I don't know what you mean by parroting. You keep accusing me of that. I guess you don't know what that word means either.
This is interesting. Your position is that because YOU do not know what the word means that the person who used it cannot know.
What does this say about your thinking style, what are the implications?
It could be that any concept not already understood (by you) cannot be understood and is therefor invalid.
Parroting means mindlessly repeating what you have been exposed to with out proper understanding: it's what you have been accusing the science side here on EvC for some time.
All the best.
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
™ Version 4.2
(1)
(1)
