Different state past

[Tiberius]

Not true. The materials that are now in decay would only take a long time to get here if this state were here all along. If not, then we have zero need of old ages.

But if we say you are right, then radio dating techniques will tell us how long radioactive decay has been going on, and since (according to you) that can only happen in the present state, then radioactive dating will tell us how long the present state has been around for.

No. Some may have been from memory relating to the pre flood times...we don't know. But we do know that long lives were the recorded reality.

Ah, so now they aren't just myths and legends, they're MEMORIES of myths and legends!

I wait for something to be proven before worrying about whether it needs unproving.

Your ignorance of science continues unabated.

Right. There had to be. So? You claim slow evolving as science. You are going down here, not I.

I have evidence that supports the idea that evolution happens slowly. You have squat in the way of evidence.

Great...let's see it??

The fossil record.

Easy. Take a lead bullet...pretty heat huh? Shoot it out a barrel of a gun. So did it sink back in?? No. The force with which something is projected would need to be considered.

Given that a bullet travels very fast, and given that we are also talking about a HUGE amount of water here, the energy required to move the water at the speed of a bullet is immense. The heat of such energy would likely vaporise the Earth.

Besides, we aren't talking about solid bullets moving through air. We are talking about iridium sinking in the molten rock of the mantle.

A better analogy would be using a water pistol that sucks up water from a pool that has a layer of sand on the bottom. Squirt as much and as hard as you like, but that sand ain't gonna move.

Ok. Name such a thing that you think was affected!!? We can look at that.

Oh lol. YOU are the one claiming that things were affected by something that happened before!

Well, if camels evolved to retain water, how is it that you claim they did so in a wet part of the world! Think before posting.

Hate to burst your bubble, dad, but a camel's hump stores FAT, not water. Your ignorance is on display to the world here.

Well, I could look to see if some were fossilized. Evidence. It can be your friend.

Then go and look and tell me what the EVIDENCE shows.

I give up...how??

You tell me. You're the one claiming that there were rabbits in a different past state.

Why, were you there and can give us a fisrt hand account?

No, but I bet you weren't there either.

Not really. God told man that as part of the curse, he would have to work and get by with the sweat of his brow.

No, you are only told by people that God said that. Were you there? Did you hear God saying it? No? Then you don't know, do you?

Who says that it was not mostly fresh at the time? You know?

So the water that covered the earth in the flood WAS mostly fresh then?

When it says...what? You see I take what is good and reject what is filthy dreaming.

In other words you pick and choose the parts you like so you can hang on to your fantasies.

The kinds I assume evolved pre flood as well. But since apparently man and mammals for the most part did not fossilize, the record for them only starts post flood.

More assumptions on your part! At least you;re admitting to guessing, that's a start.

BTW, there are lots of mammalian fossils.

No. The bible is far far far higher. You kidding??

You claim this, but I;ve yet to see any reason to believe your claim.

You make a claim....support it! Here. Now. I don't believe you.

Well, since you started this thread with a claim that there was a different state in the past and have yet to provide a single bit of support for that claim...

YOU FIRST.

 

[Tiberius]

Brain cooties lead to a unique disgust and low tolerance towards those who don't have them.

Those that don't have brain cooties spend their time badmouthing brain cooties, blaming brain cooties for all the problems in the world, while at the same time enjoying the benefits that brain cooties have provided.

People with brain cooties refer to the people described above as hypocrites.

 

[AV1611VET]

Those that don't have brain cooties spend their time badmouthing brain cooties, blaming brain cooties for all the problems in the world, while at the same time enjoying the benefits that brain cooties have provided.

People with brain cooties refer to the people described above as hypocrites.

How about the 'hypocrites' that thank God for giving us scientists?

Are they still hypocrites?

 

[TeddyReceptus]

Brain cooties lead to a unique disgust and low tolerance towards those who don't have them.

Actually it leads to a disgust and low tolerance for those who don't have them but still insist on telling those who do how brain cooties work.

Just a clarification.

(ie: a low tolerance for prideful ignorance)

 

[TeddyReceptus]

How about the 'hypocrites' that thank God for giving us scientists?

Are they still hypocrites?

they are when they tell those same scientists to "take a hike" when they say something that you don't find comforting.

If you want people around you telling you only what you want to hear I suggest you become amazingly wealthy and surround yourself with sycophants who will feed you whatever you want to hear. True or not.

 

[TeddyReceptus]

Well, since you started this thread with a claim that there was a different state in the past and have yet to provide a single bit of support for that claim...

YOU FIRST.

Here, let me help Dad with providing PROOF POSITIVE OF HIS CLAIMS:

QED! FTW! PWNAGE! SEVERE PWNAGE! TRUTH distilled (in human hand, mind you) into a single book with every bit of information ever needed!

I sometimes wonder why we even bother writing other books and stuff! It's all here! Everything from Soup to Nuts! To delicious bread recipes (Ezekiel 4:9-4:16...Now dung-that-cometh-out-of-a-man-free! (Yay!)

 

[AV1611VET]

they are when they tell those same scientists to "take a hike" when they say something that you don't find comforting.

Then I'll go ahead and take his point with a grain of salt.

I don't think I've ever told a scientist to 'take a hike.'

I could be wrong though; but if I did, it was for a legitimate reason.

Come to think of it...

 

[Tiberius]

How about the 'hypocrites' that thank God for giving us scientists?

Are they still hypocrites?

Yes. They should be thanking Harvard, Yale and the many other fine educational institutions that teach scientists what they need to know to produce, y'know, a little thing called USEFUL RESULTS.

Then I'll go ahead and take his point with a grain of salt.

I don't think I've ever told a scientist to 'take a hike.'

I could be wrong though; but if I did, it was for a legitimate reason.

Come to think of it...

Oh, but we all know that, for you, a legitimate reason is that you disagree with him.

 

[TeddyReceptus]

Then I'll go ahead and take his point with a grain of salt.

I bet you will.

I don't think I've ever told a scientist to 'take a hike.'

OOOOH, SUPER PHARISEE! Look at him parse his words! Mad rhetorical skills! Oh sure you say science can take a hike as if science is something "out there" not done by "scientists".

Sorry, not buying your equivocation and linguistic play time.

I could be wrong though; but if I did, it was for a legitimate reason.

Come to think of it...

Do you spend a lot of time saying things that look one way but have some special "magic meaning" that allow you to weave and dodge? Or is that just how you speak?

 

[dad]

So you are saying that it only took 4000 years for all the salts in the ocean to dissolve?

No. I was asking if you know.

The ocean has 35 grams of salt per kilogram of seawater on average.
Even your magical global flood couldn't deposit that much salt in that short a time.

You kidding?? Heck it did a lot more than that! There are huge deposits underground that are not even in the ocean too!

Oh wait... I forgot this is the different state past thread... you are just going to assume that reality was different 4000 years ago so anything is possible.

Laws were different, yes, of course. We would have to take any implications of that into account also.

When would oceans need to be salty? Not in the flood, worldwide, it seems to me. Why? Because I hear salt helps in keeping things sort of clean! If the oceans were all fresh, it might be difficult on the planet for all the dying things etc..no? Or is that a misconception I somehow heard?

If, then we needed salty oceans after the flood, it seems to make sense that a lot of the saltiness came to be later?

How? Well, if we have salt deposits, would it not take some time do dissolve and disperse?

 

[florida2]

Yesterday I had the powers of Superman - flight, superhuman strength, everything.

Today I don't.

That is because a different state existed yesterday. The laws of physics were completely different and now they have changed without any proof or evidence.

I cannot offer any proof, merely say that it is precisely what happens and anyone who agrees with me is stupid. You cannot disprove me because you weren't there to observe me and I will constantly say that I did have the powers of Superman.

Isn't that basically what this thread is?

 

[DaneaFL]

Yesterday I had the powers of Superman - flight, superhuman strength, everything.

Today I don't.

That is because a different state existed yesterday. The laws of physics were completely different and now they have changed without any proof or evidence.

I cannot offer any proof, merely say that it is precisely what happens and anyone who agrees with me is stupid. You cannot disprove me because you weren't there to observe me and I will constantly say that I did have the powers of Superman.

Isn't that basically what this thread is?

Basically. Some people think if your theory can't be disproved then it's true.

They are missing one very imporant part of any good theory. It has to be falsifiable to be a good theory.

For instance, the theories of evolution and gravity as strong as they are, are actually a couple of the easiest theories to falsify.

If you ever found a rabbit next to a dinosaur or if you ever saw a rock fall up then both theories would be demonstrably wrong.

So you have to ask "what could possibly prove different state past theory false?" The answer is nothing... and if nothing could ever falsify your theory... it's probably wrong.

 

[dad]

Basically. Some people think if your theory can't be disproved then it's true.

They are missing one very imporant part of any good theory. It has to be falsifiable to be a good theory.

For instance, the theories of evolution and gravity as strong as they are, are actually a couple of the easiest theories to falsify.

If you ever found a rabbit next to a dinosaur or if you ever saw a rock fall up then both theories would be demonstrably wrong.

So you have to ask "what could possibly prove different state past theory false?" The answer is nothing... and if nothing could ever falsify your theory... it's probably wrong.

False. When science is not ABLE to falsify something, then your little rule cannot apply.

 

[dad]

Yesterday I had the powers of Superman - flight, superhuman strength, everything.

Today I don't.

That is because a different state existed yesterday. The laws of physics were completely different and now they have changed without any proof or evidence.

I cannot offer any proof, merely say that it is precisely what happens and anyone who agrees with me is stupid. You cannot disprove me because you weren't there to observe me and I will constantly say that I did have the powers of Superman.

Isn't that basically what this thread is?

No. The history of the world and God's word to man do not include you as superman. They do include a different state past. Science cannot prove otherwise, or what it assumes a same state past. In all ways, it loses and I win.

 

[dad]

But if we say you are right, then radio dating techniques will tell us how long radioactive decay has been going on, and since (according to you) that can only happen in the present state, then radioactive dating will tell us how long the present state has been around for.

Correct it likely has. However science cannot differentiate between the material that was produced by decay since the state started, and the stuff that was already here.

I have evidence that supports the idea that evolution happens slowly. You have squat in the way of evidence.

Let us see this evidence of slow evolution in the far past!

The fossil record.

That supports me...what about it?

Given that a bullet travels very fast, and given that we are also talking about a HUGE amount of water here, the energy required to move the water at the speed of a bullet is immense. The heat of such energy would likely vaporise the Earth.

In this state, maybe. Not relevant.

Besides, we aren't talking about solid bullets moving through air. We are talking about iridium sinking in the molten rock of the mantle.

No, you are! Not me. Even under present state laws, these folks suggest that iridium came from a cloud!!!!!

"The Alvarez group therefore suggested that iridium was scattered worldwide from a cloud of debris that formed as an asteroid struck somewhere on Earth."

The KT extinction

So, for the space water and fountain of the deep eruptions to bring some in a different state is a piece of cake!

Hate to burst your bubble, dad, but a camel's hump stores FAT, not water. Your ignorance is on display to the world here.

No bursting involved...I never so much as even mentioned a hump!!! Strawman....that didn't break a camel's back!

You tell me. You're the one claiming that there were rabbits in a different past state.

I suspect that hares may have been somewhat different, yes. But who cares?

No, but I bet you weren't there either.

And I bet I do not claim that science says I was.

So the water that covered the earth in the flood WAS mostly fresh then?

Who cares!!?? Creatures could evolve fast then. What would it matter?

BTW, there are lots of mammalian fossils.

Duhh...you think?? From when though?? Show me a few from before the flood??

Well, since you started this thread with a claim that there was a different state in the past and have yet to provide a single bit of support for that claim...

YOU FIRST.

God and history and all evidence available from science....

 

[Farinata]

No. The history of the world

i.e. A couple other ancient cultures mention a flood therefore the biblical account of a global flood has to be literally true the exact way I read it.

Also an ancient Sumerian manuscript says kings had reigns lasting thousands of years. Totally squares with long biblical lifespans dawg. That's some solid evidence right there. Forget about the Sumerian creation myth, rituals, and list of gods to worship. Let's just selectively focus on the stuff that validates the bible. That's being neutral right?

and God's word

Why is the bible the word of god? Because it says so in the bible. Why should we trust the bible? Because it is the word of god.

Please. Unless you can come up with more creative answers than the standard fundie babble and last thursdayism nonsense you've already put forth, this thread would do better to just end rather than go around in the same tired circle.

 

[Elendur]

No. The history of the world and God's word to man do not include you as superman. They do include a different state past. Science cannot prove otherwise, or what it assumes a same state past. In all ways, it loses and I win.

Think of history as a long list of letters and numbers, along with several methods (several different records) to measure it:

I've lined up the axises so that 'p' represents a non eventful cycle, 'E' represents an eventful cycle, 'd' represents a cycle being created (that is, the current layer).
The cycles are lined up with known, major historical events.
Past cycle 0 we don't have events that we have recorded in manmade records.

Ice layers
E p p E p p p p p p p E p p E p p p E E d
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Trees
E p p E p p p p p p p E p p E p p p E E d
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Geology
E p p E p p p p p p p E p p E p p p E E d
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20


We use the method of induction (which is pretty much the only assumption science works by, that and epistemology) to read out the following layers:

Ice layers
p p E E p p
-200 -199 -198 -197 -196 -195 ... (etc)

(Trees doesn't go that far, but are reliable in close history)

Geology
p p E E p p
-200 -199 -198 -197 -196 -195 ... (etc)

We can come to the conclusion that something happened in the time -198 and -197.
If we want to know what happened we just have to compare with the events we know of, or try to explain what could have made that effect on the ice or the rock.



To say science assumes SSP is wrong, it's deducted.

 

[Tiberius]

Correct it likely has. However science cannot differentiate between the material that was produced by decay since the state started, and the stuff that was already here.

You still have to prove there was anything already there.

But, let's assume for the moment that you are right. Isn't it mightily funny that all over the world, in all these different rock samples, that the stuff that was already is THE SAME in each sample, and it just happens to be the EXACT AMOUNT needed to make it look like they had been decaying in a state that was the same as the present one.

Isn't it FUNNY, dad? I wonder how this could be!

Let us see this evidence of slow evolution in the far past!

That supports me...what about it?

No it doesn't.

In this state, maybe. Not relevant.

See posts 697, 698, 711, and 712.

No, you are! Not me. Even under present state laws, these folks suggest that iridium came from a cloud!!!!!

"The Alvarez group therefore suggested that iridium was scattered worldwide from a cloud of debris that formed as an asteroid struck somewhere on Earth."

The KT extinction

So, for the space water and fountain of the deep eruptions to bring some in a different state is a piece of cake!

My goodness, you do love to misinterpret things, don't you.

No bursting involved...I never so much as even mentioned a hump!!! Strawman....that didn't break a camel's back!

Ah, so you mentioned a camel's ability to store water... why?

Fairly obvious what you were thinking, and now you;re trying to backflip.

I suspect that hares may have been somewhat different, yes. But who cares?

More guesswork? And if they were different, how can you call them hares?

And I bet I do not claim that science says I was.

So if I can't know because I wasn't there, how can you know if you weren;t there?

Who cares!!?? Creatures could evolve fast then. What would it matter?

Dad, we've been over this many times. When you make claims like this, you need to SUPPORT THEM.

Duhh...you think?? From when though?? Show me a few from before the flood??

How can I? There never was a global flood. Any mammalian fossil I present, you'll just turn around and say that it's from AFTER the flood. (This is that whole thing how your idea is unfalsifiable, get it?)

God and history and all evidence available from science....

Oh, not this again? Dad, you know what I'm going to say. BE SPECIFIC. You love making these vague claims then acting like you;ve proved it beyond a doubt, but you haven't. You've proved nothing!

 

[florida2]

No. The history of the world and God's word to man do not include you as superman. They do include a different state past. Science cannot prove otherwise, or what it assumes a same state past. In all ways, it loses and I win.

Haha, what?!

You claim that a different state of physical laws applied in the past yet there is no proof of such a thing.

Again, I claim that I was Superman yesterday, when different physical laws applied, but now those laws have changed I'm no longer have those powers. Prove me wrong.

I do hope you'll see how silly your theory is and save yourself further embarrassment.

 

[TeddyReceptus]

Haha, what?!

You claim that a different state of physical laws applied in the past yet there is no proof of such a thing.

Again, I claim that I was Superman yesterday, when different physical laws applied, but now those laws have changed I'm no longer have those powers. Prove me wrong.

I do hope you'll see how silly your theory is and save yourself further embarrassment.

Jokes on you, Florida! Dad can't see how silly his theory is! You're the sucker in this game!