Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Intelligent Design is a self evident truth

page: 27
28
<< 24  25  26    28  29  30 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 01:27 PM
link   

Krazysh0t

spy66
reply to post by Krazysh0t
 





Math shows that it cannot exist, unless there is some weird space/time anomaly in the ark that allows for the interior area to far outstrip its exterior area. But then if that were the case, why would the ark have to be so large in the first place? Just make a standard sized boat, have the anomaly and you are good to go.


Now we are getting to the Source of the story. God is in the Picture here, when it comes to this story. Did science bring that into their calculations?

No.


So it makes sense to you for God to have Noah build an ark that is too long to hold together in the middle all to shove a bunch of animals into the interior that won't fit? This is ok, because God is going to magic the ark to work? But this begs the question, if God was going to magic the ark to work in the first place, why does the ship have to be so large? It's a logical paradox and is just as supernatural and dumb as YEC which you already agreed with me science has disproven.



In air the boat would probably break up. But would it do that in water?

Who is saying that God had to do Magic to make this possible. That is not in the story?
God doesn't do Magic.

What God have done is proven to be physically possible. God formed the singularity that formed Our universe, which have given life to us humans.

Would you Accept that form for Magic?




posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 01:35 PM
link   

spy66
In air the boat would probably break up. But would it do that in water?

Who is saying that God had to do Magic to make this possible. That is not in the story?
God doesn't do Magic.

What God have done is proven to be physically possible. God formed the singularity that formed Our universe, which have given life to us humans.

Would you Accept that form for Magic?



No wooden boat that large can hold together. Not even modern one, yet somehow Noah managed to build one 4,000 years ago that would float?! (only in Hollywood possible
and there only with magic, I mean special effects
)

What evidence do you have that God formed singularity?
edit on 17-2-2014 by SuperFrog because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 02:06 PM
link   

spy66

Krazysh0t

spy66
reply to post by Krazysh0t
 





Math shows that it cannot exist, unless there is some weird space/time anomaly in the ark that allows for the interior area to far outstrip its exterior area. But then if that were the case, why would the ark have to be so large in the first place? Just make a standard sized boat, have the anomaly and you are good to go.


Now we are getting to the Source of the story. God is in the Picture here, when it comes to this story. Did science bring that into their calculations?

No.


So it makes sense to you for God to have Noah build an ark that is too long to hold together in the middle all to shove a bunch of animals into the interior that won't fit? This is ok, because God is going to magic the ark to work? But this begs the question, if God was going to magic the ark to work in the first place, why does the ship have to be so large? It's a logical paradox and is just as supernatural and dumb as YEC which you already agreed with me science has disproven.



In air the boat would probably break up. But would it do that in water?

Who is saying that God had to do Magic to make this possible. That is not in the story?
God doesn't do Magic.

What God have done is proven to be physically possible. God formed the singularity that formed Our universe, which have given life to us humans.

Would you Accept that form for Magic?



Boat break up in air? When was it ever suspended in air? You mean when they were building it? No of course it wouldn't bend then, it is being supported from the outside by braces. I have ALWAYS been talking about when the boat was in the water. Here a link:

Noah's Ark is too big to float


So, depending on what you use for a cubit, Ye Arke is about 450 feet long, 75 wide, and 45 tall, right? I work best in metres, so lets do a bit of conversion: that's 137.16 by 22.86 by 13.716 metres, right? For ease of calculation, let's call it 140 x 23 x 14. This give you 45.080e+3 cubic metres. One cubic metre of pure water is one metric tonne. Salt water is a bit more dense. Be nice, add another thousand tonnes or so... Ye Arke displaces 46,000 tonnes. Maybe 46,400 at max. And I'm being generous. (The reader who knows something about ship-building will also spot a certain minor problem with the above figures. No creationist has ever seen it... in part 'cause if it's corrected, things get worse for Ye Arke.)

The sheer size. HMS _Victory_, still preserved at Portsmouth, was 186 feet long on the gundeck. HMS _Victoria_, the last full-rigged 1st rate ship of the line to serve as flag of the Channel Fleet, built in 1859, was 250 feet long on the gundeck. And she had a steel frame because the RN had found that building wooden ships much bigger than 225 feet long was not a good idea because they tended to straddle or to hog on being launched; that is, they tended to bend, their bows and sterns to stick up out of the water at an angle, (that¹s straddling) or to bend the other way, the bows and sterns supported by waves but the midships sections out of the water (or at least not as well supported) (that¹s hogging) and either way their keels tended to crack under the strain. Even with steel frames, wooden ships bigger than 250 feet long tended to hog or straddle. Don't take my word for it, look it up for yourself. One possible source: _The Wooden Fighting Ship In the Royal Navy, 897-1860_, EHH Archibald, Blandford Press, London. Sorry, my copy was published back before ISBNs. Edward Archibald was at the time of writing the curator of the National Maritime Museum, Portsmouth, England. Or build a wooden boat 250 feet long and see what happens. Ye Arke was the size of _two_ 1st rate line of battleships, laid end-to-end. Noah was a shepherd. He knew better than the shipwrights at Chatham who built the ships with which the RN dominated the world for 150 years? If I'm wrong, and it is possible to build a 450 foot wooden vessel, by all means demonstrate it. I'll even put up some of the money... so long as I get to record the launch of said vessel. And so long as those who say that such a craft would be safe are willing to stay on it while it's being launched. Me, I figure that I'd get some _great_ pix.


If God didn't magic the ark into working, then how is the story true? I've already demonstrated that the ark is mathematically impossible. I just posted a link showing that it would be an engineering disaster if it were to actually BE built. The only logical conclusion left for the story to remain true is that God intervened and made it work. Ie, magic. Prove me wrong.
edit on 17-2-2014 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 02:09 PM
link   
reply to post by SuperFrog
 





What evidence do you have that God formed singularity?


I have a problem when it comes to my evidence. Because first i must have Your agreement that the infinite must exist.

Well i dont really need it because it is common sense that it must exists, even without proof.

From there i can prove to you that God must exist, and that only God would be able to form finite "And that is any finite".
edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)
edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 02:45 PM
link   

spy66
reply to post by SuperFrog
 





What evidence do you have that God formed singularity?


I have a problem when it comes to my evidence. Because first i must have Your agreement that the infinite must exist.

Well i dont really need it because it is common sense that it must exists, even without proof.

From there i can prove to you that God must exist, and that only God would be able to form finite "And that is any finite".
edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)
edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)


I believe in infinity, so lay down your proof that God created the singularity.



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 02:55 PM
link   


Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.

Albert Einstein



I love how Morgan Freeman explains the balloon thing...

www.thedailyshow.com...

A lot of balloon stuff...



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 02:58 PM
link   

Krazysh0t

spy66
reply to post by SuperFrog
 





What evidence do you have that God formed singularity?


I have a problem when it comes to my evidence. Because first i must have Your agreement that the infinite must exist.

Well i dont really need it because it is common sense that it must exists, even without proof.

From there i can prove to you that God must exist, and that only God would be able to form finite "And that is any finite".
edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)
edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)


I believe in infinity, so lay down your proof that God created the singularity.



Well the infinite and infinity are two very different Things. Infinity is about finite. The infinite is not.

Finite is not infinite therefor infinity can not exist physically, they only exist as Virtual numbers. Because it took a finite amount of time to form finite, Therefor it will take a finite amount of time for it to become infinite again.

I will get to it if you Accept that there is a infinite.
edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 03:15 PM
link   

Krazysh0t

spy66
reply to post by SuperFrog
 





What evidence do you have that God formed singularity?


I have a problem when it comes to my evidence. Because first i must have Your agreement that the infinite must exist.

Well i dont really need it because it is common sense that it must exists, even without proof.

From there i can prove to you that God must exist, and that only God would be able to form finite "And that is any finite".
edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)
edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)


I believe in infinity, so lay down your proof that God created the singularity.


Not possible, since there is no proof of a singularity. Unless that's the point of this little exercise.

So what we have here are two entities that are not explicitly known to exist, but are "believed" to.
Back to square one...



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 03:29 PM
link   

PhotonEffect

Krazysh0t

spy66
reply to post by SuperFrog
 





What evidence do you have that God formed singularity?


I have a problem when it comes to my evidence. Because first i must have Your agreement that the infinite must exist.

Well i dont really need it because it is common sense that it must exists, even without proof.

From there i can prove to you that God must exist, and that only God would be able to form finite "And that is any finite".
edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)
edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)


I believe in infinity, so lay down your proof that God created the singularity.


Not possible, since there is no proof of a singularity. Unless that's the point of this little exercise.

So what we have here are two entities that are not explicitly known to exist, but are "believed" to.
Back to square one...



Correct. Scientifically by obseration the singularity can not be proven to have existed. But by observig the expansion of Our universe we know that our universe was compressed before it expanded. In othr Words, Our universe was a lot more compessed 13.7 billions years ago than it is today. That cant be proven either, or can it?



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 04:02 PM
link   

PhotonEffect

Krazysh0t

spy66
reply to post by SuperFrog
 





What evidence do you have that God formed singularity?


I have a problem when it comes to my evidence. Because first i must have Your agreement that the infinite must exist.

Well i dont really need it because it is common sense that it must exists, even without proof.

From there i can prove to you that God must exist, and that only God would be able to form finite "And that is any finite".
edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)
edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)


I believe in infinity, so lay down your proof that God created the singularity.


Not possible, since there is no proof of a singularity. Unless that's the point of this little exercise.

So what we have here are two entities that are not explicitly known to exist, but are "believed" to.
Back to square one...


Hey, I'm just trying to get him to explain his proof here. He claims he has proof that relies on the premise that the infinite exists, so I said ok I accept that premise, what is your proof?



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 04:04 PM
link   

spy66
Well science can not disprove that it didnt take Place. But science is non the less very fasinated by the story, because it has value to Our scociety.


Sure it can. Start with the talking snake in Genesis and take it from there...


Science can not disprove creationism either. Science dont know much pre Plank Time.


The pre-Planck era may be an area of conjecture but it does not support the Bronze Age creations myths that constantly get tossed out here.



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 04:07 PM
link   

spy66
God doesn't do Magic.


Oh? I thought Jesus Copperfield magicked some extra fish into existence.



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 04:10 PM
link   
reply to post by AugustusMasonicus
 





The pre-Planck era may be an area of conjecture but it does not support the Bronze Age creations myths that constantly get tossed out here.


Science can not publicly support anything they have no knolwedge about. But if you know science and have some common sense.
Even science indirectly support creationism through their scientific knowledge.

Its just that common People dont know how to put the pieces toghether to see the pictur.



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 04:13 PM
link   

AugustusMasonicus

spy66
God doesn't do Magic.


Oh? I thought Jesus Copperfield magicked some extra fish into existence.


I guess it is Magic that finite came into existence as well. That is even a bigger mystery. Than a few Fish.



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 04:15 PM
link   

spy66
Science can not publicly support anything they have no knolwedge about

...

Even science indirectly support creationism through their scientific knowledge.


Those two sentences are what is commonly referred to as an oxymoron.



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 04:17 PM
link   

spy66
I guess it is Magic that finite came into existence as well.


Please show evidence that the universe is finite.


That is even a bigger mystery. Than a few Fish.


That is irrelevant as you claimed God does not do magic but Jesus Chris Angel obviously did.



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 04:28 PM
link   

spy66

AugustusMasonicus

spy66
God doesn't do Magic.


Oh? I thought Jesus Copperfield magicked some extra fish into existence.


I guess it is Magic that finite came into existence as well. That is even a bigger mystery. Than a few Fish.


Seems a bit contradictory no? When Jesus arrived at the wedding there was not enough food or wine for everyone. To me that is the epitome of finite. Once jesus arrived... Voila, infinite fish and wine. Looks magically delicious minus the lucky charms does it not? This is the problem with investing so much disbelief in science, dichotomous thinking. Everything involves having your cake and eating it too whereas science is more interested in how to make the cake and could care less how you eat it.



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 05:21 PM
link   

peter vlar

spy66

AugustusMasonicus

spy66
God doesn't do Magic.


Oh? I thought Jesus Copperfield magicked some extra fish into existence.


I guess it is Magic that finite came into existence as well. That is even a bigger mystery. Than a few Fish.


Seems a bit contradictory no? When Jesus arrived at the wedding there was not enough food or wine for everyone. To me that is the epitome of finite. Once jesus arrived... Voila, infinite fish and wine. Looks magically delicious minus the lucky charms does it not? This is the problem with investing so much disbelief in science, dichotomous thinking. Everything involves having your cake and eating it too whereas science is more interested in how to make the cake and could care less how you eat it.


Yes, Jeus even walked on water. Jesus split a big bolder in two and gave water to a Whole tribe.

Jesus did lot of Things. And you can not disprove any of it.



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 05:37 PM
link   
reply to post by spy66
 


Nor can you PROVE his very existence let alone any of his acts of magic. The very magic you now admit to despite prior protestation, hence my point. Just for the record, the burden of PROOF lies on your end. It's not my responsibility to disprove things there is no evidence for. I only do that for my kids at Christmas time because the youngest one still believes in Santa. I'd rather take my chances with something written and compiled by Anton LaVey than anything compiled by Constantine or rewritten by King James. The less hocus locus I have to wade through the better.
edit on 17-2-2014 by peter vlar because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 05:39 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 





new topics

top topics



 
28
<< 24  25  26    28  29  30 >>

log in

join