Different state past

[Elendur]

Well, until they know and can confirm or deny our laws and space, they are sunk! They better stop claiming stuff.

1. Confirmation is evidence.
2. For physical things proof is impossible.
3. Falsifying something that is constructed to be undeniable is impossible.
4. Their claims have evidence.
5. You haven't presented evidence for your claim.

Part of it was in this state. However what He said to Adam, and Noah, etc I assume was in the former state. What He said to John who was lifted to heaven to see the future I also assume was not in earth space! Etc.

Present state blather.

The bible if true has to be from an eternal source. That was easy.

Present state blather.

I feel no compunction to reject real and reasonable evidences such as we have for last century, or last year or last week. Let's not pretend that we have anything similar for 5000 real years ago. I understand that the same state past models like the big bang and first lifeform call for a total abandoning of reason. However, one must take a balanced and realistic approach, in my humble winning opinion.

Balanced, realistic, winning and humble. You are neither.

You are nowhere near any of those, and certainly not the humble.
I can back up that claim with your 'Undefeated' tag, along with at least 7 "victory" proclamations.

 

[Split Rock]

Its all about the Dad State.

Example: Moses - Ten Commandments - Mel Brooks - YouTube

 

[dad]

1. Confirmation is evidence.

So you cannot confirm any set of laws existed in the far past. OK.

2. For physical things proof is impossible.

No. Reasonable proof is all around for the things of this world.

3. Falsifying something that is constructed to be undeniable is impossible.

So can we falsify a same state past, yes or no?

4. Their claims have evidence.

Shared evidence. We all share evidence, nothing about any of it is exclusive to a same state past dream.

5. You haven't presented evidence for your claim.

My claims fit all evidence including the records.

Balanced, realistic, winning and humble. You are neither.

You listed 3 things.

You are nowhere near any of those, and certainly not the humble.
I can back up that claim with your 'Undefeated' tag, along with at least 7 "victory" proclamations.

Victory is a part of what I do here. It is no special event. It takes no great pride or humility to admit that so called science is a failed enterprise.

The state of the past that is indicated by the bible and some history is a different one. That fits any and all evidences from science. That is just how it is.

You had your chance to contest that. Let's all move on and accept what happened. It ain't going away.

 

[Elendur]

So you cannot confirm any set of laws existed in the far past. OK.

Confirming it is easy enough, you just don't care about presented evidence.

No. Reasonable proof is all around for the things of this world.

There is no such thing as reasonable proof. It's either proof or not. And all physical proof is impossible.

So can we falsify a same state past, yes or no?

Yes. Find something that doesn't align itself with a same state. Try with some objective evidence, not something written.

Shared evidence. We all share evidence, nothing about any of it is exclusive to a same state past dream.

And what is shared evidence? Please define closer.
If you mean what I think you do you're wrong. The difference for SSP and DSP regarding evidence is that evidence supports SSP and can't falsify DSP. The difference is huge.

My claims fit all evidence including the records.

Yes, that's the beauty of your stance, unfalsifiable.
The evidence doesn't fit your claim though.

You listed 3 things.

Four things.
Balanced, realistic, winning and humble.

Victory is a part of what I do here. It is no special event. It takes no great pride or humility to admit that so called science is a failed enterprise.

This is nonsense.

The state of the past that is indicated by the bible and some history is a different one. That fits any and all evidences from science. That is just how it is.

Yup, since it's unfalsifiable. Last-thursdayism fits any and all evidence as well.
The evidence doesn't fit your hypothesis though.

You had your chance to contest that. Let's all move on and accept what happened. It ain't going away.

Another moment of an exceptional lesson in humbleness.

 

[Tiberius]

Thannks for sdmittinngg that. I guess we should qualify that a bit...the bits of what IS that it can see. The issues that are important though are not is, but what was at and after creation...the flood, the future..etc.

Which left nothing that we can see, according to you, even though a flood of such proportions would have left a definite mark on the world.

The continents separated...the fossil record...etc. I have ALL the evidence.

And I won't deny that the continents have moved, or that there is the fossil record.

You have evidence, yes, but your conclusions based on that evidence are weak and fall apart at the least bit of scrutiny (shame you never apply such scrutiny) and you also have many conclusions that are based on no evidence whatsoever. Just old stories.

I would think it does. Apparently you need something fleshed out a bit more....

No it doesn't. I asked you to explain how the ratios of parent and daughter materials came to be what they would be if they were not caused by radio decay. You did not explain how this ratio came to be.

You just once again claimed that the laws were different in the past and that explains everything somehow. Repeating the same unsupported claims over and over again is not an explanation.

But what else do you expect!? You expect a lot of stuff that is not there buut you claim WAS there. Yet there is no proof. You claim it is a part of your model, but just decayed away already. As for your claim that you expect ratios to be just as they are, how is it that they often re date rocks and stuff sometimes by millions of years, even more!? Let's be honest.

Yes, there were isotopes that are not there but once were there, and we can tell because they left traces on the rock and they left the daughter isotopes that they decayed into.

Now for the bits that are actually here, and the daughters, what you need to do is give one example of how the amounts are as expected and why exactly

I've already explained how radiodating works. If you didn't listen before, why should I expect you to now? You'll just handwave it all away, won't you?

ALL records of the earliest times of man point that way and the bible screams it out. All evidence agrees. Name anything that you think doesn't!?

Oh yes, you don't want to throw out your old stories, do you. No one knew how the world worked like people who thought the wheel was high-tech.

False!!!! You have no way of knowing unless you know the forces and laws that were in place or in this case represented by the tilt. You do not. All you can do is look at amounts of water.

Is there any evidence that they were different?

To discern truth and real time from the evidences one could NOT do what so called science does...believe and assume that our state was here long ago.

So, going back to the analogy, how would you use the amount of water in the balls to determine the past state of the tennis ball board?

Maybe the hole is on the other side of the ship, and you never heard the bang, cause of the loud music and headphones?

Oh no! But wait! I am on the good ship Scientific Method! So I measure the tilt of the deck! I measure the height of the deck above the water level and compare that height to the height I expect it to be based on how much weight is on board! And both these readings tell me the same thing! My ships is sailing safe and sound!

meanwhile, your ship is sinking and you're on deck insisting that it is the rest of the world that is tilting around you.

 

[dad]

Confirming it is easy enough, you just don't care about presented evidence.

It is not only not easy, it is absolutely impossible. I can inform you that no evidence exists for a same state past and that you have not presented any nor can you.

There is no such thing as reasonable proof. It's either proof or not. And all physical proof is impossible.

Then why mention proof since you have none as you admit?

Yes. Find something that doesn't align itself with a same state. Try with some objective evidence, not something written.

The same state past is a dream. Nothing more. Nothing need align with that dream. The only reason you have been taught that evidence did align with it, is because it does so, but only by faith alone.

And what is shared evidence? Please define closer.

Name any evidence man has!? Continental drift? That is also a fit to a different state past. Fossil record? Same thing. Etc etc etc etc etc etc ...

If you mean what I think you do you're wrong. The difference for SSP and DSP regarding evidence is that evidence supports SSP and can't falsify DSP. The difference is huge.

Then falsify the same state past!? No evidence supports it more than a DSP.

Yes, that's the beauty of your stance, unfalsifiable.
The evidence doesn't fit your claim though.

Yes all of it does. Name anything you think that does not?

Four things.
Balanced, realistic, winning and humble.

Stop describing me. Better to look at the issues.

This is nonsense.

No. Face it, one side had to win.

Yup, since it's unfalsifiable. Last-thursdayism fits any and all evidence as well.
The evidence doesn't fit your hypothesis though.

So falsify a same state past? Or zip it.

Another moment of an exceptional lesson in humbleness.

If it humbles you to face the truth that you had your chance to support your position and attempt to refute mine, then I guess it was a needed thing.

 

[Elendur]

It is not only not easy, it is absolutely impossible. I can inform you that no evidence exists for a same state past and that you have not presented any nor can you.

Again, you don't seem to know the definition of evidence.

Then why mention proof since you have none as you admit?

I mention proof since it's of importance, you seem to value it above all else. And since you put your value into something impossible...

The same state past is a dream. Nothing more. Nothing need align with that dream. The only reason you have been taught that evidence did align with it, is because it does so, but only by faith alone.

Don't even try that one. I asked for non-written evidence against DSP, you haven't presented it.

Name any evidence man has!? Continental drift? That is also a fit to a different state past. Fossil record? Same thing. Etc etc etc etc etc etc ...

I asked you to define it, not examples of it. Please define 'shared evidence'.

Then falsify the same state past!? No evidence supports it more than a DSP.

Then you're either lying or you don't know the definition of evidence.

Yes all of it does. Name anything you think that does not?

You mean except everything? There isn't one piece of objective evidence that could indicate a DSP.
I'll name one for you: Ice cores.

Stop describing me. Better to look at the issues.

Oh, goodie. Not only do you describe yourself with false virtues, you have an amazingly bad short term memory.
I'll remind you: Those were describing what you're not.

No. Face it, one side had to win.

Depends, if there ever were a contest for the win. So far you haven't even stepped up into the ring.

So falsify a same state past? Or zip it.

It's up to you, you still haven't.

If it humbles you to face the truth that you had your chance to support your position and attempt to refute mine, then I guess it was a needed thing.

Too bad the teacher didn't possess the competence needed.

 

[Tiberius]

Then falsify the same state past!? No evidence supports it more than a DSP.

Easy!

Take a rock sample and analyze the different isotopes in it that are part of radioactive decay.

For instance, say we have isotope A which decays to isotopes be which then decays into isotope C. We can determine how much of each isotope we would expect to see. Then we test the sample, and we see if the different isotopes are there.

If the amount of each isotope is different to what we expect, then we have falsified the same state past.

See how easy that was? You've failed, dad!

 

[dad]

Which left nothing that we can see, according to you, even though a flood of such proportions would have left a definite mark on the world.

It would help to know where to look for the marks! For example if the nature change was after the flood, and the mountain building and continental separation, that would mess up a record. If there was rapid plant growth, and deposition and a rapid ice age also, that might obscure some things too. Get back to us when you get a clue.

And I won't deny that the continents have moved, or that there is the fossil record.

OK.

You have evidence, yes, but your conclusions based on that evidence are weak and fall apart at the least bit of scrutiny (shame you never apply such scrutiny) and you also have many conclusions that are based on no evidence whatsoever. Just old stories.

Not sure what dreams you are dreaming. My ideas are rock solid. They do not fall apart, they tear apart.

No it doesn't. I asked you to explain how the ratios of parent and daughter materials came to be what they would be if they were not caused by radio decay. You did not explain how this ratio came to be.

Yes. I did. You seem to have a mental block. Now let's try again. If the materials were here at the onset of this state, then decay could not have caused them. Now why was there not certain materials needed in the former state that are a part of the process now? (for example the stuff you claim should have been there and is missing) - we don't know. But heck science doesn't know why much is here! Can you tell us why an atomic spin works as it does?? Gravity? The strong nuclear force? How about why there is as much helium and lead as we have? Etc...so why would we know all about the former state workings?

You just once again claimed that the laws were different in the past and that explains everything somehow. Repeating the same unsupported claims over and over again is not an explanation.

One need not explain every observed fact. One merely sometimes must note them.

Yes, there were isotopes that are not there but once were there, and we can tell because they left traces on the rock and they left the daughter isotopes that they decayed into.

I was hoping you would mention that. Example?

I've already explained how radiodating works. If you didn't listen before, why should I expect you to now? You'll just handwave it all away, won't you?

I am not sure why you think anyone needs you to explain radioactive decay...or why anyone would want to wave away the well known fact that things do decay?

Oh yes, you don't want to throw out your old stories, do you. No one knew how the world worked like people who thought the wheel was high-tech.

The bible mentions portals through deep space, stars being born, a changing nature, and etc etc etc. So called science is in diapers compared to the science of the bible.

Is there any evidence that they were different?

Is there any evidence that they were not?

So, going back to the analogy, how would you use the amount of water in the balls to determine the past state of the tennis ball board?

Impossible. One could look at the rate at which the water now filters down, and predict that a certain part of the water must have come through this process since the time we know that the tilt occurred. That is about it.

Oh no! But wait! I am on the good ship Scientific Method! So I measure the tilt of the deck! I measure the height of the deck above the water level and compare that height to the height I expect it to be based on how much weight is on board! And both these readings tell me the same thing! My ships is sailing safe and sound!

You forgot the weather forecast. Hurricane. You forgot about subs....torpedoes. You forgot about asking if you were in more than a few feet of water and could tell by the tilt....etc. You also had no map to navigate.

meanwhile, your ship is sinking and you're on deck insisting that it is the rest of the world that is tilting around you.

No. My ship walks on water and can fly. It can also travel through a portal through deep space. Your worries are not mine.

 

[dad]

Again, you don't seem to know the definition of evidence.

Yes I do.

I mention proof since it's of importance, you seem to value it above all else. And since you put your value into something impossible...

No, you did not mention 'proof'. Not even a memorable attempt at half baked biased evidence.

Don't even try that one. I asked for non-written evidence against DSP, you haven't presented it.

Can you give us non written proof of Relativity?

I asked you to define it, not examples of it. Please define 'shared evidence'.

That means (as I used it) that any evidence science has, I share.

Then you're either lying or you don't know the definition of evidence.

Go ahead tell us then?

You mean except everything? There isn't one piece of objective evidence that could indicate a DSP.

You mean except everything? There isn't one piece of objective evidence that could indicate a SSP.

I'll name one for you: Ice cores.

And...? What about them? I assume that if the womb of the planet opened up, and water gushed out in the flood, that, in some areas, some freezing agent may have existed to rapidly freeze it in layers. So? That is just one idea...need more? You have no monopoly on explanations for ice.

Oh, goodie. Not only do you describe yourself with false virtues, you have an amazingly bad short term memory.
I'll remind you: Those were describing what you're not.

Stop obsessing over me and describing me. Try to focus on the ideas at hand.

Depends, if there ever were a contest for the win. So far you haven't even stepped up into the ring.

Just show us where the ring is...

It's up to you, you still haven't.

Not true. If something can't be falsified, it is not science, some have said. If therefore you cannot falsify the same state past, it is not science. Thanks for that.

Too bad the teacher didn't possess the competence needed.

So who is the teacher in your little vision here?

 

[Elendur]

Yes I do.
No, you did not mention 'proof'. Not even a memorable attempt at half baked biased evidence.
Can you give us non written proof of Relativity?
That means (as I used it) that any evidence science has, I share.
Go ahead tell us then?
You mean except everything? There isn't one piece of objective evidence that could indicate a SSP.
And...? What about them? I assume that if the womb of the planet opened up, and water gushed out in the flood, that, in some areas, some freezing agent may have existed to rapidly freeze it in layers. So? That is just one idea...need more? You have no monopoly on explanations for ice.
Stop obsessing over me and describing me. Try to focus on the ideas at hand.
Just show us where the ring is...
Not true. If something can't be falsified, it is not science, some have said. If therefore you cannot falsify the same state past, it is not science. Thanks for that.

All of this above is evidence that you don't know what evidence and proof is.
Nor the process of falsification.

Either that or you're lying.

You asked me to tell you what it was, marked in bold, and I'll do as asked:
I think you're lying as hard as you can, since you've been provided with, and provided yourself, the definitions of evidence and proof several times.
Either that, or you're delusional.

 

[dad]

All of this above is evidence that you don't know what evidence and proof is.
Nor the process of falsification.

Either that or you're lying.

You asked me to tell you what it was, marked in bold, and I'll do as asked:
I think you're lying as hard as you can, since you've been provided with, and provided yourself, the definitions of evidence and proof several times.
Either that, or you're delusional.

ALL evidence supports a different state past. I also have the bible. NO proof exists for a same state past, in any way shape or form, and it opposes the observers who recorded stuff.

Now, show how a present state past can be falsified, or watch it fry as a science concept and claim. And the truth goes marching on.

 

[Elendur]

ALL evidence supports a different state past. I also have the bible. NO proof exists for a same state past, in any way shape or form, and it opposes the observers who recorded stuff.

Now, show how a present state past can be falsified, or watch it fry as a science concept and claim. And the truth goes marching on.

1. All evidence doesn't contradict DSP, a big difference from support.
2. The way you use the term proof yet again shows you still haven't learned what proof means.
3. You can falsify SSP by presenting objective evidence that SSP is incorrect.

Read into these terms, you need it:
Proof
Objective evidence
Subjective evidence

Edit: You could benefit from studying epistemology as well.

 

[Tiberius]

It would help to know where to look for the marks! For example if the nature change was after the flood, and the mountain building and continental separation, that would mess up a record. If there was rapid plant growth, and deposition and a rapid ice age also, that might obscure some things too. Get back to us when you get a clue.

Given that we have rock samples going back millions of years, accounts from civilisations going back thousands of years, tree rings going back thousands of years, ice cores from Antarctica going back hundreds of thousands of years and none of these show any evidence for a worldwide flood...

OK.

I'm amazed we finally agree on something.

Not sure what dreams you are dreaming. My ideas are rock solid. They do not fall apart, they tear apart.

They are not rock solid. You;ve never been able to provide a single shred of objective evidence for them.

Yes. I did. You seem to have a mental block. Now let's try again. If the materials were here at the onset of this state, then decay could not have caused them. Now why was there not certain materials needed in the former state that are a part of the process now? (for example the stuff you claim should have been there and is missing) - we don't know. But heck science doesn't know why much is here! Can you tell us why an atomic spin works as it does?? Gravity? The strong nuclear force? How about why there is as much helium and lead as we have? Etc...so why would we know all about the former state workings?

If the materials were here at the onset of this state, they would have already started decaying, and the ratios we see would not be what we find them to be!

One need not explain every observed fact. One merely sometimes must note them.

Oh my goodness. You are saying that you are right but you don't need to explain how? HA! Because you CAN'T explain how! Your DSP will always lead you to something that you can't explain!!!

I was hoping you would mention that. Example?

From Uranium-lead dating - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia :

238U with daughter nuclides undergo eight total alpha and six beta decays

in English, this means that you have one material that decays into another material, and this second material decays into yet a third material. This can happen through the process of Alpha Decay or beta Decay. The materials go through alpha decay eight times, and Beta decay six times.

I am not sure why you think anyone needs you to explain radioactive decay...or why anyone would want to wave away the well known fact that things do decay?

You need it explained to you because you are ignorant of how it destroys your DSP idea.

The bible mentions portals through deep space, stars being born, a changing nature, and etc etc etc. So called science is in diapers compared to the science of the bible.

Woopee do. I'm sure the Bible mentions many things, but that doesn't mean that it provides any understanding of those things. The Bible says that the stars can fall to Earth. Do you think this is actually possible? Because it isn't. Stars are massive and Earth would be engulfed by one if it got that close. And the star's massive gravity would rip the earth apart.

The Bible is full of claims made by the people who wrote it long ago - people who did not understand the reality of our universe.

Is there any evidence that they were not?

Yes.

And it is the hallmark of one who has nothing to avoid answering questions and turn the question around to the questioner. You have nothing.

Now, is there any evidence that they were not?

Impossible. One could look at the rate at which the water now filters down, and predict that a certain part of the water must have come through this process since the time we know that the tilt occurred. That is about it.

That's not what you said before! What's the matter? Don't you comprehend how your own DSP idea works?

You forgot the weather forecast. Hurricane. You forgot about subs....torpedoes. You forgot about asking if you were in more than a few feet of water and could tell by the tilt....etc. You also had no map to navigate.

lol, you make me laugh. You got anything more than vague nautical threats? Because you certainly don't have any evidence. My position is open to attack and has withstood every attack you have made (and I'm not speaking metaphorically here, I'm speaking literally). Your position has crumbled to every attack, and you just repeat the same tired defences.

No. My ship walks on water and can fly. It can also travel through a portal through deep space. Your worries are not mine.

*snorts* If I'd been drinking, you would have owed me a new keyboard!

 

[dad]

1. All evidence doesn't contradict DSP, a big difference from support.
2. The way you use the term proof yet again shows you still haven't learned what proof means.
3. You can falsify SSP by presenting objective evidence that SSP is incorrect.

Read into these terms, you need it:
Proof
Objective evidence
Subjective evidence

Edit: You could benefit from studying epistemology as well.

Objective means what? Who would you expect to view the stuff at the time of the flood the same as science now?? Yet we have the record of the actual people that were in the flood, and what they chatted about, recorded, did, etc!

 

[dad]

Given that we have rock samples going back millions of years,

False. A bit over 6000 years. The rest is present state dreaming into the past. That is like opium dreams.

accounts from civilisations going back thousands of years,

That agree with me! So?

tree rings going back thousands of years, ice cores from Antarctica going back hundreds of thousands of years

Deposition and plant growth were FAST. They can't help prop up your dreamland.

They are not rock solid. You;ve never been able to provide a single shred of objective evidence for them.

I have history and God and His word, and all the evidences of science. It doesn't get better than that!

If the materials were here at the onset of this state, they would have already started decaying, and the ratios we see would not be what we find them to be!

False! Yes they started decaying, but in many cases (except for your missing stuff that was never here at all in proper amounts) all that means is that the daughter material was added to by the decay for 4400 years! So?

Oh my goodness. You are saying that you are right but you don't need to explain how? HA! Because you CAN'T explain how! Your DSP will always lead you to something that you can't explain!!!

A fool pretend to know what is not known. Science is like that.

From Uranium-lead dating - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia :

238U with daughter nuclides undergo eight total alpha and six beta decays

in English, this means that you have one material that decays into another material, and this second material decays into yet a third material. This can happen through the process of Alpha Decay or beta Decay. The materials go through alpha decay eight times, and Beta decay six times.

Right...so?? Name one rock we can look at? Where was it found? What country? How much daughter of what sort is in there now? Looks like you need more than tennis balls...let's do this thing.

You need it explained to you because you are ignorant of how it destroys your DSP idea.

No. I just wait for your comprehension train to get to the 'Iwastherealreadylongago' station.

Woopee do. I'm sure the Bible mentions many things, but that doesn't mean that it provides any understanding of those things.

I suspect it might, actually. The problem could be on your end.

The Bible says that the stars can fall to Earth. Do you think this is actually possible?

Yes!

Because it isn't. Stars are massive and Earth would be engulfed by one if it got that close. And the star's massive gravity would rip the earth apart.

No. You don't know how big they are. Nor what they are made of. Nor how far they are! That is just for starters. God was right all along.

The Bible is full of claims made by the people who wrote it long ago - people who did not understand the reality of our universe.

False. God gets it. You do not, as of yet.

Now, is there any evidence that they were not?

Well, unless you know they were why ask others to prove they were not?? Just fess up you have no idea. Or....show evidence that they were!

That's not what you said before! What's the matter? Don't you comprehend how your own DSP idea works?

I think you got lost. Don't blame me. I do not change my tune mid song.

lol, you make me laugh. You got anything more than vague nautical threats? Because you certainly don't have any evidence. My position is open to attack and has withstood every attack you have made (and I'm not speaking metaphorically here, I'm speaking literally). Your position has crumbled to every attack, and you just repeat the same tired defences.

My position has your surrounded. Past and future. Literally. I can likely add deep space also. My flood made the flippin sea where your ship sunk!

 

[Elendur]

Objective means what? Who would you expect to view the stuff at the time of the flood the same as science now?? Yet we have the record of the actual people that were in the flood, and what they chatted about, recorded, did, etc!

You would get answers from reading the definitions.

Proof
Objective evidence
Subjective evidence

(Throw in some epistemology as well)

 

[Tiberius]

False. A bit over 6000 years. The rest is present state dreaming into the past. That is like opium dreams.

You refuse to even see the point, don't you? The very definition of close-minded.

That agree with me! So?

That make no mention of a worldwide flood! So there!

Deposition and plant growth were FAST. They can't help prop up your dreamland.

Your assumptions can't prop up yours.

I have history and God and His word, and all the evidences of science. It doesn't get better than that!

No, you have old stories. There is not a single shred of science that supports any of what you say.

But if there is any science, let's see you produce it. Show me somet science that supports a DSP.

False! Yes they started decaying, but in many cases (except for your missing stuff that was never here at all in proper amounts) all that means is that the daughter material was added to by the decay for 4400 years! So?

FALSE! There's more than 4400 years of decay products!

A fool pretend to know what is not known. Science is like that.

Romans 1:22, dad.

Right...so?? Name one rock we can look at? Where was it found? What country? How much daughter of what sort is in there now? Looks like you need more than tennis balls...let's do this thing.

Any rock dated by Uranium-lead dating.

Man, you really don't get this science thing, do you?

No. I just wait for your comprehension train to get to the 'Iwastherealreadylongago' station.

Who was already there? You? me? Nah, the WORLD was there long ago, and I just look at what it tells me about such long ago times.

I suspect it might, actually. The problem could be on your end.

So if I mention ANYTHING that is referred to in the Bible, you can tell me how the Bible gives an understanding of how that thing works?

Yes!

So, you think that a STAR can sit on the surface of earth.

Geez, no wonder you are so wrong about the state of the past. You're desperately trying to shoehorn the real world into your beliefs!

No. You don't know how big they are. Nor what they are made of. Nor how far they are! That is just for starters. God was right all along.

Yeah, I can't even begin to tell you how wrong you are.

False. God gets it. You do not, as of yet.

But the Bible wasn't written by God. it was written by people living in villages where the wheel was considered fancy technology.

Well, unless you know they were why ask others to prove they were not?? Just fess up you have no idea. Or....show evidence that they were!

You seem to have trouble with the concept of "burden of proof". I've already given lots of evidence that the laws were the same in the past.

All you;ve been able to provide is, "Well, my interpretation of the Bible says the laws were different, and I have some old stories that say the same thing, so science must be wrong!"

That's a pretty weak argument, dad. I've seen more strength in a wet tissue.

I think you got lost. Don't blame me. I do not change my tune mid song.

Yeah you do.

You said that it was impossible to look at the way the tennis balls are now and figure out anything about the past.

But, dad, didn't you say, back in post 806, that MAYBE you could get some information about the past state of the balls by looking at the way they are now?

So you;ve gone from "maybe you can" to "It's completely impossible and you can't!"

So yeah, you;re flip flopping.

My position has your surrounded. Past and future. Literally. I can likely add deep space also. My flood made the flippin sea where your ship sunk!

Yeah, you tell yourself that if it makes you feel better.

 

[dad]

You would get answers from reading the definitions.

Proof
Objective evidence
Subjective evidence

(Throw in some epistemology as well)

You have no prooof of the same state past that you claim. Objective and subjective are relative terms in practice of science.

 

[dad]

You refuse to even see the point, don't you? The very definition of close-minded.

What was it you thought the point was? Maybe we should rent a psychic to probe your mind?

That make no mention of a worldwide flood! So there!

Legends of a flood abound.

No, you have old stories. There is not a single shred of science that supports any of what you say.

Or what it says! So where does that leave it?

But if there is any science, let's see you produce it. Show me somet science that supports a DSP.

All science. You name it. I have never seen any science that opposes it.

FALSE! There's more than 4400 years of decay products!

Where? Sample??

Romans 1:22, dad.

Man's wisdom is foolishness to God.

Any rock dated by Uranium-lead dating.

No such thing as dates from that just dreams. Do you think that that method dates stuff say 5000 years old?? No. It is ALL in fantasy land, and a gross misreading of where isotopes came from.

Who was already there? You? me? Nah, the WORLD was there long ago, and I just look at what it tells me about such long ago times.

No. You look at how it is, and dream how it was based on that alone, while ignoring God and observers...on purpose no less.

So, you think that a STAR can sit on the surface of earth.

Well, I think that demons have stars. So I suspect that a star may be more like the star of Bethlehem, than our sun. Remember, it guided men to a house!

Geez, no wonder you are so wrong about the state of the past. You're desperately trying to shoehorn the real world into your beliefs!

Your real world doesn't exist in deep space.

Yeah, I can't even begin to tell you how wrong you are.

I agree. You can't. Cause I am right.

But the Bible wasn't written by God. it was written by people living in villages where the wheel was considered fancy technology.

Man still has nothing like the wheels Ezekiel saw! -God's wheels. God's wisdom is high above man.

You seem to have trouble with the concept of "burden of proof". I've already given lots of evidence that the laws were the same in the past.

No. You did no such thing. Nor will you.

You said that it was impossible to look at the way the tennis balls are now and figure out anything about the past.

Right. So?

But, dad, didn't you say, back in post 806, that MAYBE you could get some information about the past state of the balls by looking at the way they are now?

Right. Some meaning maybe how much water trickled down since the time of the tilt. If we observed the water falling a certain time, then we can know that a certain amount fell! Simple.

So yeah, you;re flip flopping.

Not is any way is that remotely close to a third cousin of the truth. We can know certain things about this state for as long as this state existed and we saw stuff. For example if we know that something decays into daughter material, at a certain rate, and we know this state existed for say, 4400 years, then we can say that a certain amount of the daughter material was produced by decay!

I am starting too wonder if you grasp some of these concepts.