‘Variability’ % proves God is the SPECIAL CAUSE, skeptics, why are you ignoring?

Romans 1:16 comes to mind at this point in time.

And 1 Corinthians 1:20 is on FULL display, every day.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Romans 1:16 comes to mind at this point in time.

And 1 Corinthians 1:20 is on FULL display, every day.

You forgot Romulans 0:0 and Zeta Reticuli -1:-1

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Romans 1:16 comes to mind at this point in time.

And 1 Corinthians 1:20 is on FULL display, every day.

You forgot Romulans 0:0 and Zeta Reticuli -1:-1

Awwwww shucky ducks, you used the nuclear option of debate!!!

The DREADED "appeal to ridicule" fallacy!!!!!

I guess there's nothing I can say to refute you, you've just won the argument.

(Btw, that's hyperbole again)

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
The DREADED "appeal to ridicule" fallacy!!!!!

It's pretty rich of you to accuse anybody of "appeal to ridicule fallacy" after having attempted same in your passage on the Big Bang theory (ridiculing your supposed interlocutor). Of course, you subsequently failed to substantiate the argument used in your attempted ridicule, and looked pretty ridiculous yourself (Klingons 666:-2).

*yawn*

Sorry, but you're boring me. I'm gonna do a little bit of housework and yard work and perhaps after a few hours I'll feel like bantering back and forth again.

Enjoy

*coughRomans1:22cough*

Excuse me, something in my throat.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Sorry, but you're boring me.

Likewise. You claimed an intellectual victory over an unnamed student of physics which turned out to be imaginary. You failed to provide sources of info on the supposed net angular momentum of the Universe. You gave an erroneous interpretation of the merry-go-round experiment. When exposed as a person ignorant in matters of physics, you resorted to passages from the Bible and use of "stringed instruments" to better worship of the Lord.

Rest in darkness.

Originally posted by OldThinker

Originally posted by MrXYZ

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by MrXYZ

 

Speaking of statistics and probability...

Good Read

You're trying to level me with this link, right? "Mathematical Probability that Jesus is the Christ"...are you kidding me?

I hear jergens lotion helps dig out the sand in your ears....

But seriously, you are creating a false dichotomy, why are you so discrete?

TRUTH IS TRUTH

Truth is only truth if it's backed up by FACTS that matter...the article on biblebelievers has no relevant hard facts that would prove anything. So no, this is not "truth" as you want it to be

That guy isn't a historian, biologist, anthropologist, or working in any field that would qualify him to prove someone's existence. He can assign mathematical probabilities all he wants, in fact, he can add just the right variables to make it seem a done deal. There's religiously biased scientists too! And even if Jesus were the Christ, what then? That doesn't prove he did the things attribute to him. It doesn't prove he "parted the seas" or cured the blind.

The problem with scriptures is that things get exaggerated a ton. As an example, sit in a circle with 10 people, say 3 sentences to the guy next to you, and he has to relay it to the one next to him, and so on until the original message gets back to you. In most cases, the message will be very different. It's no different with recorded "eye witness" accounts

[edit on 18-8-2010 by MrXYZ]

reply to post by NOTurTypical


You do realize that the physical laws we know today weren't necessarily present or valid around the time the big bang happened, right? So if you're talking about the law of gravity and conservation...they might not have been valid during that time, there weren't even any solid bodies!!

The most hilarious thing though is, you criticize the bib bang, which we know happened because of background radiation (we just don't know how), but your own theory is that "god did it" and you have ZERO hard facts to back that up other than scriptures written by MEN!!! Not one experiment provides even the lightest proof that such a creature exists....whereas we did numerous experiments such as background radiation testing to prove the big bang happened.

Also, this is my last post in this thread. You and OT are clearly using biased Christian science sites that aren't based on logic and rationality. I'm only interested in logic, rationality, and facts and not pink unicorns or religious science articles that don't even get the difference between causality and correlation. Both of you are so brainwashed, no amount of facts will change your minds...so you're bound to stay ignorant forever I'm afraid.

Might not be a bad thing though, what do they say: Ignorance is bliss!!

[edit on 18-8-2010 by MrXYZ]

[edit on 18-8-2010 by MrXYZ]

reply to post by MrXYZ


I say let them live in their fantasy, those who wish to seek true knowledge will seek it, hopefully it will become a majority some day.

Far be it from scientists or atheists to MAKE them seek true knowledge, we don't wish to opress people the same way religion has oppressed man.

Originally posted by awake_and_aware
reply to post by MrXYZ

 

I say let them live in their fantasy, those who wish to seek true knowledge will seek it, hopefully it will become a majority some day.

Far be it from scientists or atheists to MAKE them seek true knowledge, we don't wish to opress people the same way religion has oppressed man.

Ditto, I'm leaving this thread of pink unicorns. May the ignorant blind sheep remain ignorant....after all, it's bliss, right?

I was just trying to help them think for themselves instead of parroting bible scriptures like a broken cassette player. It's like talking to a zombie you see in the streets who's just munching away on a dead corpse, and you say "duuuuude, noooooo, let go of that, it's bad for you"...but in reality, nothing will stop a zombie.

[edit on 18-8-2010 by MrXYZ]

What I find strange is why would a christian be biased against the theory of big bang. Contrary to earlier/other theories, the idea that the universe as we know it had a beginning fits neatly into christian worldview of creation, and it was even proposed by a christian.
Unless you are one of those crazy young-Earth creationists..

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Romans 1:16 comes to mind at this point in time.

And 1 Corinthians 1:20 is on FULL display, every day.

There is better material to be found in the Peter Pan, Snow White and Dr Suess books honestly.

Since we are talking about fictional books, the ones I listed are a better source to get your daily dose of fantasy. Plus those books that I list actually make sense to the reader and are not violent, racist, sexist, and full of contradictions.

I suggest reading those books that I list.

Originally posted by Maslo
What I find strange is why would a christian be biased against the theory of big bang. Contrary to earlier/other theories, the idea that the universe as we know it had a beginning fits neatly into christian worldview of creation, and it was even proposed by a christian.

I have an explanation -- they have a knee-jerk reaction to most science as we know it. So much so that even if an element of same is aligned with their belief, they tend to discard it automatically. It's anti-knowledge.

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by Maslo
What I find strange is why would a christian be biased against the theory of big bang. Contrary to earlier/other theories, the idea that the universe as we know it had a beginning fits neatly into christian worldview of creation, and it was even proposed by a christian.

I have an explanation -- they have a knee-jerk reaction to most science as we know it. So much so that even if an element of same is aligned with their belief, they tend to discard it automatically. It's anti-knowledge.

Absolutely not!

I have been nothing but respectful...and allow you to think for yourself...you guys don't extend that to me....I'm used to it here tho, been down this road before...

As a favor, I reviewed the world's 100 most influential scientists here:

www.adherents.com...

And about 15% were atheist....

I'll stick with Wernher Von Braun, the first Director of NASA, who said "Scientific concepts exist only in the minds of men. Behind these concepts lies the reality which is being revealed to us, but only by the grace of God."

Edit to add the first ten or so...
Albert Einstein Twentieth-Century Science Jewish
Neils Bohr the Atom Jewish Lutheran
Charles Darwin Evolution Anglican (nominal); Unitarian
Louis Pasteur the Germ Theory of Disease Catholic
Sigmund Freud Psychology of the Unconscious Jewish; Atheist; Freudian psychoanalysis (Freudianism)
Galileo Galilei the New Science Catholic
Antoine Laurent Lavoisier the Revolution in Chemistry Catholic
Johannes Kepler Motion of the Planets Lutheran
Nicolaus Copernicus the Heliocentric Universe Catholic (priest)
Michael Faraday the Classical Field Theory Sandemanian
James Clerk Maxwell the Electromagnetic Field Presbyterian; Anglican; Baptist




[edit on 18-8-2010 by OldThinker]

reply to post by Baloney


Your post is Baloney....

2nd.

OT

Originally posted by OldThinker
reply to post by Baloney

 

Your post is Baloney....

2nd.

OT

I didnt expect any better of a reply from you, no surprise there.

Yep.

Originally posted by Maslo
What I find strange is why would a christian be biased against the theory of big bang.

BB was random right?

Natural right?

Did you read the OP 94% of all variability both in the negative and to improve is "within" the process....

Simple question why is there only one planet with intelligent life on it?

Why aren't there earths all over our solar system, if the BB did it?

Originally posted by Baloney

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Romans 1:16 comes to mind at this point in time.

And 1 Corinthians 1:20 is on FULL display, every day.

There is better material to be found in the Peter Pan, Snow White and Dr Suess books honestly.

Since we are talking about fictional books, the ones I listed are a better source to get your daily dose of fantasy. Plus those books that I list actually make sense to the reader and are not violent, racist, sexist, and full of contradictions.

I suggest reading those books that I list.

This is a lazy post!!!

Altho...

Peter could use the SWORD OF THE SPIRIT

My sins are SNOW WHITE

And the good Dr Suess would get as kick out of the "IAM THAT IAM"

Originally posted by OldThinker

Originally posted by Baloney

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Romans 1:16 comes to mind at this point in time.

And 1 Corinthians 1:20 is on FULL display, every day.

There is better material to be found in the Peter Pan, Snow White and Dr Suess books honestly.

Since we are talking about fictional books, the ones I listed are a better source to get your daily dose of fantasy. Plus those books that I list actually make sense to the reader and are not violent, racist, sexist, and full of contradictions.

I suggest reading those books that I list.

This is a lazy post!!!

Altho...

Peter could use the SWORD OF THE SPIRIT

My sins are SNOW WHITE

And the good Dr Suess would get as kick out of the "IAM THAT IAM"

That was one of your best posts! I sincerely mean that.

BRAVO!!

reply to post by OldThinker

Did you read the OP 94% of all variability both in the negative and to improve is "within" the process.... Simple question why is there only one planet with intelligent life on it? Why aren't there earths all over our solar system, if the BB did it?

Why should there be? I dont see how anything written in the OP is relevant to big bang theory at all. We do not know what percentage of planets has life, and this 94 % or 6 % or what is nothing more than an unsubstantiated guess at best.

[edit on 18-8-2010 by Maslo]