So Just How is ID's Supernatural-based Science Supposed to Work? (SUM. MESSAGES ONLY)

What?? Your model of absolute straight is the curvature of the earth?? Your silly earth/level analogy is ludicrous. Just because something is level for a few or a few hundred feet doesn't mean it works on astronomical scales. An absolute straight unbended bar 10,000 miles long resting on one point of the surface of the earth would have two opposite ends extending out into the atmosphere.lyx2no, if you really want to know, your bogus model doest cut the mustard.Man, can you imagine what you people would do to any of us of the minority persuasion if we used these nonsensical, unreal and false arguments to substantiate our points? Edited by Buzsaw, : add embolding

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

1. But the absolute straight bar allegedly capable of having space connect it's two ends is not a property of space. That space allegedly is bent does not address what property of space is capable of connecting the two ends of an absolute straight bar.2. We've debated this before. Cavediver and all of the other physicist pros and buffs were here, yet my argument remains unrefuted. That space curves is the only answer we get, yet the question remains; what property of space is capable of connecting the absolute straight bar's two ends?The unrefuted Buzsaw answer remains: THERE ARE NONE.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

You people are all obfuscating my model by the word, level which does not apply to my model. My straight bar model does not have to be level. It has to be absolute straight and totally unbended. Such a model exists. You have no existing model for (abe: the) argument which you need to refute my model and my argument. Your model, be it a fence on the surface of a sphere or a anything else level with the circular 2D surface of the earth does not refute my argument. Yours is a two dimensional one in a three dimensional universe. My model works in a three dimensional universe which is reality. My model which makes my point needn't be level to anything. It can be perpendicular to the earth's surface, for that matter.My model has no properties capable of ever having it's ends meet outside of bending.This whole debate is whether space has the property of curvature. The Buzsaw Hypothesis relative to space is that there are no observable properties of space, space's only properties being that it is boundless area in which all forces, energy and matter exist. If anything existing in the universe's space is observable it is energy, matter, force, light, i.e. anything detectable or observable.That's my hypothesis, folks. Take it or deny it, but sorry; even if space were curvable, that in itself is never ever going to be capable of joining the ends of an absolute straight unbended bar, no matter how many billion miles long you extend it.Until someone identifies the property of space capable of joining a 10000 mile long straight unbended bar, nobody is going to convince Buzsaw that space is capable of curving an unbended absolute straight bar zillions of miles long without bending the bar.Whether my model is a hundred ft, 10000 miles or fifty billion miles long, it's properties do not including bending which it must do for it's ends to join.I don't know what planet you people are coming from, but Buzsaw is from the world of reality where distance does not change the meaning and properties of things straight, unbendable and curvature. It appears your sophisticated QM and relativity training has propelled your thinking into a mindset of fantasy. Edited by Buzsaw, : change a word as noted in context

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

This segway began from PaulK's allegation in message 122 of this thread that Buzsaw and Berreta were demonstrating twisted "Supernatural 'science'." Imo, I've made the point that there are alternative debatable POVs and that some of these do not ignore the requirement for evidence, models, etc.My apologies for not opening a new thread in a suitable forum to respond to PaulK's allegations.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

1. The problems with narrow threads like this is that our evidences of the supernatural is a corroboration of multi-topic ones.Since the majority view of ID creationism is sudden designed and produced species there's not a lot of methodology to debate. Thus we need to refer to other evidences of the supernatural such as archeological discoveries, prophetic phenomena and such, all of which is off topic here.The dilema for us is that our evidences are segmented in the thread topics to the extent that the big picture of all the corroborated evidences is forgotten. Our opponents divide and conquer, so to speak in order to make it easier for them to undermine the isolated pieces of the puzzle as insufficient. You take a dozen pieces of the puzzle box and try to make sense of them for a picture and you get nothing worth looking at.2. "......that science would consider." You can just forget that notion. It aintagona happen. Secular mainstream science will have nothing to do with anything that hints of a higher intelligence existing in the universe than we have here on this little speck in the vast universe called Planet Earth.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

The majority of fundamentalist ID creationists don't agree that the species evolved. I am among the majority on that count.As for the age of the planet, I consider that to be the most problematic issue relative to supernatural based science for the majority, since they can't have it both ways. If God is eternal, the Universe is eternal since God's abode is in the Universe along with his heavenly domain. I'm pretty much standing alone with precious few on that count. It is this which makes some of my arguments tougher for the secularists to counter.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

Too much of what I would need to say relative to my science POV would not be acceptable as science here, so I'll pass on that, since sudden creation ID arguments entail the supernatural.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.