It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
I didn't. I said that your "understanding" of the science is lacking. In the extreme.
why did you throw a hissy fit just because i said it wasnt an exact science?
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: John333
I didn't. I said that your "understanding" of the science is lacking. In the extreme.
why did you throw a hissy fit just because i said it wasnt an exact science?
So, again. Please show who has claimed that the science is exact. Otherwise admit you attempted to use a strawman argument.
u said i was wrong.
So to say carbon dating is only 14C dating is disingenuous, carbon dating includes all the methods we use to determine the age of a fossil
we got some communication barrier.
originally posted by: Astyanax
a reply to: John333
Unfortunately, that's all over now. Instead of discussing the topic, we're discussing you and the rubbish you spout. As if it matters.
Those who couldn't resist taking you on must accept part of the blame for the ruination of this thread, but there is no doubt that the lion's share is yours.
John333
hahahahaha i did these calculations years ago. i can probably still dig up the post where i made this assertion that the current model is incorrect. but i didnt stop there. i corrected the model. i possess the true unified field theory.
John333
i could go on but there are ppl with multi billion dollar labs and funding that shouldve been able to complete it without me telling them. for all you know u are speaking to a future nobel laureate.
John333
i interpret biblical and other religious scripts which demonstrate scientific accuracy. i then cross reference both with an ancient mystic key to the universe for truth... with this key i can predict scientific discovery. i can predict behaviours based on present data in any field of science. telling whether a theory is founded on eternal facts of design of this universe is easy.
John333
i may not be a qualified scientist with 5 PhD's.. but i did not choose that route as i focused my investigative life on the mystical side of things, whilst studying science and keeping track of all earthly developments. so my life is devoted and had been devoted to becoming a translator of mystical content for scientific understanding. i provide the bridge of interpretation of the language of the mystics.
John333
I believe the 5th force is conscious and the Source consciousness of all consciousness within the universe itself!
originally posted by: peter vlar
originally posted by: Astyanax
a reply to: John333
Unfortunately, that's all over now. Instead of discussing the topic, we're discussing you and the rubbish you spout. As if it matters.
Those who couldn't resist taking you on must accept part of the blame for the ruination of this thread, but there is no doubt that the lion's share is yours.
You are 100% correct in this, I certainly have to own my portion of this thread derailment by entertaining such off topic tangents that are much better suited to the Origins and Creation forum. In regards to the OP, we should certainly be more on topic in lieu of an appropriate thread being authored. That's what I get for trying to make a simple correction because I should have known better and realized it would turn into a 3 page diatribe that had no pertinence to the actual topic at hand which, as you point out, is far more interesting than where this latter conversation has devolved.
So what is the beam coming out of a torch ? It's not light travelling at light speed? You're saying that a beam of light can't reach light speed, and if it did it would need infinite energy, not the 4 batteries powering it?
I also found this which just adds to the confusion.
"The way that scientists use the word 'theory' is a little different than how it is commonly used in the lay public," said Jaime Tanner, a professor of biology at Marlboro College. "Most people use the word 'theory' to mean an idea or hunch that someone has, but in science the word 'theory' refers to the way that we interpret facts."