Who would you say did that to dad? and why were they allowed to get away with it?
he has been damaged, in my opinion, beyond repair.
Upvote
0
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.
Who would you say did that to dad? and why were they allowed to get away with it?driewerf to dad:
dad doesn't understand the questions. He doesn't understand what science is, let alone what it is telling us, so the questions he's asked about the universe don't mean anything to him. All that happens in his brain when he reads those questions is 'abort, retry, fail?'
No, who said a PHYSICAL constant was the same before the split?? Why or how could that be?? Light in a physical only shere, or area, or universe, that was also composed of the spiritual element as well as the physical. That means the whole balance, and result is not the same. So, the light that must exist in a physical only state would reflect the laws, and forces, and limitations imposed by existing in that state. All we see is the bit that is here and can exist here. The differences are far beyond merely remixing the physical only...it involves what is not here now the spiritual. Get it? So, some properties of eternal light we will find in the book that talks of the spiritual also future or past. ...You claim light was in a different state. I wonder still in what way it was different. I suggested some possibilities to make it easier for you. So, ok, the Planck constant was the same before the split as after. So gain, in what way was light different?
You really fail to answer all the questions.
driewerf to dad:
dad doesn't understand the questions. He doesn't understand what science is, let alone what it is telling us, so the questions he's asked about the universe don't mean anything to him. All that happens in his brain when he reads those questions is 'abort, retry, fail?'
The people where he grew up, almost certainly. Probably starting with his family and immediate social circle and extending to the whole community where he grew up, which is one of many such communities living in certain states in america that are strictly controlled by church and fundamental religion. Why are they allowed to get away with it? Beats me. Personally I think they should all be given psychiatric treatment.Who would you say did that to dad? and why were they allowed to get away with it?
he has been damaged, in my opinion, beyond repair.
No, who said a PHYSICAL constant was the same before the split??
"The Planck constant (denoted h), also called Planck's constant, is a physical constant used to describe the sizes of quanta of action in quantum mechanics, specifically as angular momentum in the atomic structure. "
Planck constant - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Need I say more..????
Not sure who you are addressing. Or what you think someone needs to look up. Work on clarity.
Apparently, you think you have some point in DNA. Care to spit it out???
All that prevents anyone from getting your point, is that you up and forgot to actually say it. Scared??
Nope. That was a quote from wiki or some place. It was used to make a point. That point, which you apprently missed, was that, since the PC YOU mentioned was merely a physical constant, it did NOT apply.
Euh.... You did.
Here:
You toss it out, and say it, yes..so?? In what way are they related? Dental 'structures', and jaw?? DNA?? Can you explain more the similarities?..
A hyrax and elephant's DNA is extremely similiar. Percentage wise I don't know. But they also use the two's very similiar jaw and dental strucutures to assertain the two are related species. I said this in plain English like five times already and you ignore it.
Apparently not enough education to imagine a little trunk on this thing. Maybe you can overwhelm us with evidence, so as to make that easy.What degree from what college do you have again? Just to check credentials.
They share ninety percent DNA.
They also share many similiar features such as tusks(they're small on the hyrax), padded feet, and jaw structures.
Some believe that sirenians(manatees, dugongs and sea cows) are closer in lineage, however. But this lends to the idea that animals dot need to look entirely like their relatives.
It's all avaliable on wikipedia. You're a big boy; you can look this info up for yourself, and it's actually from credible sources, unlike this dodwell joker.
Ho hum. Kids, Isn't it time to not believe a lying word these dreamers say to begin with?
Longest run-on sentence ever...
I'm a very level headed, logical guy.Full of truth, though.
I'm a very level headed, logical guy.
I can see truth when it pokes its nose out and although there are some pieces of evidence to support evolution, it is still an assumption with much more guess work interlaced into it.
Faith in God, well thats just plain simple...
It's when people combine the two that things get haywire and I won't go too deep into that.
I'm a very level headed, logical guy.
I can see truth when it pokes its nose out and although there are some pieces of evidence to support evolution, it is still an assumption with much more guess work interlaced into it.
Faith in God, well thats just plain simple...
It's when people combine the two that things get haywire and I won't go too deep into that.
I will not deny that species on this planet evolve, because they most certainly do, whether it's to ward off predators, vestigial structures, more food, better survival, etc.
But the leaps and bounds it take to get from a chimp to a human, are enormous.
But you have got to imagine that there had to be even more species out there that were similar as well but didnt adapt in time and now they are extinct.
Perhaps they are what we are finding, when there is no actual linkage.
Review said:Even more evidence for evolution comes from the "bad designs" of animals and plants, which, Dawkins observes, look nothing like de novo creations of an efficient celestial engineer. His favorite example--and mine--is the recurrent laryngeal nerve, which runs from the brain to the larynx. In mammals it doesn't take the direct route (a matter of a few inches) but makes a curiously long detour, running from the head to the heart, looping around the aorta and then doubling back up to the neck. In the giraffe, this detour involves traversing that enormous neck twice--adding about fifteen feet of superfluous nerve. Anyone who's dissected an animal in biology class will surely agree with Dawkins's conclusion: "the overwhelming impression you get from surveying any part of the innards of a large animal is that it is a mess! Not only would a designer never have made a mistake like that nervous detour; a decent designer would never have perpetuated anything of the shambles that is the criss-crossing maze of arteries, veins, nerves, intestines, wads of fat and muscle, mesenteries and more."
Creationists often object to this sort of argument, saying that it's not scientific but theological. God is inscrutable, they claim, so how could we possibly know how he would or would not design creatures? But this misses the point, for the "bad design" we see is precisely what we'd expect if evolution were true. The laryngeal nerve takes that long detour because, in our fishy ancestors, it was lined up behind a blood vessel, with both nerve and vessel servicing the gills. As the artery moved backward during its evolution to the mammalian aorta, the nerve was constrained to move behind it, although its target (the larynx, an evolutionary descendant of the gill arch) remained up in the neck. If you insist that such designs reflect God's plan, then you must admit that his plan was to make things look as if they had evolved.
Of course there's going to be flaws, since evidence gets destroyed over time, and other such things which make dealing with the distant past so difficult. But just because we don't have every single minute detail doesn't mean we're pretty much correct. You don't need every single frame of a movie to get the gist behind it.Its always gonna be an argument. Until Hellfire rains down upon this earth there is the greatest chance that there wont be any actual physical, tangible truth that tells the entire story without flaw or contradiction.
I will not deny that species on this planet evolve, because they most certainly do, whether it's to ward off predators, vestigial structures, more food, better survival, etc.
But the leaps and bounds it take to get from a chimp to a human, are enormous.
But you have got to imagine that there had to be even more species out there that were similar as well but didnt adapt in time and now they are extinct.
Perhaps they are what we are finding, when there is no actual linkage.
Its always gonna be an argument. Until Hellfire rains down upon this earth there is the greatest chance that there wont be any actual physical, tangible truth that tells the entire story without flaw or contradiction.
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?