Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
LOL --- if I didn't think you were Consol, I'd give you one of my three favorite replies:By the by, is there anything you won't believe? (apart from science that is)
Care to plod through over 1,084,000 posts to see what I believe when it comes to science?
And when you consider the other 10% is repetition of questions, repetition of answers, QVs, ad lib answers and a few miscellaneous posts, that leaves about .002% basic doctrine.Considering that at least 90% of those posts are nothing but you counting, there's actually not much to plod through
Does 'dark matter/energy' constitute an explanation? It doesn't matter if it's an untestable one, but does it count as an explanation?Does 'Goddidit' constitute an explanation? It doesn't matter if it's an untestable one, but does it count as an explanation?
In that respect, is it a scientific hypothesis, albeit a woefully poor one?
What about 'dark matter/energy'?
[*]There is very little science I actually disagree with.
Natural = the falsifiable
supernatural = the unfalsifiable
at least that's my take
If it can be demonstrated that the universe was formed by another source other than God then wouldnt God be falsifiable? Unless you are convince there is no other source.I can't find any obvious problem with these definitions, so they're instantly my favourite.
Does 'Goddidit' constitute an explanation? It doesn't matter if it's an untestable one, but does it count as an explanation?
In that respect, is it a scientific hypothesis, albeit a woefully poor one?
And when you consider the other 10% is repetition of questions, repetition of answers, QVs, ad lib answers and a few miscellaneous posts, that leaves about .002% basic doctrine.
So, what you're saying is that 99.998% of what you post is either pointless counting, the same asked-and-answered questions asked again ad infinitum, you own opinions posted ad infinitum, posts of you quoting yourself, and stuff you make up rather than admit you don't know, and miscellaneous irrelevence?
Assuming that your "basic doctrine" is even remotely accurate, where's the incentive for anyone to plod through the rest?
You can believe what you like (which you obviously do)LOL --- if I didn't think you were Consol, I'd give you one of my three favorite replies:
1. 1,084,000 90% of which is you on the counting forum, 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9,
- Care to plod through over 1,084,000 posts to see what I believe when it comes to science?
- There is very little science I actually disagree with.
- Scientists are [one of] God's gifts to mankind.
Perhaps you meant ad nauseum.
I don't get it.
Whoooooooooosh can also be the sound of someone running away from the question.
If it can be demonstrated that the universe was formed by another source other than God then wouldnt God be falsifiable? Unless you are convince there is no other source.
You tell me if it's accurate, Nathan; instead of acting innocent.Assuming that your "basic doctrine" is even remotely accurate...
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?