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.
Please research the subject before you say nonsense.
How do you 'peer review into stellar bodies, their composition, mass, density, size, etc.'?Please research the subject before you say nonsense. There was a lot of research and peer review into stellar bodies, their composition, mass, density, size, etc. And all this research and new evidence, such as the fact that Pluto is only one of around 70,000 similar stellar bodies in its region, including some larger ones, is why the IAU had a vote on the matter.
How do you peer review evidence of composition of stellar bodies? How do you peer review findings of thousands of stellar bodies the size of Pluto? How do you peer review findings of the mass, density, and size of said objects? If you can't understand how those findings can and were peer reviewed, then why are you even talking about peer review as though you know anything about the subject?How do you 'peer review into stellar bodies, their composition, mass, density, size, etc.'?
I thought someone does that first, then it's peer reviewed.
I have a trunk full of personal anecdotes as well. In building 503 where I worked, all the test chemicals went through the peer review process. "Of the 19 brain tumor victims who have been identified by Amoco...."You think peer review is easy? Wow... you have obviously never seen, the viciousness and rabid attacks your work gets by your own 'peers' and 'colleagues.'
Are cars biological organisms that inherit traits and self-replicate with variation? If not, then as I said before, you've no idea what you're saying.
I don't even get the point of this post. Are you saying that sex offenders have no descendants or relatives?
See, here's the problem. If you and I go to a grave yard, and we dig up people who look more like you than me, It doesn't mean we've just found some of your relatives.
No matter how many graves we open, and no matter how many scientists gasp! at the similarities. No matter how many "peer reviews" approve the methodology. I don't care if your LAST NAME is on the headstones, and I don't care if you have WRITTEN DOCUMENTATION that a SAM SMITH was indeed your great-grandfather.
If you say that SAM SMITH was a sex offender I am NOT going to accuse you of being a descendant based on the bone structure of the corpse. So don't try the "relatives" ploy. Even if I'm motivated to, I won't go there.
And you should have picked up on this by now, New research is subject to trashing over time. I get to use it because you believe in it. But I only trust the old research that's been properly shot down.
As long as you realize that your opinion doesn't change reality.I have a trunk full of personal anecdotes as well.
If these bots made of the same or similar material, constructed in the same manner, and behave in a similar way, and no other EMPIRICAL, VERIFIABLE evidence points them being made at different times, it would be reasonable to assume they had a common origin, yes. Point being?I can change the illustration into self replicating nanobots from different countries if you insist on a better model. Just because this group of nano-bots have the same structure as this other group of nano-bots, does this prove they have a common origin?
What if the Chinese group replicates in a new and different way. Then months later Nanobots from Russia begin to replicate the same way. The two countries are side by side and a 100% accurate trail of paperwork PROVES that first one appeared, then the other.
The two sources are 1/4 mile apart straddling the border.
The two samples are 1 month apart.
First China.
Then Russia.
Do you have proof of a common origin?
You guys are truly the ultimate skeptics. You're saying then that morphology, genetic evidence, names, documents, or any observation is good enough for you to link someone to a relative?? How do you even believe your parents are related to you then?Just that I don't have enough proof to convict yet.
In that they are descendants of Adam and Noah, sure. But no proof that any DNA has passed between them in 10,000 years. No matter how similar.But you would say the skeletons were human and therefore related.
I don't know if it's just me but you seem to be making less and less the more you write. Are you saying that we are all Adam's descendants (therefore all related) but we're not related because genes haven't passed between every single human and every other human in existence?In that they are descendants of Adam and Noah, sure. But no proof that any DNA has passed between them in 10,000 years. No matter how similar.
You guys are truly the ultimate skeptics. You're saying then that morphology, genetic evidence, names, documents, or any observation is good enough for you to link someone to a relative?? How do you even believe your parents are related to you then?
If only you would apply this level of skepticism and required this rigorous evidence to support your belief in your deity...
So, you don't believe your parents are your parents, then. Good to know.LOL...Good Point! In some cases...children find they are not, Dude.
???That can take minutes. I'll time it...
In that they are descendants of Adam and Noah, sure. But no proof that any DNA has passed between them in 10,000 years. No matter how similar.
You guys are truly the ultimate skeptics. You're saying then that morphology, genetic evidence, names, documents, or any observation is good enough for you to link someone to a relative?? How do you even believe your parents are related to you then?
As long as you realize that your opinion doesn't change reality.
If these bots made of the same or similar material, constructed in the same manner, and behave in a similar way, and no other EMPIRICAL, VERIFIABLE evidence points them being made at different times, it would be reasonable to assume they had a common origin, yes. Point being?
Baby mix ups are a statical reality.So, you don't believe your parents are your parents, then. Good to know.
Baby mix ups are a statical reality.
Is it just because I'm sick at the moment, or is this one of the most incoherent threads ever?
Alright. Then, you're in agreement that it is indeed reasonable and logical that we would've reached this conclusion based on the currently available evidence.Perfect. But as I said. One was built in Russia. The other China.
There is no connection between the two teams.
And there is nothing wrong with your analysis.
Your just wrong...that's all.
Same with Evolution.
There's nothing wrong with your analysis of the situation.
Nobody set out to fool you.
It didn't happen the way you think it did.
Some of the evidence points toward an evolutionary leap
where one species changes into another.
Or chemicals congeal to form life.
But it didn't happen that way.
You've just reached the wrong conclusion.
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?