This is a placeholder text
Group text
by GSDtravels on 17 November 2012 - 01:11
I'm tired, my eyes are getting blurry, it's Friday and I'm giong to chill for a while. Mañana!
by Two Moons on 17 November 2012 - 01:11
Carbon is one of the things being sought out on Mars.
Truth be known they are looking for more valuable minerals but searching for life sounds more noble than potential mining sites on the moon.
Sorry,
that just popped into my head.
Truth be known they are looking for more valuable minerals but searching for life sounds more noble than potential mining sites on the moon.
Sorry,
that just popped into my head.
by Two Moons on 17 November 2012 - 01:11
Put them dogs up travels and have a nice night.
by beetree on 17 November 2012 - 01:11
Just to clarify, we will talk about every thing empircally. Laws then for me, are usually "proven" theories. I have no interest in playing the define this and that---so I win ... game.
I won't take bait on the derailment. You want to be right about me not caring to read list provided... that is true. I'm glad you provided it though--- just to show how handy you can be should there be a need for one?
What we are talking about is an order to things. The what came first; the chicken or the egg dilema. It is not solvable.
I'll have to debate more later... family calls. Just stop the redefining, so tiresome to get to the REAL STUFF.
I won't take bait on the derailment. You want to be right about me not caring to read list provided... that is true. I'm glad you provided it though--- just to show how handy you can be should there be a need for one?
What we are talking about is an order to things. The what came first; the chicken or the egg dilema. It is not solvable.
I'll have to debate more later... family calls. Just stop the redefining, so tiresome to get to the REAL STUFF.
by Two Moons on 17 November 2012 - 01:11
The egg.
by GSDtravels on 17 November 2012 - 01:11
Answering messages about a problem I'm having posting a long one and I saw your response. You were the one who started this beetree, you wanted to play and now that you're losing, you're changing the rules and telling me I'm out of line. How many different explanations would you like? You asked for a list, I gave you the list-----> the LIST from NIST (Sorry, couldn't help the Dr. Seuss implication).
Then you gave a definition and you said I avoided your question and you didn't care about my links. I explained to you why I posted that link (I can't possibly know all fo the constants so I went to the source) and you mocked me for not saying what it is, in my own words. Now, I've done that too and clarified and YOU'RE telling ME I'm being evasive? Really? Is that all you can come up with?
Speaking of easy, wow!
Then you gave a definition and you said I avoided your question and you didn't care about my links. I explained to you why I posted that link (I can't possibly know all fo the constants so I went to the source) and you mocked me for not saying what it is, in my own words. Now, I've done that too and clarified and YOU'RE telling ME I'm being evasive? Really? Is that all you can come up with?
Speaking of easy, wow!
by beetree on 17 November 2012 - 02:11
GSDTravels, the "argument" isn't about a list. It is about you calling me to start a debate. You challenged me with a topic. I chose: the NATURE of CONSTANTS. That is the point. But rest up, we'll get to it tomorrow, it isn't going any where, this discussion. It is as old as the hills!
What is the nature of CONSTANTS? HOW do they happen? Does man have SQUAT to do about them? or just can figure out how to adapt to the constant? DOES that mean anything to you? A significance perhaps?
And please stop the putting words in my mouth with "accusations" about what I must think, blah, blah, blah. Just stick to what I do say.
You know I can come up with so much more. I keep deleting most of it. This is what is left.
What is the nature of CONSTANTS? HOW do they happen? Does man have SQUAT to do about them? or just can figure out how to adapt to the constant? DOES that mean anything to you? A significance perhaps?
And please stop the putting words in my mouth with "accusations" about what I must think, blah, blah, blah. Just stick to what I do say.
You know I can come up with so much more. I keep deleting most of it. This is what is left.
by BabyEagle4U on 17 November 2012 - 02:11
Ok, so I gather at least some humans (lol) here realize by systematically observing nature and physical phenomena - science was discovered not invented or developed out of nothing. Great.
We can all toss that shiny penny up in the air and we KNOW it will fall to the ground everywhere on Earth. Fact. No ?
Can Evolutionists speak as eye witnesses or first hand observers (shiny penny = actual occurrence) like that of the shiny penny. Yes/No ?
Theory = documented facts (at least some), hypothesis = tentative assumption or is YOUR (realism) answer a fact ?
Another question I have is - was DNA discovered or "developed" ? Also, can nonliving and inorganic chemicals produce something living ?
We can all toss that shiny penny up in the air and we KNOW it will fall to the ground everywhere on Earth. Fact. No ?
Can Evolutionists speak as eye witnesses or first hand observers (shiny penny = actual occurrence) like that of the shiny penny. Yes/No ?
Theory = documented facts (at least some), hypothesis = tentative assumption or is YOUR (realism) answer a fact ?
Another question I have is - was DNA discovered or "developed" ? Also, can nonliving and inorganic chemicals produce something living ?
by Felloffher on 17 November 2012 - 04:11
BE,
You are starting to sound like Shtal.
You are starting to sound like Shtal.
by Shtal on 17 November 2012 - 04:11
Felloffher,
What's the difficulties are you having with BE?
The evidence won’t convince people to God, only God’s word…Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word. The laws of physics don’t change, law of physics we see today same where in the past; we don’t know everything there is about light and everything there is to know about space, and we have to be careful what we say what we know and more than what’s God word says. God gave us two books, the book of scripture and the book of nature; we should research and study both, and developing testable Biblical creation model and show people, how creation could / can be tested, classified and of course actually more successfully predicts of scientific discoveries.
What's the difficulties are you having with BE?
The evidence won’t convince people to God, only God’s word…Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word. The laws of physics don’t change, law of physics we see today same where in the past; we don’t know everything there is about light and everything there is to know about space, and we have to be careful what we say what we know and more than what’s God word says. God gave us two books, the book of scripture and the book of nature; we should research and study both, and developing testable Biblical creation model and show people, how creation could / can be tested, classified and of course actually more successfully predicts of scientific discoveries.
Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top