Don't dictate beliefs

Sep 5, 2012 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: The Star Press

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

Comments (Page 478)

Showing posts 9,541 - 9,560 of11,195
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
KJV

Chicago Ridge, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10056
Jan 3, 2013
 
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>First, science is a method, not an entity, so it can't want anything.

Secondly, if scientists wanted to be fraudulent, they would publicly announce the frauds they discover.

You project too much, you just inserted your entire leg.
Oh I see so if I want to be an astronomer I would have major in Method? LOL

Your second point is pure BS.
" if scientists wanted to be fraudulent, they would publicly announce the frauds they discover."
Like are you nuts?
If a bank robber held up a bank they would need publicly announce what they have done if they wanted to a criminal?
KJV

Chicago Ridge, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10057
Jan 3, 2013
 
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>So you are twisting what we told you to mean something completely different. Not a surprise.
No. You just Babble something new each day that makes no sense.
KJV

Chicago Ridge, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10058
Jan 3, 2013
 
Ooogah Boogah wrote:
<quoted text>Religibable disproving no Scientific theories at all.

Again, you've got nothing.

Why am I not surprised?
What you want me to rub your nose in failed scientific theory? You really think that there were no failed scientific theory?

Try just this one on for size.

"From Nova:

"For decades, every attempt to describe the force of gravity in the same language as the other forces—the language of quantum mechanics—has met with disaster

S. JAMES GATES, JR.: You try to put those two pieces of mathematics together, they do not coexist peacefully.

S. JAMES GATES, JR.: The laws of nature are supposed to apply everywhere. So if Einstein's laws are supposed to apply everywhere, and the laws of quantum mechanics are supposed to apply everywhere, well you can't have two separate everywheres.

RIGHT SIDE BRIAN GREENE: In the years since, physics split into two separate camps: one that uses general relativity to study big and heavy objects, things like stars, galaxies and the universe as a whole...

LEFT SIDE BRIAN GREENE:...and another that uses quantum mechanics to study the tiniest of objects, like atoms and particles. This has been kind of like having two families that just cannot get along and never talk to each other...

LEFT SIDE BRIAN GREENE: There just seemed to be no way to combine quantum mechanics...

RIGHT SIDE BRIAN GREENE:...and general relativity in a single theory that could describe the universe on all scales.

So here's the question: if you're trying to figure out what happens in the depths of a black hole, where an entire star is crushed to a tiny speck, do you use general relativity because the star is incredibly heavy or quantum mechanics because it's incredibly tiny?

Well, that's the problem. Since the center of a black hole is both tiny and heavy, you can't avoid using both theories at the same time. And when we try to put the two theories together in the realm of black holes, they conflict. It breaks down. They give nonsensical predictions. And the universe is not nonsensical; it's got to make sense."
KJV

Chicago Ridge, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10059
Jan 3, 2013
 
Ooogah Boogah wrote:
<quoted text>Religibable disproving no Scientific theories at all.

Again, you've got nothing.

Why am I not surprised?
Or this one:

"BRIAN GREENE: It's a little known secret but for more than half a century a dark cloud has been looming over modern science. Here's the problem: our understanding of the universe is based on two separate theories. One is Einstein's general theory of relativity—that's a way of understanding the biggest things in the universe, things like stars and galaxies. But the littlest things in the universe, atoms and subatomic particles, play by an entirely different set of rules called, "quantum Mechanics"

These two sets of rules are each incredibly accurate in their own domain but whenever we try to combine them, to solve some of the deepest mysteries in the universe, disaster strikes.

Take the beginning of the universe, the "big bang." At that instant a tiny nugget erupted violently. Over the next 14 billion years the universe expanded and cooled into the stars, galaxies and planets we see today. But if we run the cosmic film in reverse, everything that's now rushing apart comes back together, so the universe gets smaller, hotter and denser as we head back to the beginning of time.

As we reach the big bang, when the universe was both enormously heavy and incredibly tiny, our projector jams. Our two laws of physics, when combined, break down."

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10060
Jan 3, 2013
 

Judged:

1

KJV wrote:
<quoted text>Or this one:

"BRIAN GREENE: It's a little known secret but for more than half a century a dark cloud has been looming over modern science. Here's the problem: our understanding of the universe is based on two separate theories. One is Einstein's general theory of relativity—that's a way of understanding the biggest things in the universe, things like stars and galaxies. But the littlest things in the universe, atoms and subatomic particles, play by an entirely different set of rules called, "quantum Mechanics"

These two sets of rules are each incredibly accurate in their own domain but whenever we try to combine them, to solve some of the deepest mysteries in the universe, disaster strikes.

Take the beginning of the universe, the "big bang." At that instant a tiny nugget erupted violently. Over the next 14 billion years the universe expanded and cooled into the stars, galaxies and planets we see today. But if we run the cosmic film in reverse, everything that's now rushing apart comes back together, so the universe gets smaller, hotter and denser as we head back to the beginning of time.

As we reach the big bang, when the universe was both enormously heavy and incredibly tiny, our projector jams. Our two laws of physics, when combined, break down."
Little known secret?

Are you kidding?

That's been known for ages, and is what the search for the Grand Unified Theory (GUT) is all about.

Tell you what.

Lets do things your way.

Fuck science.

Lets just throw it out.

It's up to you.

What do you suggest?

Pray?

“There is no Truth in Faith”

Since: Dec 08

nowhere near a pound of $100's

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10061
Jan 3, 2013
 

Judged:

1

derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>
You got one thing right you're stupid, lol.
If you're going to support evolution, you need to familiarize yourself on what evolution teaches.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/faq...
Your link agrees with everything I said, stupid.

“There is no Truth in Faith”

Since: Dec 08

nowhere near a pound of $100's

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10062
Jan 3, 2013
 
derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>
I find it fascinating that you agree with (and support) the pope.
So why are you an atheist?
Where did I say I am an atheist? I said I can prove the Bible God does not exist.

“There is no Truth in Faith”

Since: Dec 08

nowhere near a pound of $100's

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10063
Jan 3, 2013
 
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
What you want me to rub your nose in failed scientific theory? You really think that there were no failed scientific theory?
Try just this one on for size.
"From Nova:
"For decades, every attempt to describe the force of gravity in the same language as the other forces—the language of quantum mechanics—has met with disaster
S. JAMES GATES, JR.: You try to put those two pieces of mathematics together, they do not coexist peacefully.
S. JAMES GATES, JR.: The laws of nature are supposed to apply everywhere. So if Einstein's laws are supposed to apply everywhere, and the laws of quantum mechanics are supposed to apply everywhere, well you can't have two separate everywheres.
RIGHT SIDE BRIAN GREENE: In the years since, physics split into two separate camps: one that uses general relativity to study big and heavy objects, things like stars, galaxies and the universe as a whole...
LEFT SIDE BRIAN GREENE:...and another that uses quantum mechanics to study the tiniest of objects, like atoms and particles. This has been kind of like having two families that just cannot get along and never talk to each other...
LEFT SIDE BRIAN GREENE: There just seemed to be no way to combine quantum mechanics...
RIGHT SIDE BRIAN GREENE:...and general relativity in a single theory that could describe the universe on all scales.
So here's the question: if you're trying to figure out what happens in the depths of a black hole, where an entire star is crushed to a tiny speck, do you use general relativity because the star is incredibly heavy or quantum mechanics because it's incredibly tiny?
Well, that's the problem. Since the center of a black hole is both tiny and heavy, you can't avoid using both theories at the same time. And when we try to put the two theories together in the realm of black holes, they conflict. It breaks down. They give nonsensical predictions. And the universe is not nonsensical; it's got to make sense."
Yah so? You've described the "Grand unification problem". There are many theories, all of them better supported by the evidence than th "Gawd doneit!!" conjecture. You've still got nothing.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10064
Jan 3, 2013
 
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh I see so if I want to be an astronomer I would have major in Method? LOL
Your second point is pure BS.
" if scientists wanted to be fraudulent, they would publicly announce the frauds they discover."
Like are you nuts?
If a bank robber held up a bank they would need publicly announce what they have done if they wanted to a criminal?
There was a typo there, if scientists wanted to be fraudulent, they wouldn't publicly announce the frauds they discover.

If a bank robber didn't want to rob a bank, would they turn in others that do? Human nature says yes.

“There is no Truth in Faith”

Since: Dec 08

nowhere near a pound of $100's

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10065
Jan 3, 2013
 
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
There was a typo there, if scientists wanted to be fraudulent, they wouldn't publicly announce the frauds they discover.
If a bank robber didn't want to rob a bank, would they turn in others that do? Human nature says yes.
"...If a bank robber didn't want to rob a bank..."

Wait!! What?!?

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10066
Jan 3, 2013
 
Ooogah Boogah wrote:
<quoted text>
"...If a bank robber didn't want to rob a bank..."
Wait!! What?!?
lol He came up with it, I just showed how it doesn't make sense. I probably should have just called him an idiot for using it instead of trying to show how much it fails.
KJV

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10067
Jan 3, 2013
 
Ooogah Boogah wrote:
<quoted text>You've obviously read none of the material I provided via link.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/scipr...

Here is an excerpt for you;

Endogenous retroviruses provide yet another example of molecular sequence evidence for universal common descent. Endogenous retroviruses are molecular remnants of a past parasitic viral infection. Occasionally, copies of a retrovirus genome are found in its host's genome, and these retroviral gene copies are called endogenous retroviral sequences. Retroviruses (like the AIDS virus or HTLV1, which causes a form of leukemia) make a DNA copy of their own viral genome and insert it into their host's genome. If this happens to a germ line cell (i.e. the sperm or egg cells) the retroviral DNA will be inherited by descendants of the host. Again, this process is rare and fairly random, so finding retrogenes in identical chromosomal positions of two different species indicates common ancestry.
"Endogenous retroviruses provide yet another example of molecular sequence evidence for universal common descent"

Yup there names are Noah and His Wife. You can go further back if you wish to Adam and Eve.

An expert of Satan's clan I don't need. Thank you not.
KJV

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10068
Jan 3, 2013
 
Ooogah Boogah wrote:
<quoted text>In humans, endogenous retroviruses occupy about 1% of the genome, in total constituting ~30,000 different retroviruses embedded in each person's genomic DNA (Sverdlov 2000). There are at least seven different known instances of common retrogene insertions between chimps and humans, and this number is sure to grow as both these organism's genomes are sequenced
That's what a world wide flood will do for you.
KJV

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10069
Jan 3, 2013
 
Ooogah Boogah wrote:
<quoted text>Then there is no reason to buy into Christianity just because a large number of nimrods like yourself do.

The basis of the scientific method is to first gather the facts, then look at the available conjectures and hypothesis to determine which one fits the data the best. On that basis,
.I can say you are lying and this is verified by the very nature of the scientific method

The basis of religion is to first gather the conclusions then discard all facts that do not support the conclusions. This is what you are doing and it never leads to the truth.
"Then there is no reason to buy into Christianity just because a large number of nimrods like yourself do."

That's correct. You don't have to do anything.

"I can say you are lying and this is verified by the very nature of the scientific method"

Yes you can. hollow words mean nothing though.

"The basis of religion is to first gather the conclusions then discard all facts that do not support the conclusions."

The Religion of evolution does seem to follow this statement so this I agree with you on, only for certain religions such as Evolution.
KJV

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10070
Jan 3, 2013
 
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>Why did you move the goal posts?
What? Is this the first time you've seen the Goal post?

Since: Apr 08

Nottingham, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10071
Jan 3, 2013
 
derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes; thank you.
You also recognize that science has failed to catch their own crimiinals. At the cost of the taxpayer, the government does what science should be doing.
You really don't grasp the worldwide nature of the scientific community, do you?

If scientists in Europe demonstrate fraud in the US, how can they "catch them"?

It's up to the US government to do that.

You, know, that body of people that are predominantly Christian.

Since: Apr 08

Nottingham, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10072
Jan 3, 2013
 
derek4 wrote:
Did sedimentation always occur at the same rate it does today?
How do we know?
If not, what does that do to dating methods?
What about polystrate fossils?
http://creation.com/how-old-is-the-earth
No copyrighted material was reproduced in this post.
You get your science from a religious website?

How dumb is that?

It's like reading a book on baking to learn up on how to install a radiator.

No wonder you're in a mess.

Since: Apr 08

Nottingham, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10073
Jan 3, 2013
 
derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>
Since you are powerless to diminish God in any way, feel free to continue diminishing yourself with improper grammar and spelling. We're accustomed to it by now.
I can't diminish something that doesn't actually exist.

It's the same as trying to lessen your integrity.

Since: Apr 08

Nottingham, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10074
Jan 3, 2013
 
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
What? Is this the first time you've seen the Goal post?
Oh, there you are.

Are you going to tell us why you admit that the Bible isn't perfect?

“There is no Truth in Faith”

Since: Dec 08

nowhere near a pound of $100's

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10075
Jan 3, 2013
 
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
"Endogenous retroviruses provide yet another example of molecular sequence evidence for universal common descent"
Yup there names are Noah and His Wife. You can go further back if you wish to Adam and Eve.
An expert of Satan's clan I don't need. Thank you not.
"Universal Common Descent" as in all life on Earth came from the same microscopic parents if you go back far enough in time. Monkeys and Apes are our cousins.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 9,541 - 9,560 of11,195
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

•••
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••