute the claim, what I have written is more than enough.
Please learn to read with comprehension. You really don't know anything. Harrit's article repeatedly refers to nano-thermite, which is explosive.

I quote:

Historically, pyrotechnic or explosive applications for traditional thermites have been limited due to their relatively slow energy release rates. Because nanothermites are created from reactant particles with proximities approaching the atomic scale, energy release rates are far greater.[2]

MICs or Super-thermites are generally developed for military use, propellants, explosives, and pyrotechnics. Research into military applications of nano-sized materials began in the early 1990s.[3] Because of their highly increased reaction rate, nanosized thermitic materials are being studied by the U.S. military with the aim of developing new types of bombs several times more powerful than conventional explosives.[4] Nanoenergetic materials can store more energy than conventional energetic materials and can be used in innovative ways to tailor the release of this energy. Thermobaric weapons are one potential application of nanoenergetic materials.[5]
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nano-thermite

Since: Feb 14

Location hidden

#121 Jun 9, 2014
Chimney1 wrote:
Your efforts follow the same errors as all other efforts at interpreting "prophecy", whether biblical, nostradamus, or whatever. You take a statement of extreme ambiguity and adapt it to whatever you think fits at the time. So, a two horned beast becomes the corporate / political machine of the USA for example
Back in the 80's when the USSR still struck fear into the free world, Revelation interpreters saw the USSR in everything.
There's no point in quoting those who have been proven to be ridiculously wrong on everything, especially the elementary fundamentals. Seventh-day Adventists figured out the identity of the two horned beast in the nineteenth century, long before the US became a major player on the world scene.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Evolution Debate Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 8 min Eagle 12 27,271
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 38 min Aura Mytha 58,065
News Nonsense of a high order: The confused world of... 1 hr Hedonist Heretic 1,896
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 1 hr Ragmar 159,298
News Intelligent Design Education Day Sun replaytime 2
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) Sun replaytime 219,597
News Betsy DeVos' Code Words for Creationism Offshoo... Feb 16 scientia potentia... 1
More from around the web