|
QuickSearch
Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ] |
EvC Forum active members: 66 (9029 total) |
| |
BodhitSLAVa | |
Total: 884,347 Year: 1,993/14,102 Month: 361/624 Week: 82/163 Day: 2/40 Hour: 2/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Alpha-Omega universes in free fall | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Larni Member Posts: 3999 From: Liverpool Joined: |
What is your point? 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 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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Larni Member Posts: 3999 From: Liverpool Joined: |
When you say you see the bigger picture how do you know what you see is not just your imagination?
Do you you have any evidence this? 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 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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Larni Member Posts: 3999 From: Liverpool Joined:
|
So, you base your conclusions about reality on what you personally prefer to believe: I wish I could.
There would be dragons. 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 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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Larni Member Posts: 3999 From: Liverpool Joined: |
No. Of course not. I would love the Universe to make sense in an intuitive way where every phenomena boiled down to common sense rules of cause and effect: where anything that just did not make sense to me could not be true. But I know there are things that don't conform to my personal take on how things should work. To get around this I use the scientific method to base my conclusions on. I would love to beleive that there are dragons: but there is no evidence of them so I don't. Do you understand? 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 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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Larni Member Posts: 3999 From: Liverpool Joined: |
You do not have a theory.
You have an unsupported hypothesis. 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 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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Larni Member Posts: 3999 From: Liverpool Joined: |
Then you should be able to demonstrate these higher and lower dimensions.
If you can't what does that tell you? 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 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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Larni Member Posts: 3999 From: Liverpool Joined: |
So you can't demonstrate what these dimensions are; you can only make unevidenced assertions.
What a surprise. 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 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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Larni Member Posts: 3999 From: Liverpool Joined: |
Still no evidence.
What a suprise. 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 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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Larni Member Posts: 3999 From: Liverpool Joined:
|
Did you buy it?
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 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.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2021