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 KentonKeogh
I'm sorry posting a few video's and naming a few well known equations and 'theories' doe's not provide proof that evolution is false and that we are created.
All current theories involving mathematics, quantum mechanics and physic's break down at the 'big bang' or moment of creation. As we are not so clever yet to prove or disprove creation. Creationist's should maybe consider that evolution was a tool used by a creator, before discrediting actual proven evidence (of evolution) found in many different fields of science.
Originally posted by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien
It means that everything in our universe and hyper has been designed, and the constants attest to this.
Evolution is therefore invalid.
Originally posted by spy66
reply to post by MrXYZ
Well he is on to something. If science have concluded the string theory, You can ask who is playing the strings.
If the string is a constant "infinite" a force of some kind within the string must exist to create the changes that formed us out of this string. Because a constant can not change on its own.
If the string is a constant and a infinite, it must also be intelligent to be able to create changes.
Originally posted by MrXYZ
Originally posted by spy66
reply to post by MrXYZ
Well he is on to something. If science have concluded the string theory, You can ask who is playing the strings.
If the string is a constant "infinite" a force of some kind within the string must exist to create the changes that formed us out of this string. Because a constant can not change on its own.
If the string is a constant and a infinite, it must also be intelligent to be able to create changes.
No it doesn't...change doesn't require intelligence. Take the Grand Canyon for example. It used to be just planes...until a river carved that canyon. It CHANGED...but unless you wanna call the forces of water "intelligence", there isn't any intelligence involved.
In short: There's NO proof of a creator whatsoever...only blind belief. Obviously that gives some people comfort, but it doesn't make it true.
Originally posted by spy66
Originally posted by MrXYZ
Originally posted by spy66
reply to post by MrXYZ
Well he is on to something. If science have concluded the string theory, You can ask who is playing the strings.
If the string is a constant "infinite" a force of some kind within the string must exist to create the changes that formed us out of this string. Because a constant can not change on its own.
If the string is a constant and a infinite, it must also be intelligent to be able to create changes.
No it doesn't...change doesn't require intelligence. Take the Grand Canyon for example. It used to be just planes...until a river carved that canyon. It CHANGED...but unless you wanna call the forces of water "intelligence", there isn't any intelligence involved.
In short: There's NO proof of a creator whatsoever...only blind belief. Obviously that gives some people comfort, but it doesn't make it true.
I agree, the changes you describe do not imply the need for intelligence. But i was not talking about the forming of the Grand Canyon either.
There is more proof of a creator than you can imagine.
Explain to me how a constant can change on its own?
The infinite is a constant. The string theory refers to this: how can this string change on its own?
-How did "pi" become to be pi?
Originally posted by john_bmth
reply to post by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien
No, pi is a mathematical concept that describes the ratio of a circle's circumference to it's diameter. Such geometric shapes exist in nature, therefore they can be described with mathematics. This has absolutely nothing to do with evolution whatsoever. The fact you think it does only shows your ignorance of the fields of evolution and mathematics.
So instead of rebutting my response you've resorted to making petty remarks?
Originally posted by john_bmth
reply to post by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien
No, pi is a mathematical concept that describes the ratio of a circle's circumference to it's diameter. Such geometric shapes exist in nature, therefore they can be described with mathematics. This has absolutely nothing to do with evolution whatsoever. The fact you think it does only shows your ignorance of the fields of evolution and mathematics.
Originally posted by spy66
Originally posted by john_bmth
reply to post by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien
No, pi is a mathematical concept that describes the ratio of a circle's circumference to it's diameter. Such geometric shapes exist in nature, therefore they can be described with mathematics. This has absolutely nothing to do with evolution whatsoever. The fact you think it does only shows your ignorance of the fields of evolution and mathematics.
It sure is. But what you say tell us nothing about how these circles/twists came to be.
The string theory is about vacuums, different types of vacuums. How did the absolute vacuum form the circles and twists that gave us "pi" ?
A vacuum that is absolute can not form something naturally, because it would be a constant.
Originally posted by john_bmth
Originally posted by spy66
Originally posted by john_bmth
reply to post by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien
No, pi is a mathematical concept that describes the ratio of a circle's circumference to it's diameter. Such geometric shapes exist in nature, therefore they can be described with mathematics. This has absolutely nothing to do with evolution whatsoever. The fact you think it does only shows your ignorance of the fields of evolution and mathematics.
It sure is. But what you say tell us nothing about how these circles/twists came to be.
The string theory is about vacuums, different types of vacuums. How did the absolute vacuum form the circles and twists that gave us "pi" ?
And what exactly do you mean by "tells us nothing how these circles/twists came to be"?
Originally posted by john_bmth
A vacuum that is absolute can not form something naturally, because it would be a constant.
What you are saying does not make any sense. What exactly does this have to do with creationism?
Originally posted by spy66
Originally posted by john_bmth
A vacuum that is absolute can not form something naturally, because it would be a constant.
What you are saying does not make any sense. What exactly does this have to do with creationism?
Everything. Don't you get it.
How can a constant change on its own?
Originally posted by spy66
Originally posted by john_bmth
Originally posted by spy66
Originally posted by john_bmth
reply to post by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien
No, pi is a mathematical concept that describes the ratio of a circle's circumference to it's diameter. Such geometric shapes exist in nature, therefore they can be described with mathematics. This has absolutely nothing to do with evolution whatsoever. The fact you think it does only shows your ignorance of the fields of evolution and mathematics.
It sure is. But what you say tell us nothing about how these circles/twists came to be.
The string theory is about vacuums, different types of vacuums. How did the absolute vacuum form the circles and twists that gave us "pi" ?
And what exactly do you mean by "tells us nothing how these circles/twists came to be"?
A absolute vacuum would equal a straight neutral string without circles and twists.
If the absolute vacuum is thee string, within string theory. How did the string change on its own and create circles and twists?