Does 'Goddidit' constitute an explanation? (2)

[Doveaman]

I don't see the sense in applying 'God did it' to the EU theory and then complaining endlessly that the standard model doesn't have enough evidence to back it up (and ignoring that it does). If you're going to resort to 'God did it', why bother asking for evidence at all?

Because God did it with electricity, and I have plenty of evidence for both.

 

[Nostromo]

EU predictions are far more consistent with observations than Big Bang.

False.

It doesn't have the ongoing problem of always being [/COLOR][/COLOR]baffled, bewildered, and befuddled by new observations, or lack thereof, as Big Bang theology does.

False.

Because God did it with electricity, and I have plenty of evidence for both.

False.
Let's move on to the next hysterical misinterpretation of a news article please.

 

[AV1611VET]

If you're going to resort to 'God did it', why bother asking for evidence at all?

So he can avoid what I go through.

I don't ask for evidence, but get it shoved at me right and left, then I have to make additional posts saying, "evidence can take a hike"; and around and around we go.

 

[Doveaman]

False.

False.

False.

Let's move on to the next hysterical misinterpretation of a news article please.

Don't you mean 'let's sweep the truth under the carpet and then pretend it's not there'?

 

[Nostromo]

No, I mean you're wrong. Feel free to show me that you're not.

 

[Nostromo]

So he can avoid what I go through.

I don't ask for evidence, but get it shoved at me right and left, then I have to make additional posts saying, "evidence can take a hike"; and around and around we go.

Surely you can appreciate this from another perspective?
Saying that observed phenomena are wrong when they disagree with ancient texts is a little odd.

 

[Nathan Poe]

So he can avoid what I go through.

I don't ask for evidence, but get it shoved at me right and left, then I have to make additional posts saying, "evidence can take a hike"; and around and around we go.

So, you're against evidence in all forms? Or do you just resent it because it proves your more asinine ideas to be asinine?

 

[Nathan Poe]

Don't you mean 'let's sweep the truth under the carpet and then pretend it's not there'?

The whole point is that he wasn't reacting to the truth.

 

[BananaSlug]

Oh come on, you mean you've never seen multiple independent clusters of multiple independent galaxies all separated by dozens of parsecs all just HAPPEN TO BE distorted in the exact same way so as to provide a (purely coincidental, naturally) ring shaped distortion pattern completely consistent with gravitational distortion of spacetime?

You silly mathematheologian!

Ha!

 

[Ellinas]

Electric Universe is outdated! The latest Creationist theory is:...............tataaaa!!!!!!

Steam powered Universe! Now let me see all you heathen atheists prove that one wrong!!!!!

 

[Nostromo]

Observations confirm Steam powered Universe:
SPACE.com -- Water in Space More Abundant than Expected

 

[pgp_protector]

Hmm
Ice / Water / Steam three transitions of H2O
Father / Son / Holy Spirit

God Did It.

 

[Cabal]

Electric Universe is outdated! The latest Creationist theory is:...............tataaaa!!!!!!

Steam powered Universe! Now let me see all you heathen atheists prove that one wrong!!!!!

steamPUNK universe for the definite win

*retrieves longcoat*

 

[Cabal]

So he can avoid what I go through.

I don't ask for evidence, but get it shoved at me right and left, then I have to make additional posts saying, "evidence can take a hike"; and around and around we go.

He can avoid being given evidence by asking for it?

I suppose that might make sense to a creationist.....

 

[BananaSlug]

You obviously don't understand how the Universe works, do you?

Of course we don't. We just spend our entire life making up stories so we don't have to believe in God. I'm having too much fun being a sinner!

EU predictions are far more consistent with observations than Big Bang. It doesn't have the ongoing problem of always being baffled, bewildered, and befuddled by new observations, or lack thereof, as Big Bang theology does.

So how about explaining the blackbody spectrum observed by the COBE satellite in the cosmic microwave background radiation?

How about answering Cabal's question: "Care to explain why a whole bunch of different galaxies separated by really quite large gaps all just happen to distort in exactly the same way so as to form not just a distinctive overall ring pattern but also how these ring patterns are explained both qualitatively and quantitatively by GR?"

But He still did it anyway. And if He did it, then He is true, even if you can't observe Him doing it. It's not His fault you can't see Him doing it. That's your fault. You need to look around more.

Tell us where to look and what we are looking for.

Care to demonstrate how space can stretch, or bend, or warp?

MIT Scientists Find Evidence Of Long-Sought Space Warping - The Tech

Gravity Probe B: Testing Einstein's Universe

 

[Cabal]

]You obviously don't understand how the Universe works, do you?

By asking that question you have clearly indicated you have no idea how science or proper debate works

EU predictions are far more consistent with observations than Big Bang.

Utter rubbish. EU barely predicts anything.

It doesn't have the ongoing problem of always being baffled, bewildered, and befuddled by new observations, or lack thereof, as Big Bang theology does.

In other words, EU is intellectually dishonest as well as wrong.

But He still did it anyway. And if He did it, then He is true, even if you can't observe Him doing it.

Which means the levels of confidence some Christians place in him and claim it as an equal point during a science debate are sorely misplaced.

It's not His fault you can't see Him doing it. That's your fault. You need to look around more.

Why would I look for something that can't be observed?

Besides, the guy's allegedly EVERYWHERE, how hard can this nonsense be?

As I've said elsewhere, once you start having to just believe really hard, Disney style, for something to become true, then it is no longer empirical science.

Care to demonstrate how space can stretch, or bend, or warp?

Did you miss the gravitational lensing photo? I think it's been posted enough times.

Now stop dodging the question.

 

[Doveaman]

Electric Universe is outdated!

If that's the case, then so are you because you live in it.

The latest Creationist theory is:...............tataaaa!!!!!!

It's not a creationists theory. It's science. Cosmology, to be precise.

 

[Cabal]

If that's the case, then so are you because you live in it.

And I bet you think evolution causes eugenics also.

It's not a creationists theory. It's science. Cosmology, to be precise.

"Goddiditwithelectricity" is your catchphrase, and you have the gall to claim this?

Transparent creationist shoehorning.

 

[BananaSlug]

No, it's a FACT that Dawkins wrote it.

Dawkins does not speak for the whole atheist community. While I may agree with what he says (see my previous post), "eugenics" in a modern sense means trying to breed a "perfect" race. He merely means that if it is possible to use selective breeding to create the different breeds of dogs that we have then it would be possible to do the same with humans.

Smart people have smart kids. The question is how much is genetic and how much is learned.

Possiblity =/= a good idea.

 

[Skaloop]

No, it's a FACT that Dawkins wrote it.

And it's a fact that Hitler said this: "I believe today that I am acting in the sense of the Almighty Creator. By warding off the Jews I am fighting for the Lord's work."