Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 49 (9215 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: Cifa.ac
Post Volume: Total: 920,173 Year: 495/6,935 Month: 495/275 Week: 12/200 Day: 6/6 Hour: 0/0


EvC Forum ⇒ Side Orders ⇒ Coffee House ⇒

Foreveryoung Discussions

Thread ▼ Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Foreveryoung Discussions
Larni
Member (Idle past 151 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005

Normal Thread Display
Message 3 of 103 (677319)
10-29-2012 8:03 AM

Arn't there several threads where this is already going on?
​
It might be nice to have it all in one place, though.
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
  
Larni
Member (Idle past 151 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005

Normal Thread Display
Message 5 of 103 (677326)
10-29-2012 8:40 AM 		Reply to: Message 4 by Percy
10-29-2012 8:27 AM

I'll grant he seems not to know much about the Bible.
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 4 by Percy, posted 10-29-2012 8:27 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied
  
Larni
Member (Idle past 151 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005

Normal Thread Display
Message 8 of 103 (677338)
10-29-2012 9:58 AM 		Reply to: Message 7 by CosmicChimp
10-29-2012 9:48 AM

I'm sure that University will burn most of his youthful conviction out of him.
​
Isn't that what University is for?
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 7 by CosmicChimp, posted 10-29-2012 9:48 AM CosmicChimp has replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by CosmicChimp, posted 10-29-2012 10:03 AM Larni has not replied
  
Larni
Member (Idle past 151 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005

Normal Thread Display
Message 19 of 103 (677423)
10-29-2012 4:01 PM 		Reply to: Message 15 by New Cat's Eye
10-29-2012 3:00 PM

Am I going mad or do they mean the same thing?
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 15 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-29-2012 3:00 PM New Cat's Eye has replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-29-2012 4:07 PM Larni has not replied
 Message 21 by nwr, posted 10-29-2012 4:10 PM Larni has not replied
  
Larni
Member (Idle past 151 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005

Normal Thread Display
Message 29 of 103 (677490)
10-30-2012 8:13 AM 		Reply to: Message 23 by foreveryoung
10-29-2012 11:54 PM

When those beliefs and the consensus of modern science are in contradiction, I am indeed slow to change my mind.
​
I actually like this. Being slow to change ones mind is a world of difference from the vast majority of literalists who simply refuse to move their stance at all.
​
I do wonder how you go about deciding what is literal and what is metaphorical but that is another thread in the making.
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 23 by foreveryoung, posted 10-29-2012 11:54 PM foreveryoung has not replied
  
Larni
Member (Idle past 151 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005

Normal Thread Display

(1)
Message 40 of 103 (677555)
10-30-2012 3:29 PM 		Reply to: Message 37 by foreveryoung
10-30-2012 2:43 PM

I came to that conclusion by long and hard thinking and trying my absolute best to come up with ways that it wasn't true.
​
Just like everyone else.
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 37 by foreveryoung, posted 10-30-2012 2:43 PM foreveryoung has not replied
  
Date format: mm-dd-yyyy
Timezone: ET (US)
  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2025