|
Author
|
Topic: Question Evolution!
|
Larni
Member (Idle past 182 days) Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: 09-16-2005
(2)
| |
| |
| |
|
Message 46 of 235 (646886)
01-07-2012 6:13 AM
|
Reply to: Message 44 by Chuck77
01-07-2012 4:24 AM
|
|
Re: What is this?
I think you need to look at how those answers actually answer the questions asked. Which one's do you think are wrong? Abe: what's with the call for suspension? Edited by Larni, : No reason given.
The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 Moreover that view is a blatantly anti-relativistic one. I'm rather inclined to think that space being relative to time and time relative to location should make such a naive hankering to pin-point an ultimate origin of anything, an aspiration that is not even wrong. Well, Larni, let's say I much better know what I don't want to say than how exactly say what I do.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 44 by Chuck77, posted 01-07-2012 4:24 AM | | Chuck77 has not replied |
|
Larni
Member (Idle past 182 days) Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: 09-16-2005
|
Re: ***LOOK AT THIS MESSAGE***
I'd be interested to see what the response is and we could do with some new creos around here.
The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 Moreover that view is a blatantly anti-relativistic one. I'm rather inclined to think that space being relative to time and time relative to location should make such a naive hankering to pin-point an ultimate origin of anything, an aspiration that is not even wrong. Well, Larni, let's say I much better know what I don't want to say than how exactly say what I do.
|
Larni
Member (Idle past 182 days) Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: 09-16-2005
|
Re: bad definitions again
I have a debate with some street preachers this saturday..*snip* Can't you just kick 'em inna nuts?
The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 Moreover that view is a blatantly anti-relativistic one. I'm rather inclined to think that space being relative to time and time relative to location should make such a naive hankering to pin-point an ultimate origin of anything, an aspiration that is not even wrong. Well, Larni, let's say I much better know what I don't want to say than how exactly say what I do.
|
Larni
Member (Idle past 182 days) Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: 09-16-2005
|
|
|
Message 179 of 235 (648086)
01-13-2012 6:06 AM
|
Reply to: Message 173 by Chuck77
01-13-2012 3:42 AM
|
|
Re: Oh well
Nothing cannot create something. Sorry. I know some on this forum will want to talk about particles and all that nonsnese. Your smarter than that right dwise? Ding ding ding! Virtual Particles. Ding ding dong?
The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286 Well, Larni, let's say I much better know what I don't want to say than how exactly say what I do.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 173 by Chuck77, posted 01-13-2012 3:42 AM | | Chuck77 has not replied |
|
Larni
Member (Idle past 182 days) Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: 09-16-2005
|
|
|
Message 197 of 235 (648177)
01-13-2012 3:29 PM
|
Reply to: Message 187 by crashfrog
01-13-2012 11:00 AM
|
|
Re: Oh well
His mum? Abe: please note (before the ban hammer falls): he was at one time born of woman. Edited by Larni, : Cowardly back peddling.
The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286 Well, Larni, let's say I much better know what I don't want to say than how exactly say what I do.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 187 by crashfrog, posted 01-13-2012 11:00 AM | | crashfrog has not replied |
|
Larni
Member (Idle past 182 days) Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: 09-16-2005
|
|
|
Message 198 of 235 (648178)
01-13-2012 3:34 PM
|
Reply to: Message 192 by Huntard
01-13-2012 1:41 PM
|
|
Re: Oh well
Stop lurking!
The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286 Well, Larni, let's say I much better know what I don't want to say than how exactly say what I do.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 192 by Huntard, posted 01-13-2012 1:41 PM | | Huntard has not replied |
|
Larni
Member (Idle past 182 days) Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: 09-16-2005
|
|
|
Message 220 of 235 (648412)
01-15-2012 2:54 PM
|
Reply to: Message 207 by Chuck77
01-14-2012 6:53 AM
|
|
Re: Chuck Refuses to Debate Like an Adult
I think Granny was saying he knew more about biology when he was eight than you do now. He made no mention of knowing more about ToE. When I was eight I had no idea about evolution, but I knew that animals had Latin names. Let me ask you, aside from web sites, what academic reading have you done into biology and ToE?
The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286 Well, Larni, let's say I much better know what I don't want to say than how exactly say what I do.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 207 by Chuck77, posted 01-14-2012 6:53 AM | | Chuck77 has not replied |
|
™ Version 4.2