Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 114 (8789 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 09-22-2017 6:10 PM
351 online now:
Coragyps, Coyote, halibut, JonF, kbertsche, Percy (Admin), XJTA (7 members, 344 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Porkncheese
Post Volume:
Total: 819,308 Year: 23,914/21,208 Month: 1,879/2,468 Week: 388/822 Day: 48/66 Hour: 0/5

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
2930
31
32333435Next
Author Topic:   Are religions manmade and natural or supernaturally based?
ringo
Member
Posts: 13639
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 451 of 511 (773360)
11-30-2015 11:36 AM
Reply to: Message 450 by ICANT
11-30-2015 11:31 AM


ICANT writes:

How do you know that it was a he?

I was privileged to meet Him in 1964 when I was dead for 3 hours.

What other possible explanations did you consider?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 450 by ICANT, posted 11-30-2015 11:31 AM ICANT has acknowledged this reply

  
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 9921
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 3.3


Message 452 of 511 (773362)
11-30-2015 11:57 AM
Reply to: Message 448 by ICANT
11-30-2015 11:21 AM


wo objects exert a force of attraction on one another known as "gravity." Sir Isaac Newton quantified the gravity between two objects when he formulated his three laws of motion.

Is that the complete text of the article?

ICANT, you are either incapable of reading the articles or you are being completely dishonest. Each of the articles that I provided links to, in addition to describing the force of action, also indicates that gravity is a curvature of space time. I checked the articles before posting the links.

Example:

quote:
Einstein realized that massive objects caused a distortion in space-time. Imagine setting a large body in the center of a trampoline. The body would press down into the fabric, causing it to dimple. A marble rolled around the edge would spiral inward toward the body, pulled in much the same way that the gravity of a planet pulls at rocks in space.

That's right, the curvature of space time produces the effect we associate with gravity.

All you are doing now is cherry picking the descriptions from the articles and avoiding the answer to the question. You may have the last word on this matter.

ABE:

Below is a quote from a free textbook on the subject of general relativity. The textbook may be a little math heavy for the casual reader.

From page 149 of General Relativity, An Introduction for Physicists by Hobson, Efstathiou, and Lasenby:

quote:
These observations led Einstein to make a profound proposal that simultaneously provides for a relativistic description of gravity and incorporates in a natural way the equivalence principle (and consequently the equivalence of gravitational and inertial mass). Einsteinís proposal was that gravity should no longer be regarded as a force in the conventional sense but rather as a manifestation of the curvature of the spacetime, this curvature being induced by the presence of matter. This is the central idea underpinning the theory of general relativity

http://202.38.64.11/...6)(ISBN%200521829518).pdf

A second, excellent reference comes from Leonard Susskinds free lecture video series on general relativity. Both his 2008 and 2012, video series are available for free on Youtube and on iTunes.

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Edited by NoNukes, : Add some info for whoever is interested.

Edited by Admin, : Fix link.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King

If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams


This message is a reply to:
 Message 448 by ICANT, posted 11-30-2015 11:21 AM ICANT has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 455 by ICANT, posted 11-30-2015 2:17 PM NoNukes has responded

    
ICANT
Member
Posts: 5625
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 453 of 511 (773371)
11-30-2015 1:58 PM
Reply to: Message 441 by Modulous
11-30-2015 3:29 AM


Hi Mod,

Mod writes:

Then where did it exist?

Everywhere.

But everywhere did not exist.

Mod writes:

It is either eternal or had a beginning to exist, which is it?

It has a finite past. I think that leaves us with less room for equivocation, so let's use that.

Just what do you mean by a finite past?
Stephen Hawking said in "The Beginning of Time":

quote:
The conclusion of this lecture is that the universe has not existed forever. Rather, the universe, and time itself, had a beginning in the Big Bang, about 15 billion years ago.

I can find no added footnote to that lecture on his website so I would assume it still holds. http://www.hawking.org.uk/the-beginning-of-time.html

Mod writes:

The concept of 'preceding' the universe makes no sense in light of the fact that there is nothing except the universe.

But that universe has not existed forever. That means it had a beginning to exist.

How could it begin to exist?

Mod writes:

There was a Supernatural Power which is outside of the universe to provide the energy and mass the universe was formed from.

Well, no. There are more than two possibilities. Many of them don't require a supernatural power. But let's stick with getting you to understand my godless universe before we start worrying about other possibilities.

Yes there is several possibilities but we are discussing the universe according to the standard model.

1. The Supernatural power I call God could have supplied the energy and mass that created our universe.
2. The Hartly/Hawking instanton could have created the universe.
3. Two branes bumping together could have created the universe.
4. A former universe that had collapsed into a singularity could have created the universe.
5. The universe could have spontaneously created itself from non existence.
6. The universe could have existed eternally in the past but it would be dead by now. This was the reason for Einstein's fudge factor to make the universe static.

#1 would be self sustaining.
#2 & 3 would require existence to exist that they could appear in for them to be able to create the universe.
#4 would require some mechanism to supply energy and mass, as the universe's lasting for an eternity would be dead by now as the energy would have all become useless energy.

If you want me to understand your Godless universe you need to provide a mechanism whereby the infinite energy existed at T=0-9 and began to expand creating your Godless universe.

God Bless,


"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 441 by Modulous, posted 11-30-2015 3:29 AM Modulous has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 454 by Modulous, posted 11-30-2015 2:09 PM ICANT has acknowledged this reply

    
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7429
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005
Member Rating: 4.0


Message 454 of 511 (773372)
11-30-2015 2:09 PM
Reply to: Message 453 by ICANT
11-30-2015 1:58 PM


But everywhere did not exist.

Of course it did. Space and Time existed.

Just what do you mean by a finite past?

I mean that time has at least one end, at the Big Bang.

But that universe has not existed forever.

It exists for all time. Which has a finite past.

abe:

. The Supernatural power I call God could have supplied the energy and mass that created our universe.

Of course, but where and when is this God?

If you want me to understand your Godless universe you need to provide a mechanism whereby the infinite energy existed at T=0-9 and began to expand creating your Godless universe.

The energy in the universe has existed for all of time, including a billionth of a second away from the start of time. The expansion is described by GR.

Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 453 by ICANT, posted 11-30-2015 1:58 PM ICANT has acknowledged this reply

    
ICANT
Member
Posts: 5625
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 455 of 511 (773373)
11-30-2015 2:17 PM
Reply to: Message 452 by NoNukes
11-30-2015 11:57 AM


Hi NoNukes,

NoNukes writes:

Example:

quote:
Einstein realized that massive objects caused a distortion in space-time. Imagine setting a large body in the center of a trampoline. The body would press down into the fabric, causing it to dimple. A marble rolled around the edge would spiral inward toward the body, pulled in much the same way that the gravity of a planet pulls at rocks in space.

That's right, the curvature of space time produces the effect we associate with gravity.

All you are doing now is cherry picking the descriptions from the articles and avoiding the answer to the question. You may have the last word on this matter.

What causes the curvature of the space time? Mass

" Imagine setting a large body in the center of a trampoline."

But space is not a sheet like a trampoline.

Space fills the universe everywhere there is not mass.

So actually the mass that is supposed to cause the curvature of space time is more like a fish in a fish bowl. The fish has water all around him and the mass has space all around it.

God Bless,


"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 452 by NoNukes, posted 11-30-2015 11:57 AM NoNukes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 457 by NoNukes, posted 11-30-2015 2:32 PM ICANT has acknowledged this reply

    
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 3428
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006


Message 456 of 511 (773374)
11-30-2015 2:21 PM
Reply to: Message 448 by ICANT
11-30-2015 11:21 AM


This says there is no such force that the mass of the sun and the mass of the earth attract one another.

That would mean when I take the apple in my hand at arms length and turn it upside down the apple will stay in my upside down hand.

No. That would mean the apple would follow the curvature of spacetime created by the mass of the Earth. To your view it would appear as the apple falling to the ground.

It does not say distorted space-time causes matter to pull on other matter.

Like the apple, above, the path through warped and curved spacetime will cause massive bodies to move towards each other.

There is an old classic analogy for visualizing this. Put a bowling ball in the middle of a trampoline. The fabric of the trampoline will curve under the bowl ball. Now roll a baseball onto the trampoline. The baseball makes it's own dent in the fabric of the trampoline but much less than the bowling ball. The baseball will follow the curved bent fabric created by the bowling ball right to the bowling ball the same way the apple falling from your hand is following the curvature of spacetime toward the earth. The difference between the trampoline fabric and the spacetime fabric is that spacetime stretches in every direction and will curve from every direction toward the massive body.

That movement of massive bodies toward each other, following the curvature of the bent spacetime fabric, is what we call the force of gravity.

Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 448 by ICANT, posted 11-30-2015 11:21 AM ICANT has acknowledged this reply

  
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 9921
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 3.3


Message 457 of 511 (773375)
11-30-2015 2:32 PM
Reply to: Message 455 by ICANT
11-30-2015 2:17 PM


What causes the curvature of the space time? Mass

Right.

So actually the mass that is supposed to cause the curvature of space time is more like a fish in a fish bowl. The fish has water all around him and the mass has space all around it.

Does this analogy aid you in your understanding of gravity? If so, then you are welcome to it. On the other hand, the analogy of the sheet allows you to picture a two dimension illustration since viewing curvature of space and time is utterly impossible. Nobody is saying space is a sheet of fabric.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King

If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams


This message is a reply to:
 Message 455 by ICANT, posted 11-30-2015 2:17 PM ICANT has acknowledged this reply

    
New Cat's Eye
Member
Posts: 11707
From: near St. Louis
Joined: 01-27-2005
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 458 of 511 (773377)
11-30-2015 3:41 PM
Reply to: Message 415 by ICANT
11-27-2015 2:53 AM


Are you now arguing that the time that is said to be the fourth dimension of the universe and the time that measures duration between events are one and the same?

No.

The time being discussed here is the one that is said to be a dimension of the universe. It has nothing to do with duration between events.

Have you realized that your old concept of time is not the one that should be used for these considerations?

I thought it was said that the tug between two large masses warps spacetime.

You thought something was said? Whoopty-do.

So gravity does not exist as a result of the curvature of spacetime.

Wrong.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 415 by ICANT, posted 11-27-2015 2:53 AM ICANT has acknowledged this reply

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 12528
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002


Message 459 of 511 (773381)
11-30-2015 4:39 PM
Reply to: Message 449 by ICANT
11-30-2015 11:24 AM


ICANT writes:

Talking about gravity is basically for educational purposes.

I don't know what this means.

If you're trying to argue that things we don't know are evidence of the supernatural, please explain why you believe this is a fruitful line of argument.

If "what gravity really is" and "what came before the universe" are topics not germane to this thread, please drop them.

If it's something else, please explain.


--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 449 by ICANT, posted 11-30-2015 11:24 AM ICANT has acknowledged this reply

    
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 9921
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 3.3


Message 460 of 511 (773613)
12-04-2015 12:11 PM
Reply to: Message 449 by ICANT
11-30-2015 11:24 AM


But I did propose that The Supernatural Power I call God holds the universe together.

Let me reconstruct your argument. You said that God was the dark energy and dark matter that scientists claimed held the universe together. You also claimed that dark matter was non existent because it was not observed. It was then pointed out that:

1. Dark energy does not hold the universe together. Dark energy provides an expansion effect and not a holding together effect.
2. Dark matter (which is not the same thing as dark energy) is detectable by the gravity it produces via gravitational effects which are visible.

You responded to the first point with some confused and incorrect statements that you found on the internet. I gave up on correcting you on that point. You responded to the second by claiming that you had never found anyone who could tell you what gravity is. I'm not sure why your claim, even it it was correct, means that we cannot detect dark matter by the gravity it produces;i t is perfectly fine to identify gravity by its effects.

I thought you might be interested in what science says about gravity, dark matter and dark energy and that informing you might lead to you using a different line of argument, or at least of being a bit better at talking about what you feel are the mistakes of scientists.

Edited by Admin, : The first "dark energy" => "dark matter" in point 2.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King

If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams


This message is a reply to:
 Message 449 by ICANT, posted 11-30-2015 11:24 AM ICANT has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 463 by ICANT, posted 12-09-2015 5:51 AM NoNukes has responded

    
dwise1
Member
Posts: 2956
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 4.3


Message 461 of 511 (773641)
12-05-2015 5:08 AM
Reply to: Message 449 by ICANT
11-30-2015 11:24 AM


But I did propose that The Supernatural Power I call God holds the universe together.

I am an agnostic. I do not believe that we are even able to KNOW such things.

Ooh, the supernatural! What do we know about the supernatural? Nothing. Why is that? Well, because we don't know anything about it. Why not? Well, because we cannot observe the supernatural, nor measure it, nor determine whether it even exists.

Is there some "Supernatural Power I call God"? Maybe. Or not. Who knows? Who could ever possibly know? We cannot possibly observe the supernatural, so who could ever possibly be able to tell?

OK, so you personally believe in that "Supernatural Power I call God" that cannot possibly be confirmed independently. OK, fine. You have your concept of God.

OK, so how can you verify your concept of God? Objectively verify it. No, obviously not.

Now consider this. That "Supernatural Power I call God" encompasses things that far outstrips the capabilities of the human mind, such as trivial things like infinity. So how could any concept of "God" that your puny human mind could possibly come up with come anywhere close to the "real thing", that actual "Supernatural Power I call God"?

In other words, since you could not ever possibly actually define that "Supernatural Power I call God", you instead invented a metaphoric "God" to represent your ideas about that "God". You have had to created your "God" as something that your limited human mind could deal with, since that "Supernatural Power I call God" is completely outside of your puny human mind's ability to function.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 449 by ICANT, posted 11-30-2015 11:24 AM ICANT has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 462 by ICANT, posted 12-09-2015 4:04 AM dwise1 has not yet responded

    
ICANT
Member
Posts: 5625
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 462 of 511 (773785)
12-09-2015 4:04 AM
Reply to: Message 461 by dwise1
12-05-2015 5:08 AM


Hi d,

d writes:

I am an agnostic. I do not believe that we are even able to KNOW such things.

You do know that what you or I believe does not make any difference in the total scheme of things.

But if you had read the thread before jumping in you might have understood what I was talking about.

In Message 46 answering a question GIA asked I said:

quote:
Greatest I am writes:

Do you think Gods are manmade or do you believe in a supernatural God?

I believe in a supernatural God.

Everybody says why?

Scientific fact: The universe has not always existed.
Scientific fact: The universe had a beginning to exist.
Scientific fact: The universe exists.

Before the universe there would have been an absence of anything. No space, time, matter, energy, or vacuum, as all those began to exist when the universe began to exist.

Now whatever caused the universe to have a beginning to exist from an absence of anything would be a supernatural power.

I call that supernatural power God, what do you call it?


In Message 110 I also said:

quote:
Since the universe exists there had to be a supernatural power that is outside of the universe to provide the energy required to produce the mass and energy of the universe.

Energy and mass can not be created or destroyed is a law of physics.

Which would require a supernatural power to supply the energy and mass required to produce the universe as it is known.

I call that supernatural power God. If you have an alternative to a supernatural power please present it.


Now correct me if I am wrong in the following.

1. The universe has not existed eternally in the past. If it did it would have been dead a long time ago as there would be no useable energy left as energy can not be created or destroyed.

2. The universe does exist today.

3. Since the universe did not exist eternally in the past but it does exist today means the universe had a beginning to exist.

4. Since energy is required to produce the mass that makes up everything in the universe that energy had to be supplied by some means.

4. This energy could not exist inside the universe as the universe did not exist.

5. If there is nothing outside the universe to provide that energy that was required to produce the mass that formed the universe it would not exist today.

6. No universe existing and nothing existing outside the universe would be non existence. Non existence can not produce anything.

7. Since the universe does exist and could not have existed eternally in the past, the universe had a beginning to exist.

8. Energy had to exist or there had to be an entity that existed that could provide the energy required to produce the universe and everything in it.

9. I call that Supernatural energy God.

God Bless,


"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 461 by dwise1, posted 12-05-2015 5:08 AM dwise1 has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 466 by NoNukes, posted 12-09-2015 12:29 PM ICANT has responded
 Message 467 by Modulous, posted 12-10-2015 4:35 AM ICANT has responded

    
ICANT
Member
Posts: 5625
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 463 of 511 (773789)
12-09-2015 5:51 AM
Reply to: Message 460 by NoNukes
12-04-2015 12:11 PM


Hi NoNukes,

NoNukes writes:

1. Dark energy does not hold the universe together. Dark energy provides an expansion effect and not a holding together effect.
2. Dark matter (which is not the same thing as dark energy) is detectable by the gravity it produces via gravitational effects which are visible.

I do not believe that God is dark energy or dark matter as I told you I do not equate the three.

I did state that God is the energy that holds the universe and everything in it together. Colossians 1:17. This was written 2,000 years before anyone put forth something was required hold the universe together.

I also said God is what causes the universe to expand. Job 9:8, Psalm 104:2, Isaiah 40:22, 44:24, 45:12, 51:13, and Jeremiah 10:12, All these were written thousands of years before anyone knew the universe was expanding.

You know that sounds like the Bible made predictions thousands of years before science came up with those ideas.

NoNukes writes:

I thought you might be interested in what science says about gravity,

Well science says gravity is what causes the curvature of spacetime.
Then turns around and says that the curvature of spacetime causes gravity.

From your first source:

quote:
The tug of gravity

Two objects exert a force of attraction on one another known as "gravity." Sir Isaac Newton quantified the gravity between two objects when he formulated his three laws of motion. The force tugging between two bodies depends on how massive each one is and how far apart the two lie.


From your second source:

quote:

1. PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE

Albert Einstein's general theory of relativity is one of the towering achievements of 20th-century physics. Published in 1916, it explains that what we perceive as the force of gravity in fact arises from the curvature of space and time.


From your third source:

quote:
As we have seen, matter does not simply pull on other matter across empty space, as Newton had imagined. Rather matter distorts space-time and it is this distorted space-time that in turn affects other matter.

So which is it? They don't agree.

What kind of an entity is space time that it can be affected or have an effect on another entity?

I know it is not a trampoline or a rubber sheet. I know it does not look like the picture on the opening page of your first source. Space surrounds the entire earth not just one side like the trampoline and bowling ball that is always used to explain how mass curves space time.

The earth in space is like a fish in water it only takes up the space the mass occupies.

It is a lot easier for me to believe the Supernatural power that was required to supply the energy that formed the mass of the universe and everything in it to put certain laws into effect and everything in the universe obeys those laws. That is except mankind, who chooses to believe what mankind wants to believe and do what mankind decides to do.

God Bless,


"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 460 by NoNukes, posted 12-04-2015 12:11 PM NoNukes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 464 by Admin, posted 12-09-2015 8:50 AM ICANT has responded
 Message 465 by NoNukes, posted 12-09-2015 12:10 PM ICANT has not yet responded

    
Admin
Director
Posts: 12528
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002


Message 464 of 511 (773791)
12-09-2015 8:50 AM
Reply to: Message 463 by ICANT
12-09-2015 5:51 AM


Moderator Provided Information
Hi ICANT,

I'm just going to provide some simple feedback and corrections.

ICANT writes:

Well science says gravity is what causes the curvature of spacetime.

This is incorrect. Science believes that mass curves space-time. The greater and denser the mass, the greater the resulting curve in space-time.

Then turns around and says that the curvature of spacetime causes gravity.

This is correct.

You continue on to quote short excerpts about gravity from three links NoNukes provided, claiming they disagree:

Your excerpt from the first link is about Newtonian gravity, which of course differs from Einsteinian gravity.

Your excerpt from the second link stops short of the very next sentence. Here it is all together, the part you quoted plus the following sentence:

quote:
Albert Einstein's general theory of relativity is one of the towering achievements of 20th-century physics. Published in 1916, it explains that what we perceive as the force of gravity in fact arises from the curvature of space and time.

Einstein proposed that objects such as the sun and the Earth change this geometry.


Which is exactly what your excerpt from the third link says. There's no disagreement at all:

quote:
As we have seen, matter does not simply pull on other matter across empty space, as Newton had imagined. Rather matter distorts space-time and it is this distorted space-time that in turn affects other matter.

You told me earlier that "Talking about gravity is basically for educational purposes." I responded in Message 459:

Admin in Message 459 writes:

I don't know what this means.

If you're trying to argue that things we don't know are evidence of the supernatural, please explain why you believe this is a fruitful line of argument.

If "what gravity really is" and "what came before the universe" are topics not germane to this thread, please drop them.

If it's something else, please explain.

You didn't respond, and now you're discussing (or working hard to misunderstand) gravity again. Please explain how it ties into the topic, or drop it. Ignoring me again will draw a suspension.


--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 463 by ICANT, posted 12-09-2015 5:51 AM ICANT has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 469 by ICANT, posted 12-10-2015 12:05 PM Admin has responded

    
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 9921
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 3.3


(1)
Message 465 of 511 (773803)
12-09-2015 12:10 PM
Reply to: Message 463 by ICANT
12-09-2015 5:51 AM


It is a lot easier for me to believe the Supernatural power that was required to supply the energy that formed the mass of the universe

I accept your statement of belief as offered. My problem is with the entire thrust of such statements an argument. To wit: you express complete and utter ignorance and lack of understanding of what science even says, and then tell me that it is easier for you to believe something else.

Your argument is simply a self-description of your own ignorance. Such an argument is not a successful way of demonstrating that your beliefs make sense, let alone demonstrating that your beliefs are correct. In fact your argument belittles you.

Edited by NoNukes, : Add a negation word that was left out.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King

If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams


This message is a reply to:
 Message 463 by ICANT, posted 12-09-2015 5:51 AM ICANT has not yet responded

    
RewPrev1
...
2930
31
32333435Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017