Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9077 total)
98 online now:
AnswersInGenitals, Tanypteryx (2 members, 96 visitors)
Newest Member: Contrarian
Post Volume: Total: 894,014 Year: 5,126/6,534 Month: 546/794 Week: 37/135 Day: 14/23 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Age of mankind, dating, and the flood
Larni
Member
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 196 of 224 (738246)
10-07-2014 8:53 AM
Reply to: Message 192 by ringo
10-05-2014 2:27 PM


I had a long discussion with iano about 'knowing'.

Lots of various levels of 'knowing'.

Who knew?


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 192 by ringo, posted 10-05-2014 2:27 PM ringo has seen this message

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022