Evolution vs. Creation

High school senior Zack Kopplin is leading the fight to repeal the Louisiana Science Education Act of 2008. Full Story

“ Ah see's lanlubbers Cap'n BT!”

Level 1

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#83995 Mar 30, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Repository? I thought they were generally star remnants. There is a large cluster at the center of the galaxy though.
<quoted text>
There's two possibilities. They don't disappear and all the information is trapped inside the singularity. Or the information bleeds away as Hawking radiation until there's not enough mass left inside the black hole to maintain itself, then it is destroyed. I'd suggest you ask Polymath if he shows up as he's our resident maths and physics expert.
<quoted text>
Dunno.
<quoted text>
The age of our universe doesn't conflict with the cycling process. All it states is that our current universal expansion is 13.71 billion years old. But it is still possible that energy is eternal and a new universe is produced upon the death of a previous one. But at each start of a new universal expansion all information of the previous universe is destroyed, meaning we have no idea of its configuration or characteristics. It may not be ever possible to know. Or it might, if we can come up with a unified theory of quantum gravity. Again if you see Polymath ask him about all this since he's sh t-hot on the stuff.
I know poly. Haven't seen him in some time though.
Thanks for your thoughts.
All is hypothesis still.

Isn't Hawking working on a new paper about it?

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#83996 Mar 30, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh my.
Mark has proof that the Ice caps are less than 6,000 years old. Form a noted glaciologist no less. He just forgot to publish that revolutionary claim
Maynard Miller is most famous for his work on the Juneau ice field. That is an actively flowing glacier and it is very possible that the age of the ice in it is less than 6,000 years. That does not mean the ice of the ice caps is only 6,000 years old. That has been shown by several dating methods to be much much older than that.
More made up stories by Mark. We have a very poor liar here.
Indeed , The length of the record depends on the depth of the ice core and varies from a few years up to 800 kyr (800,000 years) for the EPICA core.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_core
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#83997 Mar 30, 2013
Mark wrote:
<quoted text>
On #1, the math used was a population statistic average over known history. I would need to look up the calc. Agree with the variable's involved. Its a question, not a proof.
On #2, he worked in a time when one could get more non-evolutionary challenges or things to think about past peer review. Never happen today. You can imagine, you could measure his job life in seconds, no 1/2 lives involved.
The guy accepted evolution. He did not falsify evolution. And his work was merely establishing the particulars of evolution. So you can stop misrepresenting him now, especially as you don't believe in the evidence he used to write his papers since it involves stuff that's older than planet Earth, according to you.
Mark wrote:
I knew Dr. M. Miller personally because of his work in Alaska. I once asked, "Maynard, how old is the oldest ice on the planet", his answer; "less than 6000 years", I asked, "do you have documentation on that", "yes its in one of my papers - "in the tables"! He sent me a copy. That was 30 years ago. OK, can we have a truce over this "what God thinks of me" stuff?
Again, very charming. He's wrong:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/06/...

Unless of course there really WAS a God who didit with magic only 6,000 years ago because in the end such an entity can make anything look like however it likes.

Duh.

“Universal Conscious Conscience”

Level 3

Since: Feb 08

Planet Earth

#83998 Mar 30, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
No such thing. That is an emotional argument used by fundies and cranks. Empirical testing is always required.


YOU ARE INFINITLY WRONG!!!! I know one universal self-evident truth when it comes to human morality and itís not based on emotions or religious text books because I am not religious.

How do you decide morality using your scientific method or theory of evolution?

Iím not letting this one go so easy because this universal moral law I discovered is personal.

Please explain to me how your method of reasoning determines this one.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#83999 Mar 30, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh my.
Mark has proof that the Ice caps are less than 6,000 years old. Form a noted glaciologist no less. He just forgot to publish that revolutionary claim
Maynard Miller is most famous for his work on the Juneau ice field. That is an actively flowing glacier and it is very possible that the age of the ice in it is less than 6,000 years. That does not mean the ice of the ice caps is only 6,000 years old. That has been shown by several dating methods to be much much older than that.
More made up stories by Mark. We have a very poor liar here.
Especially if we take into consideration research published by Miller himself which shows he was not a YEC:

http://www.crevassezone.org/reports/JIRP/03-C...

... but then I suppose the mean old evolutionists forced him to go with an old Earth paradigm at gunpoint.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#84000 Mar 30, 2013
Black Thunder 42 wrote:
<quoted text> I know poly. Haven't seen him in some time though.
Thanks for your thoughts.
All is hypothesis still.
Isn't Hawking working on a new paper about it?
You'd have to ask him.

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#84001 Mar 30, 2013
Infinite Force wrote:
<quoted text>
YOU ARE INFINITLY WRONG!!!! I know one universal self-evident truth when it comes to human morality and itís not based on emotions or religious text books because I am not religious.
How do you decide morality using your scientific method or theory of evolution?
Iím not letting this one go so easy because this universal moral law I discovered is personal.
Please explain to me how your method of reasoning determines this one.
There is no such thing. Morality is decided by the consensus of the people within regions, and within indigenous populations.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#84002 Mar 30, 2013
Infinite Force wrote:
<quoted text>
YOU ARE INFINITLY WRONG!!!! I know one universal self-evident truth when it comes to human morality and itís not based on emotions or religious text books because I am not religious.
How do you decide morality using your scientific method or theory of evolution?
How do you decide morality using banana beef sandwiches?

How do we hammer a nail into an ocean?

You are confused as to how tools work.
Infinite Force wrote:
Iím not letting this one go so easy because this universal moral law I discovered is personal.
You won't let it go easily because you're daft. But there is no universal moral law.
Infinite Force wrote:
Please explain to me how your method of reasoning determines this one.
By the simple fact you are unable to demonstrate your claims.(shrug)

“Universal Conscious Conscience”

Level 3

Since: Feb 08

Planet Earth

#84003 Mar 30, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> There is no such thing. Morality is decided by the consensus of the people within regions, and within indigenous populations.
YOU ARE ETERNALLY WRONG! YOU HAVE NO EARTHLY IDEA OF WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT!

If your scientific method or theory of evolution can't figure out this one that follows the scientific method and backed with empirical data and deemed as a scientific moral law then you need to abandon your theory of evolution. Without order any rational technological civilization will collapse or destroy itself. THIS APPLIES TO ALL RATIONAL CIVILAZATIONS IN THIS PHYSICAL UNIVERESE. THE UNIVERSAL CONSTANT LAW STANDS!

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#84004 Mar 30, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Especially if we take into consideration research published by Miller himself which shows he was not a YEC:
http://www.crevassezone.org/reports/JIRP/03-C...
... but then I suppose the mean old evolutionists forced him to go with an old Earth paradigm at gunpoint.
Yes, I don't believe any of Mark's stories. It is very easy to look up the name of real scientists on the internet and to claim that you know them. When someone claims that that scientist wrote an article totally outside of his character and then to hear Mark has it in his garage is what makes the story laughable.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#84005 Mar 30, 2013
Infinite Force wrote:
<quoted text>
YOU ARE ETERNALLY WRONG! YOU HAVE NO EARTHLY IDEA OF WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT!
If your scientific method or theory of evolution can't figure out this one that follows the scientific method and backed with empirical data and deemed as a scientific moral law then you need to abandon your theory of evolution. Without order any rational technological civilization will collapse or destroy itself. THIS APPLIES TO ALL RATIONAL CIVILAZATIONS IN THIS PHYSICAL UNIVERESE. THE UNIVERSAL CONSTANT LAW STANDS!


Why do you keep making idiotic unsupported claims?

By the way, there is no "universal constant law". Now you are just making crap up.

“Universal Conscious Conscience”

Level 3

Since: Feb 08

Planet Earth

#84006 Mar 30, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
How do you decide morality using banana beef sandwiches?
Giving everybody one! NO EXCEPTIONS!
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
How do we hammer a nail into an ocean?
You are confused as to how tools work.
Donít worry, my method of reasoning got it and it follows the scientific method without using controlled experiments in the lab. Donít worry itís backed with empirical data as well.
This self-evident truth is un-deniable as well!
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
You won't let it go easily because you're daft. But there is no universal moral law.
WRONG AGAIN! Now explain to me why canít theory of evolution answer this?
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
By the simple fact you are unable to demonstrate your claims.(shrug)
My discovery is a scientific moral law! I just want to know how you concluded this donít exist by your scientific method? The answer is super simplistic to understand.

“Universal Conscious Conscience”

Level 3

Since: Feb 08

Planet Earth

#84007 Mar 30, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Why do you keep making idiotic unsupported claims?
By the way, there is no "universal constant law". Now you are just making crap up.
"Fundamentally, all scientific laws follow from physics, laws which occur in other sciences ultimately follow from physical laws. Often, from mathematically fundamental viewpoints, universal constants emerge from scientific laws."

>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_of_science

You need to stop denying that a universal constant law exists. Please read the above quote and source.
Mark

United States

#84008 Mar 30, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey bub, maybe God IS all about truth. YOU on the other hand are not. And don't give me this crapp about what your personal friends would do to me, I did not bring them into this. I don't even know who Bill or his wife are in order to personally insult them. If you continue to make more appeals to emotion that's your problem for getting emotionally involved on the internet. That's why I don't care if fundies call me all the names under the sun. All I've done is expose some of your flawed thinking and scientific inaccuracies, and pointed out when you are lying. I can't falsify your personal anecdotes. You may well be a coal miner and known a guy called Bill. But when you start lying about science bear in mind that people here WILL correct you whether you like it or not. It's your choice whether you want to continue lying or not. It makes no difference to us as fundies around these forums are a dime a dozen.
So, you are saying that you hold the scepter of all truth and judgment over character. Calling people liars from your position is amazing. My point is you are passing judgment on people and things from a position of what truth, your non or part knowledge.
drink The hive

New York, NY

#84009 Mar 30, 2013
"I Traveled A Long Way Seeking God - But When I Finally Gave Up And Turned Back -There He Was - Within Me! O Lalli Now Why Do U Wander Like A Beggar?- Make Some Effort - And He Will Grant U A Vision Of Himself In The Form Of Bliss In Your Heart." - The Saint Of The Kashmir Shaivism Tradition...

Mark

United States

#84010 Mar 30, 2013
Gillette wrote:
<quoted text>
1.) you would seriously post a calculation without even CONSIDERING famines; plagues, the effects of wars, etc. on population? LOL!
2.) You would seriously wonder "where all the bones are"? Don't you know that bones decompose rapidly on or under the surface of the earth? Do you think bones are ETERNAL or something?
<quoted text>
Let me guess: Dr. Miller was a "Bible-believing Christian"?
We have ice cores MANY TIMES older than that.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/icecores.html
Up to 800,000 years for some cores!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_core

I believe Dr. Miller was America's most experienced Glaciologist, as far as time on the ice as a professional. He studied mostly on teh Juneau ice feild but spent time around the earth also. I was not priming him for the answer, he offered it without hesitation. Asked him about Greenland cores and CO etc. and he said in his opinion, it's all to homogenized to really be sure that deep. An interesting indicator is the depth of a flight of WW2 aircraft that were forced down on the shelf. We never talked faith.

On the number of human remains vs population statistics, with the power of the web, it should not be hard to check how that plays out.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#84011 Mar 30, 2013
Mark wrote:
<quoted text>
So, you are saying that you hold the scepter of all truth and judgment over character. Calling people liars from your position is amazing. My point is you are passing judgment on people and things from a position of what truth, your non or part knowledge.
I don't think we can judge all liars, only the most obvious ones.

You are far more obvious than most.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#84012 Mar 30, 2013
Mark wrote:
<quoted text>
I believe Dr. Miller was America's most experienced Glaciologist, as far as time on the ice as a professional. He studied mostly on teh Juneau ice feild but spent time around the earth also. I was not priming him for the answer, he offered it without hesitation. Asked him about Greenland cores and CO etc. and he said in his opinion, it's all to homogenized to really be sure that deep. An interesting indicator is the depth of a flight of WW2 aircraft that were forced down on the shelf. We never talked faith.
On the number of human remains vs population statistics, with the power of the web, it should not be hard to check how that plays out.
Please, do not defame a man who is not hear to defend himself.

If you want to make that sort of insulting claim against Miller then you must provide some sort of evidence that he was such a full fledged idiot.

Seriously this looks like just another one of your lies.

In fact since the age of the ice caps is far greater than 50,000 years it is very obvious that he would not have made a statement about carbon dioxide.

“Darwin was right..of course.”

Level 9

Since: Jun 11

Bay of Fundy

#84013 Mar 30, 2013
Colorado Chick wrote:
STOP IT!!!...I feel a headache coming on..MIDOL PLEASE!!
Where's my Coors??

“Darwin was right..of course.”

Level 9

Since: Jun 11

Bay of Fundy

#84014 Mar 30, 2013
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> No!
You can not rule it out completely.
There were thriving population around that area, so the people then thought it was global due to the massive nature of the flood. Get that!
All those people in the thriving populations died in the flood. Any people not killed by the flood would know it wasn't global.

I'm sorry Charles, but the global flood really did not happen and if it was just local and small; how did Noah's Ark get 14,000 feet up the side of the mountain.

The story is just a parable/allegory.

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.

Weird Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
What are you thinking about now? (Jun '10) 7 min bolt 20,240
Interesting Quotes (Jun '11) 8 min wichita-rick 13,314
What Could Be Faked,...? 12 min bolt 45
ladies, how would u feel if u caught your man w... 16 min bolt 2
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 17 min Tom2Tone 147,100
I Like..... (Mar '14) 22 min David0407 311
Alphabetical ways to die (Jul '11) 22 min wichita-rick 10,463
What's your tip for the day? 58 min SLY WEST 1,054
Do you have a Topix crush? (Jun '11) 3 hr Fred Bear 5,604
•••

Weird People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••