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.
Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by spy66
Light is one dimension within emitted energy.
So you are changing your definition of dimension to the frequency spectrum?
Energy and matter are dimensions of finite.
Then you change the use of dimension almost immediately.
How do you define dimension?
Originally posted by stereologist
So basically this is your own definition of dimension that is not related to any part of science. It's just something you made up in your copious spare time. It sounds more like you use the word dimension to mean volume.
There appears to be a contradiction in your statements.
1. The infinite
2. The infinite dimension of energy
Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by spy66
Obviously all you can do is throw out word salad. You have no understanding of science - at all.
Originally posted by stereologist
Your condescending attitude makes it clear that you are sloppily trying to cover for your poor understanding of science. It's evident that you are a teenager with attitude and little education.
Can you explain why frequencies is a dimension? Please use math to remove your propensity for word salad.
If i have to use math to prove that a frequency is a dimension. Ain't that proof enough that it would be a dimension?
Originally posted by Hydroman
Originally posted by FearNoEvil
I believe fallen angels had sex with earth women and their offspring were giants. I think the following generations of these giants could account for the fossils.
Sexless beings have penises? I guess they're not sexless after all.
Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by spy66
Absolute zero and absolute vacuum are completely different concepts.
If i have to use math to prove that a frequency is a dimension. Ain't that proof enough that it would be a dimension?
No. Just show the math.
What is the likeness between a absolute vacuum and absolute Zero?
Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by novastrike81
This is the question posed by spy66. I am addressing his question.
What is the likeness between a absolute vacuum and absolute Zero?
Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by FearNoEvil
Once again a scientific theory is different from the common layman definition of theory. Evolution is a fact, it is the mechanisms of evolution that are theoretical still. Evolution can be and has been observed in the real world, whereas the existence of a god that created everything has not. That is why evolution is science and creationism is faith.
Originally posted by FearNoEvil
Where did you get the idea they were sexless?
Originally posted by MKULTRA
I'm noticing a trend emerge. Ashanu90, why is it that you start anti-creation/pro-evolution threads and then abandon them? There must be at least 3 or 4 or 9 other threads that you've started over the years, and once people start taking you to task, you disappear from your own threads. Is your position in the debate so weak that you can't articulate a response? Or is the issue really unimportant to you?
I'm wondering why it is that I, or anyone, should continue to respond to your threads on this topic if you aren't serious about following through. I could be completely off base and wish to convey that I offer this observation with respect.
Perhaps I'm a little bit of an antique-style ATS user, but I've felt that if someone starts a thread on a controversial topic, they have some degree of responsibility for monitoring their thread and nurturing the debate. You've had some vigorous debate in this thread (and others), but where do you want to take things from this point, given what others have contributed?
You have chaos symbols all over your avatar. Isn't the very nature of chaos a lack of order? In what ways are your beliefs in evolution consistent with your advocacy of chaos?
[edit on 7-5-2010 by MKULTRA]