Don't dictate beliefs

Sep 5, 2012 Full story: The Star Press 11,175

No one else can say otherwise? That is basically saying those who do "believe in God" are better? Hardly.

Full Story
KJV

United States

#7118 Nov 28, 2012
Khatru wrote:
<quoted text>So you don't know why he had his son killed?

Fair enough then.
LOL

Who's on first?

What an idiot.
KJV

United States

#7119 Nov 28, 2012
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>You have never been to Mexico either? Wow.

You shouldn't believe everything you hear on TV.
Derek do you see how the fumbling bumbling little atheist keeps posting this kind of dribble. It's unreal how they love to show off there ignorance and lie right out in the open and still expect to be held as a credible source for their fight!

Wow what fools.
KJV

United States

#7120 Nov 28, 2012
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>Why are you confusing black holes and the Big Bang? They are very different types of singularity.
Oh different types of singularity!

"According to the standard theory, our universe sprang into existence as "singularity" around 13.7 billion years ago. What is a "singularity" and where does it come from? Well, to be honest, we don't know for sure. Singularities are zones which defy our current understanding of physics. They are thought to exist at the core of "black holes." Black holes are areas of intense gravitational pressure. The pressure is thought to be so intense that finite matter is actually squished into infinite density (a mathematical concept which truly boggles the mind). These zones of infinite density are called "singularities." Our universe is thought to have begun as an infinitesimally small, infinitely hot, infinitely dense, something - a singularity. Where did it come from? We don't know. Why did it appear? We don't know. "

But we know this was a different type of singularity? LOL
KJV

United States

#7121 Nov 28, 2012
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>The Big Bang singularity is not a black hole singularity. They are very different.
According to the standard theory, our universe sprang into existence as "singularity" around 13.7 billion years ago. What is a "singularity" and where does it come from? Well, to be honest, we don't know for sure. Singularities are zones which defy our current understanding of physics. They are thought to exist at the core of "black holes." Black holes are areas of intense gravitational pressure. The pressure is thought to be so intense that finite matter is actually squished into infinite density (a mathematical concept which truly boggles the mind). These zones of infinite density are called "singularities." Our universe is thought to have begun as an infinitesimally small, infinitely hot, infinitely dense, something - a singularity. Where did it come from? We don't know. Why did it appear? We don't know.

http://www.big-bang-theory.com/
KJV

United States

#7122 Nov 28, 2012
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>Not when there is a non-zero cosmological constant (i.e, dark energy).
I'm quite familiar with dark matter.

The Soudan Underground Laboratory is the leading deep underground science and engineering laboratory in the United States today. Scientists from around the world have been working at Soudan for 25 years trying to answer basic questions about the Universe in which we live: Is matter completely stable? What is the nature of the fundamental forces? Can we identify the Dark Matter that seems to permeate our Universe?

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#7123 Nov 28, 2012
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
There is an unknown dark matter that repels science believes.
Dark *energy* is the stuff that repels, not dark matter.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#7124 Nov 28, 2012
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh different types of singularity!
"According to the standard theory, our universe sprang into existence as "singularity" around 13.7 billion years ago. What is a "singularity" and where does it come from? Well, to be honest, we don't know for sure. Singularities are zones which defy our current understanding of physics. They are thought to exist at the core of "black holes." Black holes are areas of intense gravitational pressure. The pressure is thought to be so intense that finite matter is actually squished into infinite density (a mathematical concept which truly boggles the mind). These zones of infinite density are called "singularities." Our universe is thought to have begun as an infinitesimally small, infinitely hot, infinitely dense, something - a singularity. Where did it come from? We don't know. Why did it appear? We don't know. "
But we know this was a different type of singularity? LOL
Yes, we do. The singularity of a black hole is a stable one: it is time invariant. The singularity of the Big Bang, however, is *space* invariant: it is the same for all locations of space. Schwarzchild solution for black holes, Friedman solution for the Big Bang.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#7125 Nov 28, 2012
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm quite familiar with dark matter.
The Soudan Underground Laboratory is the leading deep underground science and engineering laboratory in the United States today. Scientists from around the world have been working at Soudan for 25 years trying to answer basic questions about the Universe in which we live: Is matter completely stable? What is the nature of the fundamental forces? Can we identify the Dark Matter that seems to permeate our Universe?
Yes, Soudan is studying dark *matter*, not dark *energy*. Very different things with, unfortunately, similar names. Lots of good stuff about neutrinos from there also.
KJV

United States

#7126 Nov 28, 2012
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>I am not Hiding, I am Aerobatty.

Hey KK I found that post here it is. LOL
KJV

United States

#7127 Nov 28, 2012
12 year old leads atheist mother to Christ.

THIS BINARY CHILD PRODIGY PAINTED HER VISIONS OF HEAVEN AND BROUGHT HER ATHEIST MOTHER TO CHRIST

http://www.shangralafamilyfun.com/prodigy.htm...
KJV

United States

#7128 Nov 28, 2012
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>Yes, Soudan is studying dark *matter*, not dark *energy*. Very different things with, unfortunately, similar names. Lots of good stuff about neutrinos from there also.
neutrinos, which are light, fast, and plentiful

Not really matter is it?

Last I heard light was energy although its not the dark energy we are talking about. they do deal with dark energy as part of dark matter.
Last I head they were expanding to dark energy also.

Two parts of the lab.

MINOS is the Main Injector Neutrino Oscillation Search: "Main Injector" for the Fermilab accelerator, and "Oscillation Search" for the theory that links neutrino mass to oscillations. In Greek mythology Minos was the son of Zeus and Europa, King of Crete, and builder of the labyrinth.

What's Next Door?
The other cavern is the original Soudan 2 Laboratory. The Soudan 2 detector is about the same size as the MINOS Near Detector (1,000 tons) and is also built primarily of steel, but employs a different (gas-based) detector technology. Soudan 2 was built to test the ultimate stability of matter by looking for proton decay, and operated between 1989 and 2001. While proton decay has not yet been observed, Soudan 2 contributed to the initial evidence for neutrino oscillations on which MINOS is based.

What's CDMS II?
The Soudan 2 cavern also houses the Cryogenic Dark Matter Search (CDMS II). This experiment looks for the main component of dark matter, which may be in the form of WIMPs (Weakly Interacting Massive Particles). In contrast to neutrinos, which are light, fast, and plentiful, WIMPs would be heavy, slow, and less common, and could be even more difficult to detect.
How does CDMS II work?
The CDMS II detectors are hockey puck-sized disks of silicon and germanium. A special cryogenic apparatus cools them to less than a hundredth of a degree above absolute zero (-460 F, the coldest place in Minnesota!). A WIMP passing through would deposit only a tiny amount of energy in the detector, but it should be enough to raise its temperature very slightly. The detector signals are carefully recorded and analyzed by computers to distinguish trueWIMP signals from random noise. Despite being under a half mile of rock, scientists also use intricate shielding, carefully selected materials, and a special clean room to further reduce unwanted signals.
KJV

United States

#7129 Nov 28, 2012
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>Yes, Soudan is studying dark *matter*, not dark *energy*. Very different things with, unfortunately, similar names. Lots of good stuff about neutrinos from there also.
cdms.berkeley.edu/Jan 5, 2009 – Dark matter constitutes approximately a quarter of all matter ... matter and energy in the universe is referred to as dark energy.... at the Soudan Underground Laboratory in Minnesota where in it ...

Dark matter some of which is light is not matter at all.

Dark matter attracts and works on an individual bases while Dark matter repels but only seems to work as a whole (entire universe all at once) entity

Sudan does deal in some dark energy experiment. And I was told was expanding to run 2 or 3 labs for dark energy.

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#7130 Nov 28, 2012
Khatru wrote:
<quoted text>
Your god may not have wanted robots but humanity has paid a terrible price for what he didn't want.
If Christians are right and we were given free will, it certainly doesn't look like it was for our benefit. Rather, it was probably to please our creator with spontaneous outbursts of unconditional love.
Maybe God should have programmed us. Then he'd get our unconditional love and what's more he would have avoided all the needless excess baggage of death, destruction and suffering that comes with free will. So it certainly looks like God's enjoyment of the love he receives from a minority of humanity comes with a terrible cost.
The free will God gave you was to accept him and go to heaven or choose Satan and go to hell, which is reserved for the Devil and his followers. Only a fool would choose the latter, but those are the only choices, since God is perfection and will not allow sin into heaven. He is the Creator, and that is his right. Your opinion of his plan is irrelevant to God.

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#7131 Nov 28, 2012
Khatru wrote:
<quoted text>
Funny how you revert to a proven lie.
Langoliers may have said what he said about Noah's family, but like your posts, it was a lie.
Langoliers believes that millions of people survived the flood.
Langloiers has nothing to do with what YOU posted, so the only lie here is all yours, since you're trying to deny your own post. This is exactly what you wrote,““You should know that being in the minority doesn't mean you're wrong. What percentage of the population did Noah and his family make up?”

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#7132 Nov 28, 2012
Khatru wrote:
<quoted text>
What do you know about education?
What do I know about education? I know that I have it, and you don't, lol.

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#7133 Nov 28, 2012
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Yet, Mendel himself, and his work, helped to refine the theory of evolution. Your "source," and you, fail to mention that.
You're wrong, and you're lying, just as you always do. It's the rodent in you coming out.

And just a reminder to everyone, if you have any concerns about the content of web page material, you need to contact the publisher, since I have no interest in your objections.

Why don't you get rid of your horrible picture? You look sick. No avatar at all would be better than having to see your tired fish-belly white face every day. Yuck.

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#7134 Nov 28, 2012
Georges Cuvier (1769 – 1832)

“French naturalist and zoologist. Cuvier was a major figure in natural sciences research in the early 19th century, and was instrumental in establishing the fields of comparative anatomy and paleontology through his work in comparing living animals with fossils.”

Opposition to evolution

“He repeatedly emphasized that his extensive experience with fossil material indicated that one fossil form does not, as a rule, gradually change into a succeeding, distinct fossil form (see below). It is because of this fact and his understanding of animal anatomy and physiology, that Cuvier strongly objected to any notion of evolution. According to the University of California Museum of Paleontology (UCMP), "Cuvier did not believe in organic evolution, for any change in an organism's anatomy would have rendered it unable to survive. He studied the mummified cats and ibises that Geoffroy had brought back from Napoleon's invasion of Egypt, and showed that they were no different from their living counterparts; Cuvier used this to support his claim that life forms did not evolve over time."

He also observed that Napoleon's expedition to Egypt had retrieved animals mummified thousands of years previously that seemed no different from their modern counterparts. "Certainly", Cuvier wrote, "one cannot detect any greater difference between these creatures and those we see, than between the human mummies and the skeletons of present-day men." Lamarck dismissed this conclusion, arguing that evolution happened much too slowly to be observed over just a few thousand years. Cuvier, however, in turn criticized how Lamarck and other naturalists conveniently introduced hundreds of thousands of years "with a stroke of a pen" to uphold their theory. Instead, he argued that one can judge what a long time would produce only by multiplying what a lesser time produces. Since a lesser time produced no organic changes, neither, probably, would a much longer time.

Cuvier was critical of the evolutionary theories proposed by his contemporaries Lamarck and Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, which involved the gradual transmutation of one form into another. He repeatedly emphasized that his extensive experience with fossil material indicated that one fossil form does not, as a rule, gradually change into a succeeding, distinct fossil form. Instead, he said, the typical form makes an abrupt appearance in the fossil record, and persists unchanged to the time of its extinction.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges_Cuvier

[“Cuvier strongly objected to any notion of evolution.”]

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#7135 Nov 28, 2012
Jean Louis Rodolphe Agassiz (1807 – 1873)

“Swiss paleontologist, glaciologist, geologist and a prominent innovator in the study of the Earth's natural history. He grew up in Switzerland and became a professor of natural history at University of Neuchâtel. Later, he accepted a professorship at Harvard University in the United States.”

continued:

“Agassiz is remembered today for his theories on ice ages, and for his resistance to Charles Darwin's theories on evolution, which he kept up his entire life.”

continued:

“Agassiz opposed monogenism and evolution, he claimed that the theory of evolution reduced the wisdom of God to an impersonal materialism. Species in their natures and geographical distribution, are direct expressions of the intelligence and will of God not the results of blind chance. Agassiz believed evolution was an insult to the wisdom and will of God.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Agassiz

[At least there was SOME credible peer-review at work to check Darwin, lol.]

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#7136 Nov 28, 2012
Louis Agassiz: Anti-Darwinist Harvard Paleontology Professor

“... regarded as one of the greatest scientists of the 19th century. A founding father of the modern American scientific establishment, Agassiz was also a lifelong opponent of Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution. Agassiz “ruled in professorial majesty at Harvard’s Museum of Comparative Zoology.”

[He] was a brilliant….man, an essentialist who detested evolutionism—Darwin’s brand in particular—and clung to a vision of well-ordered nature assembled by special creations. The zoology of Agassiz was consonant with the natural theology of William Paley.

Agassiz wrote that “evidence of the existence of a Creator, constantly and thoughtfully working among the complicated structures that He has made” is found throughout the natural world. He concluded that in the living world “is clearly seen the intervention of an intelligent Creator” and that when we evaluate the living world we can see “the mental operations of the Creator at every step.”

continued:

“Agassiz concluded from his lifelong study of nature that purpose and design were manifested everywhere in nature. He noted that if it required an intelligent mind just to study the facts of biology,“it must have required an intelligent mind to establish them.” Following his famous teacher Cuvier, he asserted that the major groups of animals do not represent ancestral branches of a hypothetical evolutionary tree but, instead, document a great plan that was used by the Creator to design the many different species in existence today.

Already an eminent scientist while still a young man, Agassiz came to the United States in 1848 to accept a professorship at Harvard. In 1860, Agassiz founded the Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard, later to be headed by Stephen Jay Gould. His studies of “fishes, both living and fossil, were definitive, and have never been equaled.” Agassiz and his colleagues also founded The National Academy of Sciences in 1863.

His many students influenced science for decades after his death. Stanford professor-scientist David Starr Jordan noted that “of the older teachers in America—the men who were born between 1830 and 1850—nearly all who have reached eminence have been at one time or another pupils of Agassiz.”

continued:

“Agassiz saw the divine plan of God omnipresent in nature, and could not accept a theory that denied the intelligent design he saw everywhere in the natural world. Agassiz even once defined a species as “a thought of God.” As Agassiz wrote in his Essay on Classification, his lifelong study of the natural world eloquently documented the “premeditation, power, wisdom, greatness, prescience, omniscience, providence” of God. He declared that “all these facts in their natural connection proclaim aloud the One God, whom man may know, adore, and love; and Natural History must in good time become the analysis of the thoughts of the Creator of the Universe.”

continued:

Long before the mutational theory of evolution was popularized, Agassiz foresaw the overwhelmingly harmful nature of mutations and the inability of “selection” to produce new life forms. He recognized that the problem with Darwinism was not the survival of the fittest, but rather the arrival of the fittest. Agassiz knew, as did most all animal and plant breeders both then and today, that clear limits exist to variation and no known way exists to go beyond these limits in spite of 4,000 years of trying.

continued:

“Two years after Origin was published, Agassiz wrote that Darwin’s theory was scientifically wrong and was “propounded by some very learned but…rather fanciful scientific men” who taught that the forms of life presently inhabiting our earth “had grown out of a comparative simple and small beginning.”
http://www.icr.org/article/louis-agassiz-anti...

[“Agassiz wrote that Darwin’s theory was scientifically wrong.” Thank you Agassiz.]

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#7137 Nov 28, 2012
From Northern Arizona University:

Jean Louis Rodolphe Agassiz

“(May 28, 1807 – December 14, 1873) was a Swiss-born American zoologist, glaciologist, and geologist. Also the husband of educator Elizabeth Cabot Cary Agassiz, he was one of the first world-class American scientists. His is a prominent name in Northern Arizona; one of the San Francisco Peaks and one of Flagstaff’s downtown streets are named for Louis Agassiz.

The College of Engineering, Forestry and Natural Sciences is now accepting submissions for the Louis Agassiz Prize for Excellence in Writing.”

[Agassiz -“one of the first world-class American scientists.” Thank you, Northern Arizona University - a fine school.]

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.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038 (Apr '12) 17 min Richardfs 23,004
Atheist because of art class 1 hr AtheistBodybuilde... 1
Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 1 hr Rosa_Winkel 230,117
Does Being 'Spiritual But Not Religious' Really... 1 hr Thinking 6
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) 2 hr Richardfs 1,404
Islam for peace, or violence? 4 hr Thinking 54
Adam Atheoi - the god of 'humanity' 4 hr Thinking 92
Our world came from nothing? 11 hr Thinking 1,061

Atheism People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE