Page 7 of 13 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 123
Thanks Tree33Thanks

Thread: Why?

  1. #61
    Banned Camp
    Joined
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    66,467
    Thanks
    4304

    Quote Originally Posted by res View Post
    It is painful how deeply the public education system has failed you. You definitely need education reform in the US.

    Yes we need to stop the political liberal indoctrination in our schools

  2. #62
    Banned Camp
    Joined
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    66,467
    Thanks
    4304

    Quote Originally Posted by Dangermouse View Post
    So no proof then, as usual. Spittle-flecked rants by religious extremists don't cut it.
    So what democrats say does not matter if it does not fit your lies

  3. #63
    Banned Camp
    Joined
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    1,587
    Thanks
    213

    From
    Germany
    Quote Originally Posted by NeoVsMatrix View Post
    Whatever it was you heard... you obviously
    Now comes bullshit

    are not yet ready to listen to English speaking science folks.
    It was translated into German.

    Your basic understanding of science seems to be very rudimentary,
    Why know the people in the English speaking world often more about other people than the people know about themselves?

    so if you honestly want to get at least a grasp of what you pretend to be talking about, I recommend you stick to your own language, both the general and special theory of relativity are difficult enough to undérstand, one should not start to try so in a foreign language one is not fluent in.

    And one should sure not pretend, the gibberish you provided above is - if anything - embarrassing and an insult to A. Einstein, one of the greatest minds who ever walked this planet.
    You spoke bullshit. Calculations in the Minkowsky-space (=space-time) are a mathematical construct. |M^4 <=> |R^3,1. This is a method of calculation. This means not space is time or time is space. If you like to show that space=time or time=space then you have to transform physically space into time or time into space. We know for example that matter is energy because we are able to transform energy into matter and matter into energy.

    They made perhaps much more mistakes. For example they defined a form of negative energy, what is perhaps only the level of vacuum energy. But if they would had been right, then someone who travels in time hurts the doctrine that nothing is able to create energy or to destroy energy. If the mass of 70kg (a time traveler) would disappear today (negative energy of a mass of 70 kg) and appear yesterday - what would really happen? Would this destroy our whole planet? I guess: yes. And we do not know by the way whether the yesterday is still existing. We don't know what's on the place in time where yesterday was yesterday and where this yesterday is now, if it is still existing at all, what we also don't know. We do not even know whether time has a left-right structure too - and so on and so on. It's nearly nothing what we know about time.

    Last edited by zaangalewa; 4th February 2018 at 06:28 AM.

  4. #64
    Veteran Member Czernobog's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    35,477
    Thanks
    17709

    From
    Phoenix, AZ
    Quote Originally Posted by kingrat View Post
    The law of inertia, remember?

    The universe couldn't have expanded itself on its own so something outside the universe did so.
    Wrong. That's a presumption. There are several mathematically sound hypotheses to explain the accelerating universe that have nothing to do "Invisible Sky-Man did it".



    Quote Originally Posted by kingrat View Post
    That is precisely what physical cosmology is doing -- which is called the 'cosmological constant' instead of 'giant invisible leprecahaun'.
    You mean the term that is no longer necessary, since the Hubble discovered that the universe is not static?

    Quote Originally Posted by kingrat View Post
    Aside from the fact that it is associated with empty space and that it is expanding the universe against the effects of gravity, nothing can be said about it. It does, however, give an explanation of an objective fact -- hubble expansion.
    Actually, the exact opposite is true. When Hubble showed that galaxies are moving away from us and hence, that the universe is expanding, this term was not longer necessary -- because the universe is not static.

    Quote Originally Posted by kingrat View Post
    So:

    Positing something supernatural (outside the universe) or positing a negative energy attributed to empty space capable of expanding the universe at rates faster than the speed of light. How is one different form the other, hmmmm?
    Because the latter is accommpanied with mathematical equations demonstrating how it functions, the former isn't. Let's see the math on "Supernatural Invisible Sky-Man did it".

    Quote Originally Posted by kingrat View Post
    They are both logical, however, since leaving something at 'I don't know' puts everything you know under question.



    Correct.

    What is irrational is to conclude something with certainty from ignorance. Atheism concludes something with certainty from an incomplete and/or unknowable aspect of the physical world.
    This is, again, you misrepresenting rational atheism. At no time have I concluded anything. "God does not exist is a premise. Specifically, it is a null hypothesis. Provide me with the objective, Not hypotheses demonstrating that God could exist - that is already a given. Theists, particularly Christians, have taken that possibility, and jumped to the conclusion that God does exist.

    Quote Originally Posted by kingrat View Post
    So what objective, verifiable evidence do you have for dark matter/energy -- aside from the fact that it explains the phenomenon of an expansion of accelerating rates, hmmm?
    Again, you're still arguing that God does exist because God could exist. Sorry. No. Logic, and evidence doesn't work that way. Simply because a thing has the possibility of existing is not evidence that a thing does exist.
    Last edited by Czernobog; 4th February 2018 at 10:19 AM.

  5. #65
    Veteran Member Czernobog's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    35,477
    Thanks
    17709

    From
    Phoenix, AZ
    Quote Originally Posted by ptif219 View Post
    I responded to you. You are the one claiming God does not exist but you just spew useless opinions and democrat lies
    LOL! I'll take that to mean you are clueless about Gödel. And thaqt goes both ways. You are the one who claimsx that God exists but you just spew useless opinions, link websites you don't even read, let alone understand, and Republican lies.

    You are dismissed. I should have known better than to respond in the first place. You are incapable of honest discussion.

  6. #66
    Banned Camp
    Joined
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    66,467
    Thanks
    4304

    Quote Originally Posted by Czernobog View Post
    LOL! I'll take that to mean you are clueless about Gödel. And thaqt goes both ways. You are the one who claimsx that God exists but you just spew useless opinions, link websites you don't even read, let alone understand, and Republican lies.

    You are dismissed. I should have known better than to respond in the first place. You are incapable of honest discussion.
    Where did I claim that? I read the links and they admit it shows that some god had to crete the universe the big bang theory is the lie

  7. #67
    Veteran Member Czernobog's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    35,477
    Thanks
    17709

    From
    Phoenix, AZ
    Quote Originally Posted by ptif219 View Post
    Where did I claim that? I read the links and they admit it shows that some god had to crete the universe the big bang theory is the lie
    They admitted no such thing. From the article: "Dr Gödel’s model uses mathematical equations that are extremely complicated, but the essence is that no greater power than God can be conceived, and if he or she is believed as a concept then he or she can exist in reality." (the emphasis is mine.)

    All Godel's equations prove is that God CAN exist; that is is possible. The mathematicians confirmed that is equations are sound. So, they confirmed that God CAN exist. All Gödel posited was the possibility. You are attempting to conflate "possibility" with objective certainty.

  8. #68
    Banned Camp
    Joined
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    66,467
    Thanks
    4304

    Quote Originally Posted by Czernobog View Post
    They admitted no such thing. From the article: "Dr Gödel’s model uses mathematical equations that are extremely complicated, but the essence is that no greater power than God can be conceived, and if he or she is believed as a concept then he or she can exist in reality." (the emphasis is mine.)

    All Godel's equations prove is that God CAN exist; that is is possible. The mathematicians confirmed that is equations are sound. So, they confirmed that God CAN exist. All Gödel posited was the possibility. You are attempting to conflate "possibility" with objective certainty.
    It proves the universe could not come from the big bang theory

    You say there is no proof of God yet there is no proof there is no God since they can't prove how the universe started or where life came from. The big bang is false

  9. #69
    HayJenn Fan Boi knight's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    8,626
    Thanks
    7918

    From
    Galaxy ZRF
    Quote Originally Posted by ptif219 View Post
    Yes we need to stop the political liberal indoctrination in our schools
    What about the conservative indoctrination in our schools?

  10. #70
    Banned Camp
    Joined
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    66,467
    Thanks
    4304

    Quote Originally Posted by knight View Post
    What about the conservative indoctrination in our schools?
    The GLSEN and teachers unions and democrats do not allow that

Page 7 of 13 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast

Facebook Twitter RSS Feed