Rocket suspended (was 'Warning to Rocket - Straighten up your act')

Well, it's the first time anybody ever came back with a decent answer to that...but I still say, it makes no difference, how do you know the universe is under time?...We know the big Bang occured, but we don't know what came before it...it could be just an endless cycle of big bangs with no god at all.

Well, it's the first time anybody ever came back with a decent answer to that...but I still say, it makes no difference, how do you know the universe is under time?...We know the big Bang occured, but we don't know what came before it...it could be just an endless cycle of big bangs with no god at all.

you see, your posting form has improved already, only now we'll get banned for turning this topic into a topic. Well, this universe, I would say - is under time, or atleast effected by time. For example, all animals age and die - that's one example. An endless cycle of big bangs? Well, anything I would say would be total speculation, I have no cosmological knowledge. I don't know how much credence scientists would give the idea.One thing is certain though, God isn't biological that he would age and die. So, according to the bible he is the creator of all life - and therefore time. But if a day is the same to him, as a thousand years, that means a day would effect him like a thousand years = no effect.[This message has been edited by mike the wiz, 04-07-2004]

Every good disciplinary topic deserves a really good example of the disciplinary issue, so I'm taking this even further off topic: But all we can perceive of the universe is the four dimensions apparent to us. The universe may have a multidimensional existence, of which the four dimensions we can perceive are only a small expression of all that is really there. Just like your concept of God, the universe may have a transcendent existence of which time is only a small part. --Percy

Mike, time is an invention of man...all they had was sun dials in biblical times...they were hard pressed to tell night from day..we were only recently introduced to how time works on a cosmolgical basis...relative to the age of the universe...genesis could have easily reconciled that if it had used 13 billion years instead of 7 days...they don't even devide evenly...LOL...

Well, what a can of worms by Percy Maybe - yes. Maybe God participates in this area of the universe, where we cannot see him, and where time is no factor. Ofcourse, I still see him as supernatural so basically he could participate in any part of the universe and be invisible. But Percy - you do believe in God don't you? How would you see the time factor? I assume it is not the biblical God you believe in, but nobody's perfect. Ofcourse, anything I say about Cosmology will be about as useful as a preacher on prom night.

and another;
"It's not that the Genesis story is a complete lie...just total fiction.I like a good fiction read now and again.I can use all the same old staged arguments to challenge it's validity...but why bother...it's been done...so, lets try something new. The Geneises story leaves out too many significant details about things that were discovered by science in the relative recent past...things that should have been "CLEARLY" known as being of vital importance for a creator to prove his work as "Gospel"....I mean lets face it...Genesis is a story by a braggart, so why leave any doubt at all about it....some things that Genesis doesn't address that is of significant value to it's very own survival to be held as a true story (and these caould have been easliy handled by an all knowing being)...
1) The speed of light.
2) DNA/Genetics.
3) The time/Space Continuum.
4) Gravity.
5) Size/age of the universe.
6) Sweet-n-low.
7) Petrolium.
8) Electricity.
9) 99.9% of the lements on the periodic table of elements.
10) I can go on forever..."Now put your bullet back in your pocket Barny, I've been kicked out of way classier joints than this!

quote:

---

Well, it's the first time anybody ever came back with a decent answer to that...but I still say, it makes no difference, how do you know the universe is under time?...

---

Every observation we make in this universe is correlated with time in some respect. This is due to the fact that our senses are tied to time, so the observable universe (the only universe we know) "is under" time. The Heisenberg Uncertainty principle (ie, you can measure velocity and place, but not both at the same time with the same accuracy) among other quantum mechanical principles and theories may be shedding the first light on situations where time is not a factor. I would say that time as an all encompassing force or dimension may not be correct, but only through investigation and theory development will we be able to know for sure.

quote:

---

We know the big Bang occured, but we don't know what came before it

---

What came before human sentience? We may never know. We are hindered by our senses which are based on time/space. Breaking out of time/space may require a transformation out of our natural bodies. Don't get me wrong, I am an agnostic, but this is how I see it. We may have to move our consciousness into a quantum fluctuation wave (just made this term up, but it sounds good) in order to experience the full spectrum of activity within and before the universe. Dang, that didn't sound half bad. Maybe I should start a cult . . . ..

CULT!?!...will you provide the grape kool-aide, nikes and jogging suits..Halley-Bop! Make another round, you missed a couple!....
But seriously, my contention is where were we before we were here?...it's the same as waking up after surgery I think, you wake up at first not knowing where you were, then not knowing where you are...and then you remember and you exist again. Death is just not knowing where you are.

Well you're just completely out of control!
I think of time as a fluid, no beginning and no end, it's only self imposed rules are;
1) It is mono directional.
2) It can never touch itself.
3) For it to exist, it must have a minimum of two bodies in motion
relative to each other.

I thought the warning to Rocket was justified.And this thread demonstrates the strong tendency for people to veer way off topic.

Suck up!

You are in violation of your own forum rules. You have not only posted an ad hominum argument, "dubious" is NOT considered supporting data, (it's not even a half-way decent personal opinion...LOL)...
Whats worse, you have abused your powers as an administrator by screwin' this up royally and punishing a member without satisfactory explaination.
avoid bare assertions...well you certainly didn't do that....Ban youself for oh, say five minutes and I'll re-consider throwing chicken bones at and spitting on your Lexmark high quality photopaper 50,0000 megapixel 12'x16' poster...

Since "Adminnemooseus" bumped this thread to the top at around 3 in the morning yesterday, I'm fairly sure he meant for it to stay there (so I don't fergit)...so I'm just helpin' him out.

Rocket, are you TRYING to be suspended? 116 posts in 3 days, the majority of which are one liners. Six new threads started mostly fluff.I am as big a fan of humorous fluff as the next guy, but too much is too much.In case you want to complain about bare assertions, here are your most recent posts to the 30 most recent threads you posted on. If you need more I will link to your entire posting history.If you do agree that you are attempting to get suspended, I'm sure that there are a few of us here that would be happy to oblige you.

---

AdminAsgara
Queen of the Universe