|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: Falsifying a young Universe. (re: Supernova 1987A) | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Brad McFall Member (Idle past 5060 days) Posts: 3428 From: Ithaca,NY, USA Joined: |
You can look forward to a future suggestion of mine that provided my calculations give a value larger than Einstein found (for effect of gravity on individuals)that Quantum ENTANGLEMENT might be voided by organs WITHIN organisms that develop adaptive thermal currents via hierarchic thermodynamic electricity MOVING heat sinks. At present this is only CRITICAL as I need to produce more as I see there ARE readers here whom KNOW what I have already said. Speculation now, hypothesis later I (always) sat LOL.y
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Loudmouth Inactive Member |
quote: And why should I accept their claims without evidence?
quote: More accurately, the supernatural has never been successfully used to accurately predict new findings in nature. Why is that?
quote: And a Hindu doctor would have another opinion. A native american doctor would have yet another opinion. Why is that?
quote: So prayer is always answered, no matter what the outcome is? So how can you tell the difference between unanswered prayer and answered prayer if the outcomes are indistinguishable?
quote: Isn't it speculation and extrapolation that God even exists? And I never said that quantum fluctuations could produce a universe, only that the could be tested to see IF they could.
quote: So then I could argue that the pre-split absence of infinitely faster stuff also causes mismeasurements of the Empire State Building. The ESB is actually 5,000 feet tall. Any other measurement is pure conjecture. Are you starting to see how foolish this is?
quote: Why? Even the solar system is chocked full of evidence that the universe is old. The earth, in particular, fully supports a 4.5 billion year old solar system. The universe agrees with the evidence in our solar system. So why don't you trust the universe that you claim that God created?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
simple  Inactive Member |
I take it your point is about the christians who embrace long ages, and simply reinterpret the bible to appease science? Yes I am aware of those nice people. I think the pope is even now one! Proof, I guess he really isn't infallible, unless this evolution acceptance is I forget what they call it-basically doesn't count as being really a message from God.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
simple  Inactive Member |
Ok Brad, we wait for your future suggestion. Watch out, though, I hear mixing it in a home lab can be dangerous.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
NosyNed Member Posts: 9004 From: Canada Joined: |
I take it your point is about the christians who embrace long ages, and simply reinterpret the bible to appease science? Yes I am aware of those nice people. I think the pope is even now one! Proof, I guess he really isn't infallible, unless this evolution acceptance is I forget what they call it-basically doesn't count as being really a message from God. I don't know what this is supposed to mean. I doesn't seem to answer the question: "Who was the fool who taught you that if the world is old then there is no God? " A follow on would be that you explain the logic of this. This message has been edited by NosyNed, 01-20-2005 00:49 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
simple  Inactive Member |
quote:Do you talk to the earth? Or are we just talking about how it appears to poor present science it is so terribly old? Man, with all the crap it's had to put up with since Adam and Eve, can you blame it? Even Bush is looking older these days! quote:Could you really argue that? I dare you, even in jest. quote:Well, Billions don't think so, any more than 911 was speculation. We read about it, and feel it's effects. quote:Not true. Elijah prayed for no rain, and got it. Joseph predicted a drought, or famine via a dream, and it came bang on cue. Hey, Noah predicted a flood!!!! quote:No need to accept them, all you asked was did anyone ever see it, so I gave you God's own record, and named a few. After all, I don't accept science's universe in a speck sized quark gluon soup either. In this case also, you certainly have no witnesses, even 'just' in God's word!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
simple  Inactive Member |
Why, who was the fool who taught you something else? I just go by God's record, so I guess He's the guilty one. And yours?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
NosyNed Member Posts: 9004 From: Canada Joined: |
Why, who was the fool who taught you something else? I just go by God's record, so I guess He's the guilty one. And yours? No one has taught me that a young earth or an old earth means no God. There are many who have come here who want to say that an old earth means not God. I don't see the logic and agree with the majority of believers that those who try to show that God doesn't exist if the world is old are fools. God wrote only one record. It is the world around us. It's message is clear. It seems He disagrees with you. This message has been edited by NosyNed, 01-20-2005 01:11 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
simple  Inactive Member |
quote:This doesn't surprise me, but thanks for stating your position about who you think are fools. Fairly strong sentiments, and crass presentation, but, hey, b- for effort anyhow.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
NosyNed Member Posts: 9004 From: Canada Joined: |
Hey don't give me the credit, I'm just going with the majority of Christians on this one.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Loudmouth Inactive Member |
quote: Let's look back to your other posts about supernova 1987a. You claim that science is not considering the different speed of light before the split of the spiritual world. This is your argument, and yet you berate me when I use it. Who is the jester? If I can't use it for proposing a 5,000 foot tall Empire State Building, then how can you use the same argument for a young universe? This message has been edited by Loudmouth, 01-20-2005 13:07 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
simple  Inactive Member |
quote:I could go with our light has always been the same. Never do I need, or expect it to change. Since it was made. If it was made as a replacement for something faster, and different, that can not exist in our plane, (spirit light), then I would need to know how fast the original could go. Before we traded the bmw in for a pinto. So, If I built the building using inches, and you come along with a new metric ruler, we need to convert! Doesn't mean your ruler is wrong, or the one used to measure the thing in the first place! Only thing that would confuse one, was if you didn't realize there were two correct ways to measure!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Loudmouth Inactive Member |
quote: So what evidence is there for this faster light that existed before our present light?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
simple  Inactive Member |
quote:What evidence do we have stars are made of neutrinos, or whatever? It must be to fit the evidence, as best we can come up with. And, as we know, there is no way to prove otherwise. All we can do, in absence of that proof, is chose our theory. One that excitingly allows for a God of creation, and the bible's timetable, or one that pitifully does not, and yet tries to demand all believe, and that there is no other way.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 196 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
The question was "So what evidence is there for this faster light that existed before our present light?". Your reply doesn't even try to answer the question.
What evidence do we have stars are made of neutrinos, or whatever? We have no evidence that stars are made of neutrinos. We do measure what stars are made of using spectrophotometry. See What is a star's "spectrum"?
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024