Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Darwin's theory

1…6465676970…88

Comments

  • #1982
    LeinsterDub
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    J C wrote: »
    No need to just believe ... they're there allright ... I have had close encounters with them!!!:)

    Do they believe Jesus is their Lord their God?


  • #1983
    Roger Hassenforder
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,555 ✭✭✭Roger Hassenforder


    Saganist wrote: »
    I can't believe it.

    Today, the all the rocks out my back garden died. The walls died and even my deep fat fryer died.

    I'm having a ceremony to see them off to the next life. :rolleyes:

    at least the deep fat fryer factory can begat more deep fat fryers of the same kind.


  • #1984
    Saganist
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,333 ✭✭✭Saganist


    Roger Hassenforder wrote: »
    at least the deep fat fryer factory can begat more deep fat fryers of the same kind.

    I have a baby fryer. He won't tell me how he feels though. What am I doing wrong ? :eek:


  • #1985
    Doctor Jimbob
    Registered Users Posts: 7,652 ✭✭✭Doctor Jimbob


    J C wrote: »
    No need to just believe ... they're there allright ... I have had close encounters with them!!!:)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Uu3kCEEc98


  • #1986
    J C
    Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Saganist wrote: »
    I can't believe it.

    Today, the all the rocks out my back garden died. The walls died and even my deep fat fryer died.

    I'm having a ceremony to see them off to the next life. :rolleyes:
    I don't believe it either.

    Your rocks didn't die ... they were dead already.

    That the whole point of the Biological Law of Biogenesis ... life only can produce more life.

    ... and your chip pan never was alive ... is not alive now ... and will never will be alive ... even if an infinity of multiverses exist.:)


  • Advertisement
  • #1987
    Roger Hassenforder
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,555 ✭✭✭Roger Hassenforder


    J C wrote: »
    They didn't die ... they were dead already.



    ... and your chip pan never was alive ... is not alive now ... and will never will be alive ... even if an infinity of multiverses exist.:)

    you're only winding us up.
    surely...
    please say you are.
    i


  • #1988
    Saganist
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,333 ✭✭✭Saganist


    J C wrote: »
    They didn't die ... they were dead already.

    You should use this logic in everyday conversation. :rolleyes:

    I'll say this one more time.

    An inanimate object, like, for instance, a gun. Is not dead, never was dead, never was alive, it cannot reproduce, can never reproduce, because, It's AN INANIMATE object..... :rolleyes:

    If you can't understand this, then sorry, you're too far gone. Into the realm of Kent Hovind and Co.


  • #1989
    J C
    Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Doctor Jimbob wrote: »
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Uu3kCEEc98
    There is indeed life after love ... and after Evolution as well.
    Cher is one of my favorite singers ... thanks Jimbob.


  • #1990
    Saganist
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,333 ✭✭✭Saganist


    Roger Hassenforder wrote: »
    you're only winding us up.
    surely...
    please say you are.
    i

    I really think he believes it... :eek:


  • #1991
    Saganist
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,333 ✭✭✭Saganist


    1 dead adjective \ˈded\
    : no longer alive or living : no longer having life


  • Advertisement
  • #1992
    J C
    Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Roger Hassenforder wrote: »
    you're only winding us up.
    surely...
    please say you are.
    i
    ... why? ... is it not true ... your chip pan never was alive ... is not alive now ... and never will will be alive ... even if an infinity of multiverses exist?


  • #1993
    J C
    Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    LeinsterDub wrote: »
    Do they believe Jesus is their Lord their God?
    Funny thing ... they don't ... even though they know He is God.


  • #1994
    Chunners
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 424 ✭✭Chunners


    J C wrote: »
    Everything in our Universe follows mathematical rules ... it's the queen of sciences ... and it rules all other sciences.

    The laws of probability completely rule out the production of specific functional sequences in a particular time and space where such sequences occupy combinatorial spaces at and above the UPB. They're actually practically ruled out long before the UPB is reached.

    Nothing in our universe follows mathematical rules because mathematical rules are a human construct, our Universe follows imperatives that at any given time can and do change based on conditions, for earth the conditions (mass of the planet) make gravity 9.8 meters per second squared but on the moon it is 6 times less, gravity isn't 9.8 meters per second squared all over the universe. And even forget planets look at black holes, they ignore maths so much they twist it and can even slow down light and time so much that the "maths" can become useless.

    As for a rock being inanimate and inanimate being the same as dead you really are the idiot I assumed you were from the start, if you are a scientist then really I am Americas next top model. I'd weep for the Irish if you are the best our colleges can spit out


  • #1995
    Saganist
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,333 ✭✭✭Saganist


    J C wrote: »
    Funny thing ... they don't ... even though they know He is God.

    You're a presuppositional apologist, aren't you...


  • #1996
    J C
    Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Saganist wrote: »
    1 dead adjective \ˈded\
    : no longer alive or living : no longer having life
    Here is the full definition of dead:-
    Quote:-
    "Full Definition of DEAD

    1
    : deprived of life : no longer alive
    2
    a (1) : having the appearance of death : deathly <in a dead faint> (2) : lacking power to move, feel, or respond : numb
    b : very tired
    c (1) : incapable of being stirred emotionally or intellectually : unresponsive <dead to pity> (2) : grown cold : extinguished <dead coals>
    3
    a : inanimate, inert <dead matter>"

    Dead matter encompasses inanimate matter of both organic and inorganic origin.:)


  • #1997
    Saganist
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,333 ✭✭✭Saganist


    J C wrote: »
    Here is the full definition of dead:-
    Quote:-
    "Full Definition of DEAD

    1
    : deprived of life : no longer alive
    2
    a (1) : having the appearance of death : deathly <in a dead faint> (2) : lacking power to move, feel, or respond : numb
    b : very tired
    c (1) : incapable of being stirred emotionally or intellectually : unresponsive <dead to pity> (2) : grown cold : extinguished <dead coals>
    3
    a : inanimate, inert <dead matter>"

    Dead matter encompasses inanimate matter of both organic and inorganic origin.:)

    That's absolutely fine.

    Now define inanimate, and tell me which word you should use to describe, lets say, a rock. :)

    Edit: I prefer this definition http://tinyurl.com/qfqaat6


  • #1998
    J C
    Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Saganist wrote: »
    You're a presuppositional apologist, aren't you...
    Not really ... but the 'aliens' have amazing technology ... their craft can achieve transonic speed in a split second from a standing start ... without causing any sonic effect.


  • #1999
    J C
    Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Saganist wrote: »
    I have a baby fryer. He won't tell me how he feels though. What am I doing wrong ? :eek:
    ... you're not feeding him enough fish and chips!!!:)


  • #2000
    Chunners
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 424 ✭✭Chunners


    J C wrote: »
    Not really ... but the 'aliens' have amazing technology ... their craft can achieve transonic speed in a split second from a standing start ... without causing any sonic effect.

    So you admit there are Aliens? if there are Aliens then does that not make your assumption that a God created the universe just for humans moot?


  • #2001
    kingchess
    Registered Users Posts: 795 ✭✭✭kingchess


    Dembski really is a con-man of the highest order with his made up Universal probability bound-. A theory that only he believes in despite every other scientist of repute pointing out his many many mistakes with his Math. So -J C- where you are going wrong is first , you believe the Bible is a science manual and secondly-you seem to believe the crap that Dumbski comes out with.;


  • Advertisement
  • #2002
    Chunners
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 424 ✭✭Chunners


    J C wrote: »
    Here is the full definition of dead:-
    Quote:-
    "Full Definition of DEAD

    1
    : deprived of life : no longer alive
    2
    a (1) : having the appearance of death : deathly <in a dead faint> (2) : lacking power to move, feel, or respond : numb
    b : very tired
    c (1) : incapable of being stirred emotionally or intellectually : unresponsive <dead to pity> (2) : grown cold : extinguished <dead coals>
    3
    a : inanimate, inert <dead matter>"

    Dead matter encompasses inanimate matter of both organic and inorganic origin.:)

    Tell me then how a rock was once alive


  • #2003
    J C
    Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Chunners wrote: »
    Nothing in our universe follows mathematical rules because mathematical rules are a human construct, our Universe follows imperatives that at any given time can and do change based on conditions, for earth the conditions (mass of the planet) make gravity 9.8 meters per second squared but on the moon it is 6 times less, gravity isn't 9.8 meters per second squared all over the universe. And even forget planets look at black holes, they ignore maths so much they twist it and can even slow down light and time so much that the "maths" can become useless.
    Everything (physical) in the Universe follows mathematical rules and can be specified mathematically ... the only limitations are our understanding of the processes involved.
    The physicists are way ahead of the Biologists on this ... but some of the Biologists are catching up fast.
    Chunners wrote: »
    As for a rock being inanimate and inanimate being the same as dead you really are the idiot I assumed you were from the start, if you are a scientist then really I am Americas next top model. I'd weep for the Irish if you are the best our colleges can spit out
    Why do you guys resort to nasty personal comments?
    ... is it because you have no real answers to the points that I make ... have you ever heard of the principle of attacking the idea and not the person?
    You should try it some time.
    You'll feel much better afterwards ... and you will have a better chance of having your ideas taken on board.


  • #2004
    J C
    Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Chunners wrote: »
    So you admit there are Aliens? if there are Aliens then does that not make your assumption that a God created the universe just for humans moot?
    Like I say, I know they exist and I have had close encounters with them

    Why does the existence of Aliens invalidate the hypothesis that God Created us?


  • #2005
    J C
    Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Chunners wrote: »
    Tell me then how a rock was once alive
    ... there is plenty of inert/inanimate matter that never was alive.
    Why are you so 'hung up' on whether something contains molecules that once were in a living organism in order to call it dead?
    ... even on your narrow definition, sedimentary rocks contain fossilised remains of things that were once alive ... and therefore are presumably, regarded by you as 'dead' ... or does the blood have to be fresh before you call it 'dead'?


  • #2006
    Saganist
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,333 ✭✭✭Saganist


    J C wrote: »
    ... there is plenty of inert/inanimate matter that never was alive.

    You just did it again. Covering.. :rolleyes:

    I agree with the above. This is why we have all kinds of words. You know, to use to describe, lets say, rocks and stuff. :pac:

    I'm not arguing that a rock could contain matter that was once alive, however, it doesn't negate the fact that it is now just a rock. An inanimate object, devoid of all life, that only people like you can describe as being dead. :confused::confused:


  • #2007
    J C
    Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    kingchess wrote: »
    Dembski really is a con-man of the highest order with his made up Universal probability bound-. A theory that only he believes in despite every other scientist of repute pointing out his many many mistakes with his Math. So -J C- where you are going wrong is first , you believe the Bible is a science manual and secondly-you seem to believe the crap that Dumbski comes out with.;

    Rather than making unfounded assertions about the man ... please tell us were are the flaws in his idea that is summarised in this posting (without any strawmanning, handwaving, appeals to authority or name-calling, please)?

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=92692013&postcount=1836


  • #2008
    J C
    Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Saganist wrote: »
    You just did it again. Covering.. :rolleyes:

    I agree with the above. This is why we have all kinds of words. You know, to use to describe, lets say, rocks and stuff. :pac:

    I'm not arguing that a rock could contain matter that was once alive, however, it doesn't negate the fact that it is now just a rock. An inanimate object, devoid of all life, that only people like you can describe as being dead. :confused::confused:
    ... the bodies in a morgue are 'devoid of all life' i.e. they are as 'dead as a doornail' ... or a rock!!!:eek:
    http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/as-dead-as-a-doornail.html

    Now settle down ladies and gentlemen ... and lets get back to the main event ... Darwins dead Theory ... and its long drawn out funeral !!!:)


  • #2009
    Doctor Jimbob
    Registered Users Posts: 7,652 ✭✭✭Doctor Jimbob


    J C wrote: »
    Rather than making unfounded assertions about the man ... please tell us were are the flaws in his idea that is summarised in this posting (without any handwaving or name-calling please)?

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=92692013&postcount=1836

    There's nothing unfounded about the assertions, and the flaws in that post have been pointed out numerous times. Whatever about yourself, Dembski is a liar and a conman.


  • #2010
    Saganist
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,333 ✭✭✭Saganist


    J C wrote: »
    ... the bodies in a morgue are 'devoid of all life' i.e. they are as 'dead as a doornail' ... or a rock!!!:eek:
    http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/as-dead-as-a-doornail.html

    Comparing death to inanimate objects.

    OK. I'm out. Have fun. :pac:


  • Advertisement
  • #2011
    Chunners
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 424 ✭✭Chunners


    J C wrote: »
    Everything (physical) in the Universe follows mathematical rules and can be specified mathematically ... the only limitations are our understanding of the processes involved.
    The physicists are way ahead of the Biologists on this ... but some of the Biologists are catching up fast.

    Why do you guys resort to nasty personal comments?
    ... is it because you have no real answers to the points that I make ... have you ever heard of the principle of attacking the idea and not the person?
    You should try it some time.
    You'll feel much better afterwards ... and you will have a better chance of having your ideas taken on board.
    J C wrote: »
    Like I say, I know they exist and I have had close encounters with them

    Why does the existence of Aliens invalidate the hypothesis that God Created us?
    J C wrote: »
    ... there is plenty of inert/inanimate matter that never was alive.
    Why are you so 'hung up' on whether something contains molecules that once were in a living organism in order to call it dead?
    ... even on your narrow definition, sedimentary rocks contain fossilised remains of dead things ... and therefore is presumably regarded by you as 'dead' ... or does the blood have to be fresh before you call it 'dead'?

    But wait, does your belief not state that fossils can't exist because nothing existed before 6000 years ago when God said "Let there be life" whereas fossils are generally 250k years old? have you just admitted that life beyond 6000 years ago was possible and as such the bible was wrong? and also that Aliens exist because you have been visited by them so the premise that the universe was created only for humans is wrong too?


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement