Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9161 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,585 Year: 2,842/9,624 Month: 687/1,588 Week: 93/229 Day: 4/61 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Falsifying a young Universe. (re: Supernova 1987A)
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1457 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 9 of 948 (66942)
11-16-2003 8:47 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by Trump won
11-16-2003 8:40 PM


So you think that God is a liar?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Trump won, posted 11-16-2003 8:40 PM Trump won has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by Trump won, posted 11-16-2003 9:01 PM crashfrog has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1457 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 11 of 948 (66945)
11-16-2003 9:39 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by Trump won
11-16-2003 9:01 PM


No.
So... then you agree with Humphreys that the "in-transit" model is objectionable on theological grounds?
[This message has been edited by crashfrog, 11-16-2003]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Trump won, posted 11-16-2003 9:01 PM Trump won has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1457 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 75 of 948 (176422)
01-13-2005 12:16 AM
Reply to: Message 74 by simple
01-12-2005 11:57 PM


Not "second" as in "1/60th of a minute", "second" as in "1/60th of a degree."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by simple, posted 01-12-2005 11:57 PM simple has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 76 by simple, posted 01-13-2005 12:55 AM crashfrog has replied
 Message 78 by DrJones*, posted 01-13-2005 1:08 AM crashfrog has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1457 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 77 of 948 (176438)
01-13-2005 12:57 AM
Reply to: Message 76 by simple
01-13-2005 12:55 AM


Therefore even a single parsec would be aprox 4 times older than the created earth itself!
How can a distance have age? Or are you referring to the age of the object we observe from that distance?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by simple, posted 01-13-2005 12:55 AM simple has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 80 by simple, posted 01-13-2005 1:15 AM crashfrog has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1457 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 79 of 948 (176444)
01-13-2005 1:11 AM
Reply to: Message 78 by DrJones*
01-13-2005 1:08 AM


nitpick: 1 second=1/3600 of a degree.
Oops, you're right. Should have used the Google converter.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by DrJones*, posted 01-13-2005 1:08 AM DrJones* has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1457 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 82 of 948 (176450)
01-13-2005 1:24 AM
Reply to: Message 80 by simple
01-13-2005 1:15 AM


It is my opinion you are missing a part of the equation somewhere, though, and in reality, in real time, (despite how fast light travels now), it was indeed actually several thousand years ago.
Well, in my opinion you're missing the fact that the Invisible Ninjas have better kung-fu than the Tooth Fairy, but both of us have just as much actual physical evidence for our opinions; that is to say, none at all.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by simple, posted 01-13-2005 1:15 AM simple has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 83 by simple, posted 01-13-2005 2:25 AM crashfrog has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1457 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 88 of 948 (176556)
01-13-2005 12:58 PM
Reply to: Message 83 by simple
01-13-2005 2:25 AM


But science's present ability to put it all into real time is pure conjecture.
In what way is it conjecture? Time exists, right? We observe that things take time to travel distances, including light, right?
There's no conjecture about it. It takes time for light to travel distances; this is observation, not conjecture.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by simple, posted 01-13-2005 2:25 AM simple has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 91 by simple, posted 01-13-2005 3:30 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1457 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 96 of 948 (176618)
01-13-2005 4:08 PM
Reply to: Message 95 by simple
01-13-2005 4:05 PM


Why do we have the creation time so far off?
Far off of what?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 95 by simple, posted 01-13-2005 4:05 PM simple has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 99 by simple, posted 01-13-2005 4:15 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1457 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 98 of 948 (176623)
01-13-2005 4:14 PM
Reply to: Message 97 by simple
01-13-2005 4:12 PM


The conjecture comes in when it is assumed there were no other factors at play here.
Since the alternative is to presume that unknown, undetectable factors make it so that we can't know anything at all about the universe, why do you believe that assumption is unreasonable?
I mean, it might be that undetectable factors make it so that even though it looks like I live in Missouri, I actually live on the Moon. But why on Earth would I presume such a thing?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 97 by simple, posted 01-13-2005 4:12 PM simple has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 103 by simple, posted 01-13-2005 4:47 PM crashfrog has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1457 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 104 of 948 (176641)
01-13-2005 4:56 PM
Reply to: Message 103 by simple
01-13-2005 4:47 PM


Only unknown because you rule them out of your circle of chosen knowledge.
How can they be ruled out if we don't even know what they are?
Undtectable, because men don't wish to detect them
So you've detected them? Good, that's what we've been asking for the whole time - the evidence you've accumulated that proves these factors exist.
So, lay it on us.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 103 by simple, posted 01-13-2005 4:47 PM simple has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1457 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 119 of 948 (177039)
01-14-2005 3:44 PM
Reply to: Message 118 by simple
01-14-2005 3:34 PM


The little body I am using for a short while, flipped a cosmic switch, and, as instructed by the bible, asked Jesus into my heart, or being. Before the comnnection happened, the lttle electrical impulses and all that transpired in that mind and body were flatter than they think the universe is, and completely incapable of perceiving these things. No manmade telescope, or microscope could have helped me. This could be why there are things written sort of like 'if any man try God-then he will know for sure that these things are real' (this was more a translation to simple language, than a direct quote). So I now have the actual concrete evidence, and perceptions of things hitherto unperceivable, coursing through an earthly housing.
I replicated your proceedure, to the letter, but was unable to duplicate your results. How do you explain this?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 118 by simple, posted 01-14-2005 3:34 PM simple has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 121 by simple, posted 01-14-2005 4:18 PM crashfrog has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1457 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 124 of 948 (177067)
01-14-2005 5:29 PM
Reply to: Message 121 by simple
01-14-2005 4:18 PM


If you are serious, I assume you got saved as a youngster, but for whatever reason were repelled from the whole thing?
How about instead of speculating on my religious life, you answer the question? Presume that I had an adult religious experience - was raised as an atheist, converted to Christianity as an adult, read and studied the Bible, etc. My subsequent religious experience is irrelevant because during the time I was a Christian I experienced absolutely none of the experiences you say that I should have.
Nor did I ever meet anyone who had, and I met a lot of Christians, and asked them.
Since God isn't a liar, and it is a known effective formula
No, it's not known to be effective. Of the hundreds of people who I've asked who have tried it, you're the only one with any "results" - results that can't be verified, repeated, or are even consistent with other reports of the supernatural.
Isn't the more reasonable explanation at this point that you're simply making it up? At what point can you cease to explain away a failure of others to detect these "supernatural" things as "late bloomers"? When do we conclude that a "late bloomer" will never bloom at all?
This message has been edited by crashfrog, 01-14-2005 17:31 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 121 by simple, posted 01-14-2005 4:18 PM simple has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 126 by simple, posted 01-14-2005 7:10 PM crashfrog has replied
 Message 129 by Juhrahnimo, posted 01-14-2005 11:02 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1457 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 133 of 948 (177188)
01-15-2005 1:56 AM
Reply to: Message 126 by simple
01-14-2005 7:10 PM


If she, or he never sees a miracle, never speaks in tongues, never gets a prophesy, never sees an angel, or anything else, fine, many don't, it isn't something like that.
But that's not at all the impression you gave. You gave the impression that all we had to do was accept Jesus, or whatever, and our eyes would be opened to the supernatural.
But now you seem to be retreating from that assertion; now you seem to be asserting that we only get to view the supernatural if God determines we're special enough to; which begs the question "is it really our fault we can't take into account the supernatural factors if God has determined that we're not allowed to see them?"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 126 by simple, posted 01-14-2005 7:10 PM simple has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 134 by simple, posted 01-15-2005 2:13 AM crashfrog has replied
 Message 140 by Juhrahnimo, posted 01-15-2005 11:56 AM crashfrog has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1457 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 135 of 948 (177193)
01-15-2005 2:17 AM
Reply to: Message 134 by simple
01-15-2005 2:13 AM


Not instantly.
Not, apparently, ever, for most people. Which gets back to my criticism. You blamed us for not seeing the supernatural factors, but it's God who decided we couldn't.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 134 by simple, posted 01-15-2005 2:13 AM simple has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1457 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


(1)
Message 141 of 948 (177270)
01-15-2005 12:56 PM
Reply to: Message 140 by Juhrahnimo
01-15-2005 11:56 AM


Now it's all coming together; if that's what you were told, "you done been messed up" by someone who doesn't know the Bible.
No, buddy, I was told that by Cosmo himself.
Try to stay on topic; speculations about my religious history are not on topic on this thread. (And nor am I going to be particularly happy to be your little "bring him back to the fold" project.)
You seem to harbor some hostility toward God (or the concept of God, as you might say)
God would have to exist for that to be the case. I do however harbor plenty of hostility towards the arrogantly presumptive attitude most of his followers take; the casually arrogant way that they dismiss hundreds of years of painstaking scientific efforts because they contradict their fairy tales, or the way they butt into matters that are none of their buisness without the slightest trace of shame. Who wouldn't get miffed at that arrogance?
But it's not on topic.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 140 by Juhrahnimo, posted 01-15-2005 11:56 AM Juhrahnimo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 143 by Juhrahnimo, posted 01-15-2005 6:59 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024