Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Theories of Cosmological Origins: Are They Science?
molbiogirl
Member (Idle past 2641 days)
Posts: 1909
From: MO
Joined: 06-06-2007


Message 97 of 115 (461345)
03-24-2008 5:27 PM
Reply to: Message 95 by Rahvin
03-24-2008 4:08 PM


Re: expansion
Hey Rahvin.
I thought of something as I was reading your reply to ICANT.
ICANT's reliance on "what he knows" to answer the "bullet question" is obviously analogous to "what a physicist knows" when he answers the the "T < 10^-43 question".
ICANT uses "common sense" stuff (that he learned just as a matter of course over his lifetime) to figure out that the bullet (1) didn't just appear (2) was shot from a gun, etc. just as a physicist uses "physicist common sense" stuff (that he learned earning his PhD) to figure out that the universe (1) didn't just appear (2) was small/hot/dense, etc.
But ICANT doesn't get the analogy.
I imagine ICANT's reply will be something along the lines of "Well, I know a bullet didn't just appear. Of course I know that! But YOU don't know that the universe didn't just appear."
And I think that's at the heart of the misunderstanding.
"Of course the bullet didn't just appear." vs. "Of course the universe didn't just appear."
ICANT will refuse to admit a bullet "just appeared" but will not admit that the universe "just appeared" (because, of course, in his mind, it did).
So. My question to ICANT is this:
Prove to me that the bullet didn't just appear. Given ONLY the evidence in the video, DEDUCE that the bullet didn't just appear.
Because that's what physicists do every day. Given ONLY the evidence, nothing else, they DEDUCE what happened.
And no fair saying something like, "Well, I know that there are guns."
There are no guns in the video. Prove to me that the bullet didn't just appear.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 95 by Rahvin, posted 03-24-2008 4:08 PM Rahvin has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 98 by lyx2no, posted 03-25-2008 5:48 PM molbiogirl has not replied
 Message 99 by ICANT, posted 03-25-2008 6:05 PM molbiogirl has replied

  
molbiogirl
Member (Idle past 2641 days)
Posts: 1909
From: MO
Joined: 06-06-2007


Message 101 of 115 (461518)
03-25-2008 10:30 PM
Reply to: Message 99 by ICANT
03-25-2008 6:05 PM


Re: expansion
Let's try this again.
Powder is discharged to cause the bullet to fly through the air
There is no evidence of powder. Video only.
I did observe the bullet and know it was a bullet in the video.
How do you know it is a bullet?
But I have pretty good evidence that a bullet is manufactured in an ammunition plant or by a gun smith.
There is no evidence of ammunition plants/gun smiths. Video only.
Since you can go into any sporting goods store and buy ammunition common sense says bullets exist. There is visible, testable, see able evidence for them.
To repeat: Use the evidence at hand. The video. That is the ONLY evidence you have. DEDUCE what happened BEFORE the video based ONLY on the video evidence.
Good luck!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by ICANT, posted 03-25-2008 6:05 PM ICANT has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 102 by molbiogirl, posted 03-27-2008 12:18 AM molbiogirl has not replied

  
molbiogirl
Member (Idle past 2641 days)
Posts: 1909
From: MO
Joined: 06-06-2007


Message 102 of 115 (461676)
03-27-2008 12:18 AM
Reply to: Message 101 by molbiogirl
03-25-2008 10:30 PM


Bump for ICANT
Still waiting.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 101 by molbiogirl, posted 03-25-2008 10:30 PM molbiogirl has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 104 by ICANT, posted 03-28-2008 8:08 AM molbiogirl 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