DEBATE Evolution vs Creation. Come on in!

Originally posted by supergravity
reply to post by boncho

 

Its not just for cooling
Here again you have no idea what you are talking about, AS YOU CAN READ WATER GIVES GOOD PROTECTION FROM HIGH LEVELS OF PENETRIATING RADIATION.If you would use your brain instead of repeating talking points you might get to an iq of 30.
Its like I am debating a bunch of 15 year olds on this thread.

edit on 3-6-2013 by supergravity because: (no reason given)

I didn't say it was there for cooling. I said it was there as a medium for heat/energy transfer, no different than the steam engine using coal as fuel but steam (water) to get usable energy from the system.

Do you know what a turbine is?

reply to post by supergravity


Still debunked. Still impossible. We still wouldn't survive the pressure. Ice canopy has no evidence. Don't call people teenagers, when you, yourself haven't posted a single piece of evidence to suggest this ice canopy existed. People aren't just going to believe random bloggers on the net. You need sources or some kind of reference.

reply to post by supergravity

1. Can you provide any evidence in support of of canopy theory?
2. Can you provide any evidence that Saturn's rings violate the law of gravity?
3. Can you provide any evidence that Jupiter's Great Red Spot is the result of rotational frame dragging?

reply to post by Barcs


You state the canopy would cause the earth to boil, But as I tried to explain WHEN THE CANOPY WAS FORMED in genesis man was not made yet. If you are going to debunk the words of the creator you first must READ THEM!!
When gas is pressurized it does create heat, but only at time of initial pressurization and it will dissipate quickly.I have a tank of gas that is 2000 P.S.I but yet it stays at room temp, only at the plant when they filled it did heat get generated.
And yes I know what a turbine is, I have a degree in electronic engineering and have invented many things ,magnetic levitator ,hydrogen gen cell, (for my car) solar pressure cooker,I live in a solar house and do experiments every day, so don't think I am some yahoo putting things on here to offend you descendants of monkeys......LOL .

reply to post by iterationzero


The rings of Saturn are time space ripples caused by the large mass of the planet spinning, This was proved in 1998 called FRAME DRAGGING. I though every body new that, look it up.
rocks are trapped in anomalies of gravity forming each spoke.

More proof of the canopy is the FLASH FROZEN mastodons found close to Norway, they had fresh flowers in there stomachs and were frozen in place when the canopy collapsed.
The river in the grand canyon when measured verses wear on the canyon walls could not have carved it even in millions of years ,not enough water, so some large event such as a catastrophic flood with debris would be the only possible way to cut solid rock. This would be similar to sand and water under pressure will cut concrete in seconds when it would take many years to do it naturally.

reply to post by iterationzero


Can I give evidence that the red storm on Jupiter is result of frame dragging,yes They have found all planets have some of this,one key indicator is the anomalies happen on the poles AND........the 19.5 parallel . you will find the storm on the 19.5.on earth you will find the pyramids in egypt. on Saturn the north pole has a pie formation with each slice having high speed winds that do not mix with the wedge shape that is beside it.
my hole point is that we still are trying to understand the universe and you should question everything, dont just repeat the politically correct talking points.

reply to post by supergravity

The rings of Saturn are time space ripples caused by the large mass of the planet spinning, This was proved in 1998 called FRAME DRAGGING. I though every body new that, look it up.
rocks are trapped in anomalies of gravity forming each spoke.

"Every body new that" isn't providing evidence of Saturn's rings violating the law of gravity.

More proof of the canopy is the FLASH FROZEN mastodons found close to Norway, they had fresh flowers in there stomachs and were frozen in place when the canopy collapsed.

Even Answers In Genesis, a creationist website, refutes what you're saying here. So no evidence yet...

The river in the grand canyon when measured verses wear on the canyon walls could not have carved it even in millions of years ,not enough water, so some large event such as a catastrophic flood with debris would be the only possible way to cut solid rock. This would be similar to sand and water under pressure will cut concrete in seconds when it would take many years to do it naturally.

Speculation isn't evidence.

reply to post by supergravity

Can I give evidence that the red storm on Jupiter is result of frame dragging,yes They have found all planets have some of this,one key indicator is the anomalies happen on the poles AND........the 19.5 parallel . you will find the storm on the 19.5.on earth you will find the pyramids in egypt. on Saturn the north pole has a pie formation with each slice having high speed winds that do not mix with the wedge shape that is beside it.

The Great Red Spot is at 22°S. The Pyramids of Giza are at about 30°N. That evidence isn't looking so good.

my hole point is that we still are trying to understand the universe and you should question everything, dont just repeat the politically correct talking points.

I don't know what your "hole point" is, but you're "hole evidence" doesn't stand up to any degree of scrutiny. Try again...

1. Can you provide any evidence in support of of canopy theory?
2. Can you provide any evidence that Saturn's rings violate the law of gravity?
3. Can you provide any evidence that Jupiter's Great Red Spot is the result of rotational frame dragging?

reply to post by supergravity


When people ask for evidence, they aren't asking for your opinions. If you have any sources or scientific data to support what you are saying, please post it.

reply to post by iterationzero


It seems my memory AND my opinons are right on, read and weep.

Just cause you dont like the truth dont mean you can change the FACTS.

reply to post by iterationzero


read and weep, your rebutal is TAKING ON WATER.

reply to post by iterationzero
[

I think you guys should go regroup and come back and try again without making things up.

reply to post by Barcs


Flash frozen seems reasonable ,Ice in space is -400 and when it fell it lowered the temp on the surface to -150 instantly wiping out the dinosaurs and everything else, the oil we burn comes from all living things at the time compressed into pockets that decayed into crude oil, a catastrophic event that shaped this world.
to be fair this article does later try to debunk the flash frozen theory because WE CANT LET PEOPLE THINK GOD CREATED EVERYTHING.

reply to post by supergravity

It seems my memory AND my opinons are right on, read and weep.

Just cause you dont like the truth dont mean you can change the FACTS.

You're the one changing your story from post to post. Let me remind you of what you claimed in this post:

Can I give evidence that the red storm on Jupiter is result of frame dragging,yes They have found all planets have some of this,one key indicator is the anomalies happen on the poles AND........the 19.5 parallel . you will find the storm on the 19.5.on earth you will find the pyramids in egypt. on Saturn the north pole has a pie formation with each slice having high speed winds that do not mix with the wedge shape that is beside it.

You claimed that the Great Red Spot and the pyramids at Giza were at 19.5° latitude. You were wrong about both. The Great Red Spot is at 22°S. The Pyramids of Giza are at about 30°N. What does your claim that "the anomalies happen on the poles AND........the 19.5 parallel" have to do with what you posted?

Do you have evidence that, as your uncited source claims, "sunspot activity and the region of peak temperatures is limited to 19.5 degrees north and south"? Because Form of the latitude of sunspot distribution (Ivanov, et al, 2011) shows pretty clearly that sunspots are observed to occur well outside that range. See, that's a citation with data... that's called "evidence".

Do you have evidence that, as your uncited source claims, "the presumably active major volcano complexe Alpha and Beta Regio are near 19.5 degrees"? Because when I look up the locations of those two areas are at 22°S and 25°S, neither of which are particularly close to 19.5°. See, that's called "facts". Try again...

1. Can you provide any evidence in support of of canopy theory?
2. Can you provide any evidence that Saturn's rings violate the law of gravity?
3. Can you provide any evidence that Jupiter's Great Red Spot is the result of rotational frame dragging?
4. Can you provide any evidence that "anomalies" occur with any regularity at 19.5° on Earth or any other body in our solar system?

reply to post by supergravity

read and weep, your rebutal is TAKING ON WATER.

You still haven't provided any evidence. You've got Hoagland et al making a claim as to the significance of 19.5°, involving a tetrahedron inscribed in a sphere. These are claims, not evidence. My rebuttal is still standing quite strong in the face of your lack of evidence. Try again...

1. Can you provide any evidence in support of of canopy theory?
2. Can you provide any evidence that Saturn's rings violate the law of gravity?
3. Can you provide any evidence that Jupiter's Great Red Spot is the result of rotational frame dragging?
4. Can you provide any evidence that "anomalies" occur with any regularity at 19.5° on Earth or any other body in our solar system?

reply to post by supergravity

None of this is evidence of significance. Again, these are just claims. "It exists, therefore it must be significant!"

None of these anomalies are located at 19.5°. Do you not even remember what you claimed earlier in your own post? Try again...

1. Can you provide any evidence in support of of canopy theory?
2. Can you provide any evidence that Saturn's rings violate the law of gravity?
3. Can you provide any evidence that Jupiter's Great Red Spot is the result of rotational frame dragging?
4. Can you provide any evidence that "anomalies" occur with any regularity at 19.5° on Earth or any other body in our solar system?

Since we share DNA with every living thing on earth, even grass, then we have clear signs of evolution. Species come and go but life continues on and that shows evolution too. If one was to suggest life was planted and not randomly started evolution is still there.

Looking at humans we show a very distinct make-up to earth evolution. Our DNA, the minerals we need to live and ones that are poison to us, the air mixture we need...etc all show that we are unique to earth, and we evolved on earth.

reply to post by Xtrozero


There are some examples of small local evolution but people don't turn into fish and there is no evidence we once had wings.

reply to post by supergravity


Your ignorance of science is astounding, but the fact of the matter is that it's all too common. You really should try to learn at least the basics of a subject before commenting on it.
If you are truly interested in learning, there are many people here who can teach you what science really is, what it does, and how it works. But, if your intent is to come here and tell us what we think and tell us things about science that we know are incorrect, you are wasting your time.

reply to post by supergravity

There are some examples of small local evolution but people don't turn into fish and there is no evidence we once had wings.
1. Can you provide any evidence in support of of canopy theory?
2. Can you provide any evidence that Saturn's rings violate the law of gravity?
3. Can you provide any evidence that Jupiter's Great Red Spot is the result of rotational frame dragging?
4. Can you provide any evidence that "anomalies" occur with any regularity at 19.5° on Earth or any other body in our solar system?
5. Can you provide any evidence that modern evolutionary synthesis claims that "people turn into fish" or that "we once had wings"?

reply to post by flyingfish


You think I dont know anything about science,....By 10 I had built my own chemistry set and electrolysis system
by 11 I made a digital lock for my room door
by 12 I was generating hydrogen by scraping zinc off of our trash can and putting it in acid
by13 I had my whole house bugged
built my own jam box
By 19 had degree in electronic engineering and built a magnetic levitator and 100s of other inventions and experiments.


What were you doing at 10 years old?????

Be careful what words you use , you never know what ones you will have to EAT.