Posted by amazed on March 07, 2007 at 19:34:49 (EST):
In Reply to: Re: ASD part3 posted by Maxx on March 07, 2007 at 13:14:09 (EST):
: First off, I work for a living, so I can only reply when I have time, plus my kids need the use of the computer so I only have so much time to reply. You on the other hand seem to have all the time in the world. Makes me wonder???
Makes you wonder huh??? Why don't you "theorize" what I do for a living.
: Second, your example said, ‘if you see bear tracks in the woods‘, so you already said what the tracks were and what made them. If you would have said, “here are animal tracks I wonder what they are, let’s follow them to see what made them” your example would have been more appropriate. I stand by my answer, so “Give It Up”.
So if you see tracks and don't know wat made them, you think it's col to just make up some kind of creature and then say that this creature is what made the tracks then.
: Nope!!! Scientists know there are black holes, idiot! Have you ever heard of “The theory of black holes”. No you didn’t. Again you are wrong so “Give It Up”.
NO, scientists DON'T KNOW balck holes exist. They found "evidence", said that "black holes" cause this evidence, and then use this "evidence" as "proof" that "black holes" exist. Did you not read what I posted from Britannica?
: I’ve already shown how objects in space have been proven, not because of direct observation, but because of calculations, like planets and BLACK HOLES. So “Give It UP”
What "objects"? What was "proven"? What "calculations". Are you talking about all the "evidence" that they use to prove the existance of things they aren't even sure exist?
: You asked “When did I say Einstien's theories were childish?” See, you can’t even remember the crap you type here, there’s so much of it. Here’s the quote “The mere idea that somehow, if you go fast enough, you'll be propelled forward in time, seems like a childish concept at best.” Your whole posts have been like this. You say one thing and a few posts later you either claim “I never said that” or you say the exact opposite of what you said just a few posts before. There is an old computer saying that you must live by, “Garbage in, Garbage Out”! So “Give It Up”.
Yes, the "time travel" aspect IS childish. I didn't say the whole theory was childish, I said the idea of time travel is childish.
You need to calm down a little bit!
Here's something for you to wrap your little narrow minded brain around. The whole time travel idea revolves around how the speed of light is not relative. It says that no matter how fast you go, a ray of light is still going to move away from you at the same speed and this same ray would still travel at the same speed relative to a stationary object. Basically this is saying 2 things. The first is that, somehow, a ray of light can travel at different speed at the same time. The second, is that the speed of light could never be achieved, because no matter how fast you went a ray of light is still going to move away frm you at the speed of light.
Can't you see the lunacy of this?
: You are right, ID and Creationism is COMPLETE HOGWASH” I asked you to prove that either wasn’t “dressed up religion” and all I got from you is, “we don’t know” or “well it’s only a theory”(which it‘s not). That’s not proof. But I know why you didn’t give me proof, BECAUSE THERE ISN’T ANY!!!, SO GIVE IT UP.
You seem to think that we somehow DO know everything. I haven't mentioned religion at all as far as the ID argument is concerned. YOU are the one who keeps bringing that into it.
I HAVE given you examples of how ID and evolution can coexist.
I HAVEN'T said anything about GOD being responsible for anything.
: Never said ID was a theory, scientific or otherwise. So Give It Up!
Maybe I misunderstood what you wrote. That would be very easy to do, as you tend to write like a five year old. You wrote, "I do accept they are theories, but I’ve shown that scientific theories are NOT guesses, they are based on sound science. A theory doesn’t have to be based on observation but a scientific theory does (they are different)." You also wrote, "I do accept they are theories, but I’ve shown that scientific theories are NOT guesses, they are based on sound science."
: So you don’t have a problem with someone making there idea sound “more scientific”. You are some piece of work. What’s the matter with doing the research and experiments to make them scientific, not just sound scientific. They can’t because it religion, and you can’t make religion sound scientific anymore than you can make Santa Clause sound scientific. So Give it Up.
So what you are saying is that absolutely nothing could possibly exist that we do not understand. You are trying to say that if somebody has an idea, that idea cannot and should not be mentioned unless it can be "scientifically" verified. How do you think "theories" begin? Somebody has to have a thought that has never been thought before. What you are suggesting is that unless I can "scientificall" prove this concept, I should not be allowed to express my thought.
: You’re right, you “don’t need to do anything”. Just stay stupid the rest of your life. Give it Up.
So you are saying that unless they "prove" YOU wrong, a person is ultimately "stupid".
: You said, “YOU wrote "It also predicts the existence of cosmic background radiation..." What is that word there?...PREDICTS? So now you are using "predictions" as "scientific" evidence'“ See this is what I mean by you either not reading or comprehending what I write or you just forget or ignore what I write. In the first few posts I made I explain the scientific method of a scientific theory and the last step is predicting.
Yes, these "predictions" can be made. But "predictions" are not "poof" and "predictions" are certainly NOT "evidence".
: Remember the swan example? The example said it would “predict” all swans are white. Go back and re-read it then Give It Up.
Yes, good example. "Predicting" all swans are white, in absolutely no way "proves" they are all white and this "prediction" is in no way "evidence" that all swans are white.
: You said, “Okay, this guy found a "glow"...then he says this "glow" is "evidence" of a "Big Bang". That sounds an awful lot like the "evidence" for black holes!” I’m glad you’re “Giving It Up” because you have to be one of the stupidest people I’ve talked with. It wouldn’t be evidence of a black hole because NOTHING ESCAPES” a black hole, not even light or a glow or radiation. Besides, black holes are not caused by explosions. Give it Up.
Sheez you're dumb!! I said it sounds LIKE the EVIDENCE for black holes.
Yes, this is the same TYPE of evidence you are saying "proves" black holes exist.
They are saying that since this "glow" exists an explosion HAD to have caused it. Then they say that the "glow" IS evidence of an explosion, nay THE EXPLOSION.
So now YOU kow how black holes ARE created.
: You’re the only one who said the universe is “infinite”, egghead. Show me where evolution says lightning struck a pool of water and caused life to began, meathead. You keep bringing into the equation a supreme being that’s not needed. But if it is, I’ve asked you at least 3 times now, how was this supreme being created. Did another supreme being make it also. Give it Up
I don't say the universe is infinate, scientists do. Oh, I'm sorry, maybe I should have said "space" is infinate. I didn'y SAY lghtning stuck a pool. I said a lightning strike "or whatever....".
I didn't say a "supreme being". YOU are the one who keps bring that into the ID debate, NOT ME. By definition nothing COULD have created a "supreme" being. That's what would make it "supreme". All ID says is that an "inteligent" being COULD have created the universe as we know it.
You haven't asked me 3 times. But to answer that question I'll say it again. WE DON'T KNOW.
Again, you seem to think that unless we can prove something it can't be possible.
: Here’s something for you to think of. Evolution is the only subject taught in schools that has become a legal issue. Think about that. All kinds of things are taught and all kinds of theories are taught in science class, but only evolution has been taken out of the science class and into the court room by, as you put it, “off the wall parent(s)” Truthfully, why do you think that is so. One word, religion. It goes against the bible and genesis. It takes out the need for a deity. The response was the religious community trying to force religion into the schools with creationism and ID. That is why you’ll never be able, no matter how hard you try, to separate religion and these 2 pseudo-sciences. So, Give It Up.
No, evolution is NOT the only subject there has been a legal debate over. Sex Education and Eubonics, Alternative Lifestyles sut to name a few. Also, there seems to be no problem with teaching about how ancient civilizations warshipped and sacrificed human being in the name of their religion, But for some reason as soon as Christianity is brought up, there is always a big uprising of people like you. Ask YOURSELF why that is. Ask YOURSELF why you cannot accept, even as a mere POSSIBILTY, that a being or beings with far greater intelligence and resources could POSSIBBLY have created everything we know of.
I already HAVE separated these , as you call them, "psuedo-sciences". YOU are the one who insists on CONNECTING them with religion.
: We send out signals into deep space because there are trillions of planets orbiting around stars that may have evolved life like our own planet. Give It Up.
So, in order for them to desipher AND reply to these messages, wouldn't they have to be more evolved and more intelligent than we are? Trillions of planets and you think that none could have life more itelligent than our own. Also, you say "like our own planet". This implies that you think that life AS WE KNOW IT is the ONLY possible form of life.
: You said, “No, I "don’t know how powerful a being would have to be to create the Universe"...DO YOU?” Yes I do, it wouldn’t be powerful at all because it doesn’t exist. Give it Up.
So you KNOW for an ABSOLUTE FACT, without ANY SHADOW of a DOUBT, as an ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY, you are 100% SURE that there is NO POSSIBILITY, NO CHANCE that ID COULD be POSSIBLE.
That my friend, is NARROW-MINDEDNESS.
: These are all public schools that allowed prayer groups. I’ll bet even Kittanning has one. The school in Kentucky was also a public school. Pay attention and Give It Up.
What are "these" schools. You mentioned ONE by name.
You "bet" Kittanning has one, huh? I guess later you'll use the fact that you "said" you "bet" as evidence. I know a few teachers up thee, I'll ask and find out.
: You said, “No I don't think they should be allowed to "disrupt" class, but when are they given this time to pray. YOU are the one who said they were "free" to pray.” Anytime they want. I’ve already said that. Please read and comprehend what I say. They can bow their head and say a prayer silently anytime, just like Jesus said to do. Why do you want them to go against Jesus? BTW Jesus told me to tell you to Give It Up.
Yes, I KNOW you already said that....hence the quotation marks, you freakin' moron!
So they are allowed to pray "anytime" they want huh? Anytime? Why must they pray SILENTLY? What's up with that?
: You said, “Kids CAN refuse to take the "oath" (by the way it's a PLEDGE) but they are considered "rebels" or "outsiders" if they don't.” So you think Jehovah Witnesses are “rebels”? Give It Up
What?
:
: You ask, “Why is it right to have the kids who chose not to take this pledge become "rebels", but not right to have all the kids pray and have THOSE kids CHOSE to sit out he prayer?” Here’s what I don’t understand. You obviously want prayer in schools but you refuse to inject a God into the creationism debate. That doesn’t make sense. I think you are running away from the God in creationism argument because you know you can’t defend it, so you come up with a silly argument like aliens spreading their seed throughout the universe and somehow, to you, it sounds much more scientific. You can really Give It UP.
I'm not defending "creationism". I'm defending the right to express ALL theories. I'm defending the POSSIBILITY of ID, NOT creation. YOU are the one who keeps tying the two together.
I don't want prayer in school. I just don't see why there is such a strong outrage by people like YOU against it. Why are people like YOU not fighting to keep our kids from being exposed to the PLEDGE of ALLIEGENCE to a flag that we are not required to be LOYAL to.
See above. If you can't get this you gotta be a moron!
: You said, “You can't see a hypocrasy between having the pledge of ALLIEGENCE and the right to BURN the flag!!! I can't believe this!! One is making you promise to stand loyal to the flag and the other is saying you should feel free to burn the very same flag!! “ Nope, still can’t see how the two are connected. Sorry. I think you probably have a thought in that small mind of yours, but it doesn’t come out here. Give It Up.
Again...MORON.
: You said, "with EVERY explosion there is a flash of light."...Really? Are you sure about that? I think you better look that up.” I already did before I posted it. Maybe the flash of light you see is that flag you’re burning. Give It Up.
Apparently you DID NOT look it up. An explosion can be a chemical reaction which causes no "flash" or it could be a simple rapid release of compressed matter.
Stick a pin in a balloon and tell me if you see a "flash.
: You said, “"In space, every explosion there is a flash of light. Every star that explodes there is a flash of light."...so they somehow know what EVERY type of explosion looks like...in an INFINATE universe!!! "Because what they found is so huge! It could only have been caused by a very large explosion." So you also KNOW that FOR A FACT. “ YES. GIVE IT UP.
So now you are prfofessing to know how every explosion everywhere throughout the universe has, does or will occur. What a dick!!!
: You said, "Gravity" keeps the Earth from expanding. Yes, yes...I see how that WOULD fit into the THEORY”. Wow, after all these post I thought I wasn’t getting into that thick head of yours, but I think I finally cracked your egghead. You finally acknowledged that gravity is a theory. Thank you. It’s all been worth it. But don’t forget, we also have laws for gravity. You finally Gave It Up.
How is it a GENIUS like yourself doesn't detect sarcasm? Since atms are not constantly expanding you say that gravity is the reason. Let me ask you this. Why aren't the smallest of comets expanding? There is no gravity in outer space right? Or is there. Wait a minute, the LAW of gravity explains that even the smallest of objects will have their own gravitational field. So what are you going to do here? Are you going to say that this LAW doesn't exist? Or are you going to USE this LAW as evidence that SUPPORTS another theory?
: You said, "Yes, that’s the great thing about science, it always correcting itself." In order for it to CORRECT itself. it HAS to be WRONG in the FIRST PLACE. Does it not? How could these "scientific" theories end up being wrong? How can THAT happen?” Please refer back to the post where I talked about the scientific method. But I guess if it hasn’t sunk in by now it never will. Give It Up.
So then, are you at least admitting that a "theory" CAN be wrong?
:
: You said, “See ya in the afterlife!...Osama.” I knew before I ever started posting on this subject that ‘amazed’ and ‘give it up’ were the same person.
DUH....DIDJA TENNESSEE?
: Two people on this board cannot be that stupid, so they had to be the same person.
You are absolutely correct, NOBODY could be as dumb as you.
: One last thing I have to say. You are a very good example of why people who do not have a higher education shouldn’t be allowed to run for a school board position. You don’t have the foggiest idea of what science is and for someone like you to sit on a school board and decide what and how things should be taught would be a crime.
I have a higher education, but where the fuck are you getting "school board"? What an ass!
No, I don't have the "foggiest idea".
Why would I want the foggiest idea?
I think what you wanted to say was "even the foggiest of an idea".
What "crime" would that be? Would that be the as the "illegal" invasion?
: Trouble is that isn’t against the law and is one reason the schools are going down hill.
What?
: I wouldn’t want people like you telling my kids what they need to learn, because it would all be wrong.
What's "it"?
I was just seeing if I could get your simple ass to scroll all the way down here. ha ha!!