RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (919) < ... 261 262 263 264 265 [266] 267 268 269 270 271 ... >   
  Topic: Joe G.'s Tardgasm, How long can it last?< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
Joe G



Posts: 12011
Joined: July 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 22 2014,08:57   

Quote (The whole truth @ Oct. 22 2014,08:53)
Quote (Joe G @ Oct. 22 2014,05:57)
Quote (The whole truth @ Oct. 22 2014,07:05)
 
Quote (Joe G @ Oct. 22 2014,04:49)
 
Quote (The whole truth @ Oct. 22 2014,06:43)
Hey joey, what's your opinion of Gary Gaulin's version of ID?

Why should I care?

Why shouldn't you, joey? Aren't you interested in ID?

What a dumbass. One can be interested in ID without being interested in obscure versions of it.

Obscure? What makes it any more obscure than your version, which you won't even honestly describe?

I don't have a version of ID. I go by what the ID experts and founders say wrt ID. And I bet Gary does too.

As I said you are proud to be a little whiny baby

--------------
"Facts are Stupid"- Timothy Horton aka Occam's Afterbirth

"Genetic mutations aren't mistakes"-ID and Timothy Horton

Whales do not have tails. Water turns to ice via a molecular code-  Acartia bogart, TARD

YEC is more coherent than materialism and it's bastard child, evolutionism

   
stevestory



Posts: 13407
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 22 2014,09:08   

Quote (Joe G @ Oct. 22 2014,09:27)
Quote (stevestory @ Oct. 22 2014,08:13)
Quote (Joe G @ Oct. 21 2014,20:23)
 
Quote (stevestory @ Oct. 21 2014,13:21)
 
Quote (Joe G @ Oct. 21 2014,14:10)
So what, if not mass, makes our universe the size that it is?

you seem to be alleging that universe size is a function of mass. Can you elaborate on what the function is?

Answer my question and I will get to yours.

so you can't. not surprised.

So YOU can't. Why am I not surprised

I can talk about the friedmann equations, stress-energy tensors, scalar fields of vacuum energy all you want, but I want to know what you imagine is the size=f(mass) function. Since the universe is expanding, do you believe the total mass is increasing? Or do you think the energy density of empty space is decreasing in accordance with conservation of E? since mass and energy are proportional, if you're right that the size of the universe is proportional to mass, it must be proportional to the vacuum energy of space, right? so is the vacuum energy of space determined, or not? also, how does your function deal with the Vacuum Catastrophe?

   
OgreMkV



Posts: 3668
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 22 2014,09:11   

Quote (Joe G @ Oct. 22 2014,07:50)
Quote (rossum @ Oct. 22 2014,07:08)
Quote (Joe G @ Oct. 22 2014,06:14)
Can you walk us through some of the testable hypotheses for differing accumulations of genetic accidents, ie neo-darwinian evolution?

For a good illustration of differential accumulation of 'genetic accidents' google for the Luria-Delbrück experiment.

 
Quote
Science does have a great track record. However NDE doesn't qualify as science.

It does and it does, respectively.

rossum

Please provide the methodology that determined the changes were differential accumulation of 'genetic accidents'.

And in what way is NDE science? It doesn't make any predictions based on the mechanisms and it is untestable.

1) Darwinian Evolution on a chip

2) Tiktaalik

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
The whole truth



Posts: 1554
Joined: Jan. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 22 2014,09:12   

Quote (Joe G @ Oct. 22 2014,06:52)
Quote (The whole truth @ Oct. 22 2014,08:49)
Quote (Joe G @ Oct. 22 2014,05:53)
 
Quote (The whole truth @ Oct. 22 2014,07:03)
Hey joey, will you explain gynandromorphs from your supernatural-ID-creation point of view?

ID doesn't require the supernatural you ignorant faggot

Oh really? Then why do you and your IDiotic ilk constantly argue against natural origins-processes-events-results?

LoL! Artificial is the opposite of natural you ignorant fuck. And we argue against purely materialistic processes, not merely natural.

It's as if you are proud to be an ignorant dick

So then, according to you the alleged intelligent-design-creation of this entire universe was/is artificially done by the artificial religious characters allah, yhwh, jesus, and holy-ghost, and those characters were artificially designed-created by some other artificially designed-created thingamabobs, doohickies, and/or watchamacallits and it's artificial design-creation by artificial designers-creators all the way down, eh joey?

--------------
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. - Jesus in Matthew 10:34

But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me. -Jesus in Luke 19:27

   
OgreMkV



Posts: 3668
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 22 2014,09:14   

Quote (Joe G @ Oct. 22 2014,08:52)
Quote (The whole truth @ Oct. 22 2014,08:49)
Quote (Joe G @ Oct. 22 2014,05:53)
 
Quote (The whole truth @ Oct. 22 2014,07:03)
Hey joey, will you explain gynandromorphs from your supernatural-ID-creation point of view?

ID doesn't require the supernatural you ignorant faggot

Oh really? Then why do you and your IDiotic ilk constantly argue against natural origins-processes-events-results?

LoL! Artificial is the opposite of natural you ignorant fuck. And we argue against purely materialistic processes, not merely natural.

It's as if you are proud to be an ignorant dick

Wait... please tell us a natural process that is not also materialistic (using this definition of materialistic)
Quote

Materialism is a form of philosophical monism which holds that matter is the fundamental substance in nature, and that all phenomena, including mental phenomena and consciousness, are the result of material interactions.


So ID isn't concerned with the supernatural, but the only thing it can use is the supernatural since it rejects purely natural explanations.

It's not a new record for contradicting yourself, but it's close.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
Joe G



Posts: 12011
Joined: July 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 22 2014,09:14   

Quote (stevestory @ Oct. 22 2014,09:08)
Quote (Joe G @ Oct. 22 2014,09:27)
Quote (stevestory @ Oct. 22 2014,08:13)
 
Quote (Joe G @ Oct. 21 2014,20:23)
 
Quote (stevestory @ Oct. 21 2014,13:21)
   
Quote (Joe G @ Oct. 21 2014,14:10)
So what, if not mass, makes our universe the size that it is?

you seem to be alleging that universe size is a function of mass. Can you elaborate on what the function is?

Answer my question and I will get to yours.

so you can't. not surprised.

So YOU can't. Why am I not surprised

I can talk about the friedmann equations, stress-energy tensors, scalar fields of vacuum energy all you want, but I want to know what you imagine is the size=f(mass) function. Since the universe is expanding, do you believe the total mass is increasing? Or do you think the energy density of empty space is decreasing in accordance with conservation of E? since mass and energy are proportional, if you're right that the size of the universe is proportional to mass, it must be proportional to the vacuum energy of space, right? so is the vacuum energy of space determined, or not? also, how does your function deal with the Vacuum Catastrophe?

The mass isn't increasing. The mass is what is feeding the expansion. No mass no expansion.

That is why I asked- So what, if not mass, makes our universe the size that it is?

Can there be a universe of nothing? How would you know?

--------------
"Facts are Stupid"- Timothy Horton aka Occam's Afterbirth

"Genetic mutations aren't mistakes"-ID and Timothy Horton

Whales do not have tails. Water turns to ice via a molecular code-  Acartia bogart, TARD

YEC is more coherent than materialism and it's bastard child, evolutionism

   
Joe G



Posts: 12011
Joined: July 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 22 2014,09:17   

Quote (OgreMkV @ Oct. 22 2014,09:14)
Quote (Joe G @ Oct. 22 2014,08:52)
Quote (The whole truth @ Oct. 22 2014,08:49)
 
Quote (Joe G @ Oct. 22 2014,05:53)
 
Quote (The whole truth @ Oct. 22 2014,07:03)
Hey joey, will you explain gynandromorphs from your supernatural-ID-creation point of view?

ID doesn't require the supernatural you ignorant faggot

Oh really? Then why do you and your IDiotic ilk constantly argue against natural origins-processes-events-results?

LoL! Artificial is the opposite of natural you ignorant fuck. And we argue against purely materialistic processes, not merely natural.

It's as if you are proud to be an ignorant dick

Wait... please tell us a natural process that is not also materialistic (using this definition of materialistic)
Quote

Materialism is a form of philosophical monism which holds that matter is the fundamental substance in nature, and that all phenomena, including mental phenomena and consciousness, are the result of material interactions.


So ID isn't concerned with the supernatural, but the only thing it can use is the supernatural since it rejects purely natural explanations.

It's not a new record for contradicting yourself, but it's close.

Kevin, purely materialistic processes would exclude humans or other intelligent agencies producing it. As I have said you have no fucking idea what is being debated yet you feel you have some authority about it.

You are just an ignorant asshole.

--------------
"Facts are Stupid"- Timothy Horton aka Occam's Afterbirth

"Genetic mutations aren't mistakes"-ID and Timothy Horton

Whales do not have tails. Water turns to ice via a molecular code-  Acartia bogart, TARD

YEC is more coherent than materialism and it's bastard child, evolutionism

   
Joe G



Posts: 12011
Joined: July 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 22 2014,09:19   

Quote (OgreMkV @ Oct. 22 2014,09:11)
Quote (Joe G @ Oct. 22 2014,07:50)
Quote (rossum @ Oct. 22 2014,07:08)
 
Quote (Joe G @ Oct. 22 2014,06:14)
Can you walk us through some of the testable hypotheses for differing accumulations of genetic accidents, ie neo-darwinian evolution?

For a good illustration of differential accumulation of 'genetic accidents' google for the Luria-Delbrück experiment.

   
Quote
Science does have a great track record. However NDE doesn't qualify as science.

It does and it does, respectively.

rossum

Please provide the methodology that determined the changes were differential accumulation of 'genetic accidents'.

And in what way is NDE science? It doesn't make any predictions based on the mechanisms and it is untestable.

1) Darwinian Evolution on a chip

2) Tiktaalik

Yes Kevin, we all know that you are an equivocator.

Please tell us how it was determined that Tiktaalik arose by differing accumulations of genetic accidents/ errors/ mistakes.

Or just admit that you are an ignorant fuck

--------------
"Facts are Stupid"- Timothy Horton aka Occam's Afterbirth

"Genetic mutations aren't mistakes"-ID and Timothy Horton

Whales do not have tails. Water turns to ice via a molecular code-  Acartia bogart, TARD

YEC is more coherent than materialism and it's bastard child, evolutionism

   
Joe G



Posts: 12011
Joined: July 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 22 2014,09:20   

And Darwinian evolution on a chip doesn't utilize Darwinian evolution. Go figure

--------------
"Facts are Stupid"- Timothy Horton aka Occam's Afterbirth

"Genetic mutations aren't mistakes"-ID and Timothy Horton

Whales do not have tails. Water turns to ice via a molecular code-  Acartia bogart, TARD

YEC is more coherent than materialism and it's bastard child, evolutionism

   
stevestory



Posts: 13407
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 22 2014,09:26   

Quote (Joe G @ Oct. 22 2014,10:14)
Quote (stevestory @ Oct. 22 2014,09:08)
Quote (Joe G @ Oct. 22 2014,09:27)
 
Quote (stevestory @ Oct. 22 2014,08:13)
 
Quote (Joe G @ Oct. 21 2014,20:23)
   
Quote (stevestory @ Oct. 21 2014,13:21)
   
Quote (Joe G @ Oct. 21 2014,14:10)
So what, if not mass, makes our universe the size that it is?

you seem to be alleging that universe size is a function of mass. Can you elaborate on what the function is?

Answer my question and I will get to yours.

so you can't. not surprised.

So YOU can't. Why am I not surprised

I can talk about the friedmann equations, stress-energy tensors, scalar fields of vacuum energy all you want, but I want to know what you imagine is the size=f(mass) function. Since the universe is expanding, do you believe the total mass is increasing? Or do you think the energy density of empty space is decreasing in accordance with conservation of E? since mass and energy are proportional, if you're right that the size of the universe is proportional to mass, it must be proportional to the vacuum energy of space, right? so is the vacuum energy of space determined, or not? also, how does your function deal with the Vacuum Catastrophe?

The mass isn't increasing. The mass is what is feeding the expansion. No mass no expansion.

That is why I asked- So what, if not mass, makes our universe the size that it is?

Can there be a universe of nothing? How would you know?

the size of a car, or a balloon, or a planet, isn't simply determined by it's mass, so why should be the universe? And how can you define a function size=f(mass) when you can't determine the vacuum energy, and therefore the absolute mass?

And if you're saying space has to expand because mass is constant, we'd all like you to show us the GR equations that describe that, because you can't, because it's gibberish.

   
Occam's Aftershave



Posts: 5287
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 22 2014,09:26   

Ronery Chubs is ronery.  Soooooooo ronery.   :p

--------------
"CO2 can't re-emit any trapped heat unless all the molecules point the right way"
"All the evidence supports Creation baraminology"
"If it required a mind, planning and design, it isn't materialistic."
"Jews and Christians are Muslims."

- Joke "Sharon" Gallien, world's dumbest YEC.

  
Joe G



Posts: 12011
Joined: July 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 22 2014,09:35   

Quote (stevestory @ Oct. 22 2014,09:26)
Quote (Joe G @ Oct. 22 2014,10:14)
Quote (stevestory @ Oct. 22 2014,09:08)
 
Quote (Joe G @ Oct. 22 2014,09:27)
 
Quote (stevestory @ Oct. 22 2014,08:13)
   
Quote (Joe G @ Oct. 21 2014,20:23)
   
Quote (stevestory @ Oct. 21 2014,13:21)
     
Quote (Joe G @ Oct. 21 2014,14:10)
So what, if not mass, makes our universe the size that it is?

you seem to be alleging that universe size is a function of mass. Can you elaborate on what the function is?

Answer my question and I will get to yours.

so you can't. not surprised.

So YOU can't. Why am I not surprised

I can talk about the friedmann equations, stress-energy tensors, scalar fields of vacuum energy all you want, but I want to know what you imagine is the size=f(mass) function. Since the universe is expanding, do you believe the total mass is increasing? Or do you think the energy density of empty space is decreasing in accordance with conservation of E? since mass and energy are proportional, if you're right that the size of the universe is proportional to mass, it must be proportional to the vacuum energy of space, right? so is the vacuum energy of space determined, or not? also, how does your function deal with the Vacuum Catastrophe?

The mass isn't increasing. The mass is what is feeding the expansion. No mass no expansion.

That is why I asked- So what, if not mass, makes our universe the size that it is?

Can there be a universe of nothing? How would you know?

the size of a car, or a balloon, or a planet, isn't simply determined by it's mass, so why should be the universe? And how can you define a function size=f(mass) when you can't determine the vacuum energy, and therefore the absolute mass?

And if you're saying space has to expand because mass is constant, we'd all like you to show us the GR equations that describe that, because you can't, because it's gibberish.

LoL! Cars, balloons and planets wouldn't exist without mass.

Why do you avoid the points I made?

Quote
And how can you define a function size=f(mass) when you can't determine the vacuum energy, and therefore the absolute mass?


You didn't understand anything I said. Pathetic

Quote
And if you're saying space has to expand because mass is constant,


Never crossed my mind.

--------------
"Facts are Stupid"- Timothy Horton aka Occam's Afterbirth

"Genetic mutations aren't mistakes"-ID and Timothy Horton

Whales do not have tails. Water turns to ice via a molecular code-  Acartia bogart, TARD

YEC is more coherent than materialism and it's bastard child, evolutionism

   
Joe G



Posts: 12011
Joined: July 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 22 2014,09:37   

Quote (Occam's Aftershave @ Oct. 22 2014,09:26)
Ronery Chubs is ronery.  Soooooooo ronery.   :p

Yes Timmah, we all know that you crave attention. Richie keeps inviting me so go whine to him

--------------
"Facts are Stupid"- Timothy Horton aka Occam's Afterbirth

"Genetic mutations aren't mistakes"-ID and Timothy Horton

Whales do not have tails. Water turns to ice via a molecular code-  Acartia bogart, TARD

YEC is more coherent than materialism and it's bastard child, evolutionism

   
The whole truth



Posts: 1554
Joined: Jan. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 22 2014,09:38   

Quote (Joe G @ Oct. 22 2014,06:57)
 
Quote (The whole truth @ Oct. 22 2014,08:53)
 
Quote (Joe G @ Oct. 22 2014,05:57)
   
Quote (The whole truth @ Oct. 22 2014,07:05)
   
Quote (Joe G @ Oct. 22 2014,04:49)
     
Quote (The whole truth @ Oct. 22 2014,06:43)
Hey joey, what's your opinion of Gary Gaulin's version of ID?

Why should I care?

Why shouldn't you, joey? Aren't you interested in ID?

What a dumbass. One can be interested in ID without being interested in obscure versions of it.

Obscure? What makes it any more obscure than your version, which you won't even honestly describe?

I don't have a version of ID. I go by what the ID experts and founders say wrt ID. And I bet Gary does too.

As I said you are proud to be a little whiny baby

Exactly which so-called founders and experts are you referring to, joey?  Is everything you say about ID in accordance with what those so-called founders and experts say? Do you and Gary Gaulin and those so-called founders and experts agree on just one particular version of ID?

--------------
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. - Jesus in Matthew 10:34

But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me. -Jesus in Luke 19:27

   
OgreMkV



Posts: 3668
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 22 2014,09:39   

So humans aren't material... dang, who knew?

What are we Joey? If not material things?

Question, is your designer just really long lived (more than the age of the universe) or is it a group? ... are the Illuminati the designers?

And you would think that "Darwinian evolution" means "Darwinian evolution", but then I remembered you think that if it happens in a lab, that the results were designed. Sorry, I forgot how you cling to ridiculous beliefs that make no sense.

And Tiktaalik was in response to your second question. It was a prediction. But thanks for showing your intellectual dishonesty by moving the goal posts... again.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
Quack



Posts: 1961
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 22 2014,09:43   

About Information Technology

--------------
Rocks have no biology.
              Robert Byers.

  
stevestory



Posts: 13407
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 22 2014,09:43   

Quote (Joe G @ Oct. 22 2014,10:35)
Quote
And if you're saying space has to expand because mass is constant,


Never crossed my mind.

do you remember saying "The mass isn't increasing. The mass is what is feeding the expansion. No mass no expansion."?

you don't even seem to understand what you're saying, let alone anyone else. I'm out.

   
Joe G



Posts: 12011
Joined: July 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 22 2014,09:46   

Quote (OgreMkV @ Oct. 22 2014,09:39)
So humans aren't material... dang, who knew?

What are we Joey? If not material things?

Question, is your designer just really long lived (more than the age of the universe) or is it a group? ... are the Illuminati the designers?

And you would think that "Darwinian evolution" means "Darwinian evolution", but then I remembered you think that if it happens in a lab, that the results were designed. Sorry, I forgot how you cling to ridiculous beliefs that make no sense.

And Tiktaalik was in response to your second question. It was a prediction. But thanks for showing your intellectual dishonesty by moving the goal posts... again.

Again with the ignorance. Information is not material- real information not the type you believe in. Our thoughts and concepts are not material.

Intelligent Design is not about the designer.

Yes you would think Darwinian evolution meant Darwinian evolution. But to those of us who know what Darwinian evolution entails Darwinian evolution on a chip doesn't cut it.

And no I do NOT think that because just because it happens in a lab it is designed. You are just an ignorant asshole, as I have been saying.

All you do is fight strawmen and then turn around and wrongly accuse me of doing that.

And Tiktaalik was NOT a prediction of NDE. My claim pertained to NDE. You are the most dishonest or ignorant fuck there is.

--------------
"Facts are Stupid"- Timothy Horton aka Occam's Afterbirth

"Genetic mutations aren't mistakes"-ID and Timothy Horton

Whales do not have tails. Water turns to ice via a molecular code-  Acartia bogart, TARD

YEC is more coherent than materialism and it's bastard child, evolutionism

   
Joe G



Posts: 12011
Joined: July 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 22 2014,09:47   

Quote (stevestory @ Oct. 22 2014,09:43)
Quote (Joe G @ Oct. 22 2014,10:35)
Quote
And if you're saying space has to expand because mass is constant,


Never crossed my mind.

do you remember saying "The mass isn't increasing. The mass is what is feeding the expansion. No mass no expansion."?

you don't even seem to understand what you're saying, let alone anyone else. I'm out.

LoL! What does what I said have to do with your response?

You were out long ago and never returned.

--------------
"Facts are Stupid"- Timothy Horton aka Occam's Afterbirth

"Genetic mutations aren't mistakes"-ID and Timothy Horton

Whales do not have tails. Water turns to ice via a molecular code-  Acartia bogart, TARD

YEC is more coherent than materialism and it's bastard child, evolutionism

   
Joe G



Posts: 12011
Joined: July 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 22 2014,09:49   

Please provide the methodology that determined the changes were differential accumulation of 'genetic accidents'.

And in what way is NDE science? It doesn't make any predictions based on the mechanisms and it is untestable.


Everything in that refers to NDE, Kevin. I asked for predictions based on the mechanisms, which are differential accumulation of 'genetic accidents', errors and mistakes.

Tiktaalik does not fit that- you are a moron

--------------
"Facts are Stupid"- Timothy Horton aka Occam's Afterbirth

"Genetic mutations aren't mistakes"-ID and Timothy Horton

Whales do not have tails. Water turns to ice via a molecular code-  Acartia bogart, TARD

YEC is more coherent than materialism and it's bastard child, evolutionism

   
Occam's Aftershave



Posts: 5287
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 22 2014,09:51   

Chubby Joke Gallien - world's most ronery attention whore.    :D  :D  :D

--------------
"CO2 can't re-emit any trapped heat unless all the molecules point the right way"
"All the evidence supports Creation baraminology"
"If it required a mind, planning and design, it isn't materialistic."
"Jews and Christians are Muslims."

- Joke "Sharon" Gallien, world's dumbest YEC.

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3668
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 22 2014,09:56   

So the designer is material, but the design is not material... except that the design is for living things which are material.

Got it.

Are the tools that the designer used material or not?

BTW: I note that you are ignoring the definition of materialism that I am using. Since you are doing that, then it is you are arguing a strawman, not me.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
Joe G



Posts: 12011
Joined: July 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 22 2014,09:58   

Quote (Occam's Aftershave @ Oct. 22 2014,09:51)
Chubby Joke Gallien - world's most ronery attention whore.    :D  :D  :D

I have your chubby right here :D  :D   :D

--------------
"Facts are Stupid"- Timothy Horton aka Occam's Afterbirth

"Genetic mutations aren't mistakes"-ID and Timothy Horton

Whales do not have tails. Water turns to ice via a molecular code-  Acartia bogart, TARD

YEC is more coherent than materialism and it's bastard child, evolutionism

   
Joe G



Posts: 12011
Joined: July 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 22 2014,10:00   

Quote (OgreMkV @ Oct. 22 2014,09:56)
So the designer is material, but the design is not material... except that the design is for living things which are material.

Got it.

Are the tools that the designer used material or not?

BTW: I note that you are ignoring the definition of materialism that I am using. Since you are doing that, then it is you are arguing a strawman, not me.

No, dumbass, the design is material- we don't know about the designer.

BTW I note that you are totally ignorant of what is being debated and you think that ignorance means something.

YOU have to understand what ID is saying and yet you refuse to and then you blame me.

--------------
"Facts are Stupid"- Timothy Horton aka Occam's Afterbirth

"Genetic mutations aren't mistakes"-ID and Timothy Horton

Whales do not have tails. Water turns to ice via a molecular code-  Acartia bogart, TARD

YEC is more coherent than materialism and it's bastard child, evolutionism

   
Joe G



Posts: 12011
Joined: July 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 22 2014,10:02   

Materialism is a form of philosophical monism which holds that matter is the fundamental substance in nature, and that all phenomena, including mental phenomena and consciousness, are the result of material interactions.

Except mental phenomena and consciousness are the very things that are being questioned as to being the result of material interactions.

If you could only scientifically demonstrate such a thing ID would fade away.

--------------
"Facts are Stupid"- Timothy Horton aka Occam's Afterbirth

"Genetic mutations aren't mistakes"-ID and Timothy Horton

Whales do not have tails. Water turns to ice via a molecular code-  Acartia bogart, TARD

YEC is more coherent than materialism and it's bastard child, evolutionism

   
The whole truth



Posts: 1554
Joined: Jan. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 22 2014,10:14   

Hey joey, in addition to what I asked you above about the so-called founders and experts, there's this:

(me): Hey joey, what's your opinion of Gary Gaulin's version of ID?

(joey): Why should I care?

(me): Why shouldn't you, joey? Aren't you interested in ID?

(joey): What a dumbass. One can be interested in ID without being interested in obscure versions of it.

(me): Obscure? What makes it any more obscure than your version, which you won't even honestly describe?

(joey): I don't have a version of ID. I go by what the ID experts and founders say wrt ID. And I bet Gary does too.

So, you don't care about Gary Gaulin's version of ID because it's "obscure", yet you say that you'd bet that Gary goes "by what the ID experts and founders say wrt ID". Hmm, you don't care, it's obscure, you go by what the so-called ID founders and experts say and you'd bet that Gary does too.

How do you know whether Gary goes by what the so-called founders and experts say if you don't care about (and are obviously not familiar with) his version of ID, and why would you bet on something "obscure" that you don't care about and aren't familiar with? Why do you call Gary's version "obscure" if it goes by what the so-called ID founders and experts say?

--------------
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. - Jesus in Matthew 10:34

But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me. -Jesus in Luke 19:27

   
k.e..



Posts: 5432
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 22 2014,10:15   

Quote (Joe G @ Oct. 22 2014,18:02)
Materialism is a form of philosophical monism which holds that matter is the fundamental substance in nature, and that all phenomena, including mental phenomena and consciousness, are the result of material interactions.

Except mental phenomena and consciousness are the very things that are being questioned as to being the result of material interactions.

If you could only scientifically demonstrate such a thing ID would fade away.

ID has already sunk Joe you're just the stink remaining. Keep it up tho you and Gary banging away on all two cylinders at once is just tard gold. A real treat tard don't get any better than this.

--------------
"I get a strong breeze from my monitor every time k.e. puts on his clown DaveTard suit" dogdidit
"ID is deader than Lenny Flanks granmaws dildo batteries" Erasmus
"I'm busy studying scientist level science papers" Galloping Gary Gaulin

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3668
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 22 2014,10:25   

Quote (Joe G @ Oct. 22 2014,10:02)
Materialism is a form of philosophical monism which holds that matter is the fundamental substance in nature, and that all phenomena, including mental phenomena and consciousness, are the result of material interactions.

Except mental phenomena and consciousness are the very things that are being questioned as to being the result of material interactions.

If you could only scientifically demonstrate such a thing ID would fade away.

Interesting. So you claim that the brain is not the source of mental phenomena. What is the source of mental phenomena then? Where's your evidence of it.

Since it's not material, then it must be BEYOND the realm of the natural, which means it's supernatural... but ID doesn't have anything to do with supernatural. Which is it?

Joey, NO ONE understands your version of ID, because
A) it's an incoherent mess with you making changes as you go
B) you are, the worst "teacher" in the history of the universe
C) you can't keep from contradicting your own ideas, even within just a few minutes.

It's not my problem I don't understand you. I really don't want to understand you. Your world must be a nightmare of the worst aspects of clowns, funhouse mirrors, and a rave.

Regardless, IF you could post a coherent thought, then I would read it. Your next response will be "I've already done it", but not a single link will appear. Your blog is not "full of it"... well it is, but for an idiomatic definition of "full of it".

Go ahead, point to one post that you have written that explains all of the details of ID that you think I don't understand.

From now on, I will hold you to whatever is in that post. Agreed?

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
JohnW



Posts: 3217
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 22 2014,10:33   

Quote (Joe G @ Oct. 22 2014,07:14)
Quote (stevestory @ Oct. 22 2014,09:08)
Quote (Joe G @ Oct. 22 2014,09:27)
 
Quote (stevestory @ Oct. 22 2014,08:13)
 
Quote (Joe G @ Oct. 21 2014,20:23)
   
Quote (stevestory @ Oct. 21 2014,13:21)
   
Quote (Joe G @ Oct. 21 2014,14:10)
So what, if not mass, makes our universe the size that it is?

you seem to be alleging that universe size is a function of mass. Can you elaborate on what the function is?

Answer my question and I will get to yours.

so you can't. not surprised.

So YOU can't. Why am I not surprised

I can talk about the friedmann equations, stress-energy tensors, scalar fields of vacuum energy all you want, but I want to know what you imagine is the size=f(mass) function. Since the universe is expanding, do you believe the total mass is increasing? Or do you think the energy density of empty space is decreasing in accordance with conservation of E? since mass and energy are proportional, if you're right that the size of the universe is proportional to mass, it must be proportional to the vacuum energy of space, right? so is the vacuum energy of space determined, or not? also, how does your function deal with the Vacuum Catastrophe?

The mass isn't increasing. The mass is what is feeding the expansion. No mass no expansion.

That is why I asked- So what, if not mass, makes our universe the size that it is?

Can there be a universe of nothing? How would you know?

Hilarious.  Given that Joe hasn't got his head around GMm / r^2 = mv^2 / r, this is so far over his head... well, let's say the distance above it, measured in Gpc, is pretty close to the largest known number.

--------------
Math is just a language of reality. Its a waste of time to know it. - Robert Byers

There isn't any probability that the letter d is in the word "mathematics"...  The correct answer would be "not even 0" - JoeG

  
The whole truth



Posts: 1554
Joined: Jan. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 22 2014,10:40   

Quote (Joe G @ Oct. 22 2014,08:02)
Materialism is a form of philosophical monism which holds that matter is the fundamental substance in nature, and that all phenomena, including mental phenomena and consciousness, are the result of material interactions.

Except mental phenomena and consciousness are the very things that are being questioned as to being the result of material interactions.

If you could only scientifically demonstrate such a thing ID would fade away.

"Except mental phenomena and consciousness are the very things that are being questioned as to being the result of material interactions."

Really, joey? That's all that's "being questioned"?

Tell me joey, what do mental phenomena and consciousness have to do with ID questions and/or assertions regarding bacterial flagella, DNA, Tiktaalik, speciation, vestigial bones in whales, solar systems, gravity, galaxies, the age of the universe and Earth, the size of the universe, the origin of the universe and Earth, the origin of life, the Cambrian explosion, fossilization, radiometric dating, and uniformitarianism?

--------------
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. - Jesus in Matthew 10:34

But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me. -Jesus in Luke 19:27

   
  27552 replies since Feb. 24 2010,12:00 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (919) < ... 261 262 263 264 265 [266] 267 268 269 270 271 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]