Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 75 (8963 total)
75 online now:
Minnemooseus (Adminnemooseus) (1 member, 74 visitors)
Newest Member: Samuel567
Upcoming Birthdays: CosmicChimp
Post Volume: Total: 870,909 Year: 2,657/23,288 Month: 848/1,809 Week: 280/225 Day: 0/40 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Evidence to expect given a designer
Larni
Member
Posts: 3990
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 287 of 373 (647189)
01-08-2012 11:45 AM
Reply to: Message 228 by Just being real
01-08-2012 12:21 AM


Re: Evidence for a designer
All things we have observed come into existence thus far in our human experience have come from something else.

Apart from virtual particles, obviously.

Did you not know about virtual particles?


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 228 by Just being real, posted 01-08-2012 12:21 AM Just being real has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 296 by Just being real, posted 01-08-2012 10:24 PM Larni has responded

  
Larni
Member
Posts: 3990
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 306 of 373 (647296)
01-09-2012 5:17 AM
Reply to: Message 296 by Just being real
01-08-2012 10:24 PM


Re: Evidence for a designer
Then how can you say that we have not seen something come from nothing if you know about virtual particles?

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 296 by Just being real, posted 01-08-2012 10:24 PM Just being real has not yet responded

  
Larni
Member
Posts: 3990
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 345 of 373 (649880)
01-26-2012 9:06 AM
Reply to: Message 342 by ookuay
01-25-2012 10:00 PM


Re: If a tree falls in the forest...
and theoretically moving faster than the speed of light can create an alternate timeline

How does that work, exactly? Can you show us your maths, 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

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

Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134


This message is a reply to:
 Message 342 by ookuay, posted 01-25-2012 10:00 PM ookuay has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 346 by ookuay, posted 01-26-2012 7:47 PM Larni has not yet responded

  
Larni
Member
Posts: 3990
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 349 of 373 (650008)
01-27-2012 3:14 AM
Reply to: Message 348 by ookuay
01-26-2012 11:07 PM


Re: If a tree falls in the forest...
So your point about alternative times lines was factually wrong.

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

Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134


This message is a reply to:
 Message 348 by ookuay, posted 01-26-2012 11:07 PM ookuay has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2020