• 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.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

Moon was Created

FishFace

Senior Veteran
Jan 12, 2007
4,535
169
37
✟28,130.00
Faith
Atheist
Since you took the trouble to mention conceptual snips, I will add a few words.

Why is the center of the earth hot. [That one was good, I am still amazed at the failure of anyone to be able to back up the wild claims of science. In fact, I definitely now lean toward no hot core][/quote]

So... why does it get hotter the deeper down you go, I wonder...

(Don't answer that - it was a rhetorical question.)

[Yes, I have done that on another forum as well, and the more it is looked at, the more is really is the only answer that fits all the evidences and the bible]


Well, there's only one sane answer - but you didn't hit it.

Water on mars proof of flood and merge
[Craters on moon, and planets caused by flood ejecta, yes, why not!]


Because it's barmy?

No Gravity before flood.

[No one even came close to making any half decent case at all there]


You can't even show that gravity was the same in 1803 - baby steps, eh, dad?
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,856,330
52,690
Guam
✟5,168,353.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Ya know, Christmas has come and gone and the only thing the scientists on this board wanted for a present was a Creationist who bothered to understand science and logic.

And why would that be, Thaumaturgy? So we can be like them? So we can look at the Horsehead Nebula and say, "Look what nature hath wrought?" instead of, "Look what God hath wrought?" So we can look at Genesis 1 and say, "Nope, didn't happen?" So we look at the Flood and say, "Nope, didn't happen?" So we can turn our backs on Jonah in the whale's belly, Daniel in the lion's den, Daniel's friends in the fiery furnace, the writing on the wall, the Red Sea parting, the Star of Bethlehem, Jesus' virgin birth, Jesus' resurrection, etc.? Or so we can pass a cross or crosses driving to work and get that vexation feeling? So we can think this good ol' US of A is good only because of her resources?

Just to name a few?

No, thank you.
 
Upvote 0

thaumaturgy

Well-Known Member
Nov 17, 2006
7,541
882
✟12,333.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
And why would that be, Thaumaturgy? So we can be like them?

You mean capable of the debate? Yeah, sure. But we all know how much you value intelligence. Celsus saw your game nearly 2 millenia ago.

Celsus said:
"the following are the rules laid down by them. Let no one come to us who has been instructed, or who is wise or prudent (for such qualifications are deemed evil by us); but if there be any ignorant, or unintelligent, or uninstructed, or foolish persons, let them come with confidence." (SOURCE) Celsus quoted in Origen

So we look at the Flood and say, "Nope, didn't happen?"

Wouldn't want you to face what reality tells you. Perish the thought.


Or so we can pass a cross or crosses driving to work and get that vexation feeling?

I bet if you had to pass nothing but Hindu temples and Mosques on your way to work you'd feel somewhat vexed in your supposed "Christian Nation".

You don't understand that when you plaster your world with YOUR stuff you sometimes make it seem to those who are NOT like you that they don't really have a stake in THIS place of yours.

That isn't where I want to live. But then of course I can actually defend my thoughts in many cases so I'm not so scared of "The Others" that I have to make a cocoon of ignorance around me.
 
Upvote 0

thaumaturgy

Well-Known Member
Nov 17, 2006
7,541
882
✟12,333.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
It's about time they started taking notes!

22595076.jpg

"Yes...I see. And how does that make you feel?"
 
Upvote 0

dad

Undefeated!
Site Supporter
Jan 17, 2005
44,905
1,259
✟25,524.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Why didn't you answer the question? Clearly going to the moon would be an amazing experience - that's not guessing, it's obvious.
Guess I am not one to pretend I know. Personally, you couldn't pay me to get in one of those monkey suits, wasting billions of dollars the world needs for other things, and get in a cramped spacecraft, eating out of a toothpaste tube, and having weird ways to go to the bathroom.
I plan to go in style, and see the real attractions there, which are not on the surface.
From the evidence of how most if not all were impacted on the moon, I suspect any man would feel a spiritual influence, though.



No, dad, it's real. But it's a concept, not an object.
So are spirits.

Not that I would expect you to understand non-literal language! It doesn't cut spirits - it just cuts them out - out of the equation of the rational person's mind.
No, it only thinks it does, it is not really a ghostbuster any more than you.

If the only evidence you have for something you don't know exists already can be explained by something you do know exists already, then it's more sensible to go with what you know. Is it not?
Depends on who knows what. In your case, you don't know, so naturally must grope in the dark for present natural only explanations. That is fine, just don't pretend it is more than that.

Or, when I throw a ball into the air and it lands at your feet, would you accept my explanation that an invisible pink unicorn, not gravity, caused it to fall.
Not in this universe state. We know how it works.



Can you tell me what it doesn't work on, and provide me with evidence that it doesn't? Of course not; all you can do is bluster about spirits. You have no evidence.
The imaginary razor, I think you are still referring to here? That works only on natural universe conceptions, such as the 'scientific' method. It can't cut out of the box!! Pitiful little PO toy that it is.



Way to prove my point! I didn't say anything about the spiritual. "Spiritual" is a word that denotes MORE THAN ONE THING! Only one meaning is "the" spiritual.
OK, so what is the point if any? Of course there is more than one spirit.



So if you want to believe in spirits under a mountain, give me some evidence. Have you forgotten where this started? You tried to tell me that spiritual feelings on top of mountains are caused by spirits in the mountain. I say, "poppycock - give me some evidence."
Doesn't matter if there is an angel on your shoulder, you couldn't see it. The place is not important. Since spirits anywhere are out of your depth, all you can do is try and whack them away with an imaginary razor. Good luck with that.


And there we have it. The admission. You haven't observed anything spiritual whatsoever - you've observed physical effects, explainable by physical things.
The spiritual is observed by it's effects on the physical. This is news? Ghosts are invisible. Angels as well, unless they want to be seen. But then, you would not know they really were spirits. As I say, it really is out of the league of science of the natural.



How different did I say it was? Not very. The value of g was about 9.5 instead of the present day 9.8 or so.
Well, then if light or gravity had some tiny difference, who cares? Gravity was still here a few hundred years ago.



Why, because it's so darned funny! You obviously don't appreciate what a source of entertainment you are, dad; don't put yourself down.
OK, so you raise boinking from thread to thread, because you find the concept funny. Fine.

Not really. All that impacts me when I look up is the beauty of the stars and the sky. Why do you need anything other than beauty to give people the same feeling on the moon?

Why assume that beauty is the only conductor of inspiration? It is one source, yes. There are many others. Do you think the moon surface is beautiful? On the contrary, some mentioned how plain it looks compared to earth. It seems that the evidence suggests that it was not beauty alone that was the source of the impacts on the moon.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,856,330
52,690
Guam
✟5,168,353.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I bet if you had to pass nothing but Hindu temples and Mosques on your way to work you'd feel somewhat vexed in your supposed "Christian Nation".

I bet you're right.

You don't understand that when you plaster your world with YOUR stuff you sometimes make it seem to those who are NOT like you that they don't really have a stake in THIS place of yours.

This place is actually not mine --- I'm just a pilgrim here, an ambassador.

That isn't where I want to live. But then of course I can actually defend my thoughts in many cases so I'm not so scared of "The Others" that I have to make a cocoon of ignorance around me.

You guys can get the answers to your science questions anywhere; but when you pour oil into water, don't expect us Christians to make a mixture into a solution (or is it the other way around?).
 
Upvote 0

dad

Undefeated!
Site Supporter
Jan 17, 2005
44,905
1,259
✟25,524.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
So... why does it get hotter the deeper down you go, I wonder...
That is only true, as far as evidence and observation goes, to a small degree.


Well, there's only one sane answer - but you didn't hit it.
Tell us what that might be.




You can't even show that gravity was the same in 1803 - baby steps, eh, dad?

I don't feel the need, as we have plenty of records. Let someone that feels there was no gravity worry about that. Relax.
 
Upvote 0

thaumaturgy

Well-Known Member
Nov 17, 2006
7,541
882
✟12,333.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
I bet you're right.

[BIBLE]Luke 6:31[/BIBLE]


You guys can get the answers to your science questions anywhere; but when you pour oil into water, don't expect us Christians to make a mixture into a solution (or is it the other way around?).

Oil and water will make an emulsion with sufficient shearing.
 
Upvote 0

thaumaturgy

Well-Known Member
Nov 17, 2006
7,541
882
✟12,333.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
That is only true, as far as evidence and observation goes, to a small degree.

Show us where the temperature levels off and starts getting cooler the deeper you go.

In the interim, maybe you could learn something from people like Schlumberger who make a ton of money off of knowing about the geothermal gradient.

Or would learning from someone who knows something be anathema?

"the following are the rules laid down by them. Let no one come to us who has been instructed, or who is wise or prudent (for such qualifications are deemed evil by us); but if there be any ignorant, or unintelligent, or uninstructed, or foolish persons, let them come with confidence." (SOURCE) Celsus quoted in Origen


As I told AV, people learned your "game" long ago. They've known how your kind operates for nearly two millenia.:)
 
Upvote 0

thaumaturgy

Well-Known Member
Nov 17, 2006
7,541
882
✟12,333.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Okay, thanks. What did you get for Christmas?

Christopher Hitchens "God is not Great" and a copy of the U.S. Constitution.

Actually no, I didn't get those for Christmas. I actually got a 160G pocket drive and a trip to the Nixon Library in Yorba Linda.
 
Upvote 0

FishFace

Senior Veteran
Jan 12, 2007
4,535
169
37
✟28,130.00
Faith
Atheist
Guess I am not one to pretend I know. Personally, you couldn't pay me to get in one of those monkey suits, wasting billions of dollars the world needs for other things, and get in a cramped spacecraft, eating out of a toothpaste tube, and having weird ways to go to the bathroom.

Doesn't really matter how you get there - the end result is that you're on an entire different lump of rock then you've ever been on before. There isn't a single noise to be heard, the sky looks incredible. If you can't imagine that and think it would be amazing, you must be heartless.

So are spirits.

Spirits are concepts? You mean they don't have a real existence apart from in people's minds? Well, I'd agree with that.

No, it only thinks it does, it is not really a ghostbuster any more than you.

Well, it does for as long as you don't present any evidence. For the same reason as it cuts out that invisible elephant in your wardrobe.

Depends on who knows what. In your case, you don't know, so naturally must grope in the dark for present natural only explanations. That is fine, just don't pretend it is more than that.

Please, if you have evidence, state your case. But you've had 19 pages to do so and still haven't so I'm not holding my breath!

Not in this universe state. We know how it works.

How do you know that it is not an invisible pink unicorn that caused the ball to fall?

The imaginary razor, I think you are still referring to here? That works only on natural universe conceptions, such as the 'scientific' method. It can't cut out of the box!! Pitiful little PO toy that it is.

Sorry dad, but Ockham's razor is a philosophical tool, nothing explicitly to do with physics. It finds applications most frequently in science, but also in philosophy of mind and of religion, as well as other places.
You can't just chuck out one of most fundamental bits of epistemology known to modern men on a whim.

OK, so what is the point if any? Of course there is more than one spirit.

When one feels spiritual there is no necessity for there to be anything spiritual at work. A spiritual feeling can be a purely physical feeling of awe or something similar. That is just how the word is used.

Doesn't matter if there is an angel on your shoulder, you couldn't see it. The place is not important. Since spirits anywhere are out of your depth, all you can do is try and whack them away with an imaginary razor. Good luck with that.

No evidence, then?

The spiritual is observed by it's effects on the physical. This is news? Ghosts are invisible. Angels as well, unless they want to be seen. But then, you would not know they really were spirits. As I say, it really is out of the league of science of the natural.
So how do you know whether a physical effect is caused by something spiritual or physical?

Well, then if light or gravity had some tiny difference, who cares? Gravity was still here a few hundred years ago.

You can't prove it? Shame. So I guess you won't be taking the even more difficult challenge?
I'll throw it out there anyway - prove that, on March 18th, 1794, an invisible pink unicorn did not reverse gravity for 10 seconds, throwing everyone into the air, reverse it back again, and wipe everyone's memories of the event.

Why assume that beauty is the only conductor of inspiration? It is one source, yes. There are many others. Do you think the moon surface is beautiful? On the contrary, some mentioned how plain it looks compared to earth. It seems that the evidence suggests that it was not beauty alone that was the source of the impacts on the moon.

No, it was not just the beauty of the moon - but also of the earth and of the sky.
 
Upvote 0

dad

Undefeated!
Site Supporter
Jan 17, 2005
44,905
1,259
✟25,524.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Show us where the temperature levels off and starts getting cooler the deeper you go.
Since we have never BEEN down more than several miles, how would man and his knowledge know that?
The heat that is claimed is not by observations, but 'guilt by association with other PO theories'. indirect evidences.

In the interim, maybe you could learn something from people like Schlumberger who make a ton of money off of knowing about the geothermal gradient.
Well, I know something of it. It is a surface thing. Can you show a core sample from even a hundred measly miles down?

Or would learning from someone who knows something be anathema?
You are learning here, we would hope, about the silly limitations of your claim, that render it false, as applied to any depth.

As I told AV, people learned your "game" long ago. They've known how your kind operates for nearly two millenia.:)
Excellent, and they better get used to it, we will soon rule in an iron dictatorship with God forever and ever.

Pagans, and worshipers of other gods, and etc. the world has also known for a long time. They also know how God and His people have defeated them over and over and over. Now that we know each other, on with it, man.
 
Upvote 0

dad

Undefeated!
Site Supporter
Jan 17, 2005
44,905
1,259
✟25,524.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Doesn't really matter how you get there - the end result is that you're on an entire different lump of rock then you've ever been on before. There isn't a single noise to be heard, the sky looks incredible. If you can't imagine that and think it would be amazing, you must be heartless.
I am glad that appeals to you. I would find it nice enough if I was teleported there, for coffee. But I am turned off by the whole astronaut thing myself.
If I am going to imagine things about the moon, I'll do it my way. Say, maybe, I get a ride in a royal UFO, something like the Scepter, or flying sapphire throne of God in Eze. I chose to take a whole hour to get there, and sip fine wine, and have good conversation with Daniel, and Eve, and, Marilyn Monroe, and Elvis, and St Paul on the way. I ask some questions about things I have wondered, and get good answers.

Knowing that there is spiritual influence, I decide to ride down a portal to the inhabited area inside the moon. There, I meet departed relatives, and friends, and others, who somehow knew I was coming, and were there to meet me. I go with several of them for a ride on white horses. Flying on a horse would be interesting. We stop by a park to listen to some hot music for a bit, and dance. Then, it's off to have a nice dish of Greek food, or maybe Thai food. A swim in a pool at one of their mansions there goes quite well after that. Somewhat interesting, and taking a bit of getting used to, is how the clothes there are see through. A little like the greek goddesses, and such of old. Everyone there is young looking, as they are immortal, and have chosen the age they would prefer to remain, or, in some cases, return to look.
I could go on, but the thread really isn't about our imagining what the moon will be like.



Spirits are concepts? You mean they don't have a real existence apart from in people's minds? Well, I'd agree with that.

No, they are quite real, but, like your concept, they are not objects that are physical.


Well, it does for as long as you don't present any evidence. For the same reason as it cuts out that invisible elephant in your wardrobe.
But it does so only in your mind, see, cause in reality that conceptual 'razor' doesn't deal in things spiritual at all. Since neither does science, nothing is cut from something that never had what you imagine was cut in the first place!!!


Please, if you have evidence, state your case. But you've had 19 pages to do so and still haven't so I'm not holding my breath!
If I have evidence? Try and retain some of the pages you read, things that are not solid have no solid evidence. The spiritual evidences are out of the fishbowl of science of the pitiful mere present natural.



How do you know that it is not an invisible pink unicorn that caused the ball to fall?
Because laws are known, and I assume they work just fine, as God set them up to work in this temporary state universe. Besides, I think unicorns are clever enough to have better things to do, than pull pranks.



Sorry dad, but Ockham's razor is a philosophical tool, nothing explicitly to do with physics. It finds applications most frequently in science, but also in philosophy of mind and of religion, as well as other places.

A tool that cannot be used out of the fishbowl. Keep it real.

You can't just chuck out one of most fundamental bits of epistemology known to modern men on a whim.
Yes I can, when they try to whack spirits in the moon with the silly thing!

When one feels spiritual there is no necessity for there to be anything spiritual at work.
How would you know? Maybe there is. Either way, you can't speak from knowledge there, just guesswork.

A spiritual feeling can be a purely physical feeling of awe or something similar. That is just how the word is used.
That is one weak, and improper use of the word, yes. But not the main one, or best one.


So how do you know whether a physical effect is caused by something spiritual or physical?
I usually look for the spiritual influence to be spiritual, and physical influences to be physical in nature. Then, I work it from there.



I'll throw it out there anyway - prove that, on March 18th, 1794, an invisible pink unicorn did not reverse gravity for 10 seconds, throwing everyone into the air, reverse it back again, and wipe everyone's memories of the event.
No spirit has the power to do anything save God grants it. Major spiritual events likely would have some precedent, or known motis operandi from the history of believers.
Your invention falls short on all counts.
Just like I don't worry about meteors or comets hitting the earth. We are protected from real danger. Earth is forever.


No, it was not just the beauty of the moon - but also of the earth and of the sky.
OK, so there is a lot to be said for the beauty of creation. It cannot nullify real spiritual influences from real spirits, now can it, though?!
 
Upvote 0

thaumaturgy

Well-Known Member
Nov 17, 2006
7,541
882
✟12,333.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Since we have never BEEN down more than several miles, how would man and his knowledge know that?

Glad to see you still don't know what a graph looks like.

Unless and until you can show me any reason for there to be a reversal in the geothermal gradient then I guess I'll go with what we know about the interior of the earth.

I know I have PERSONALLY explained to you many things about seismic wave propogation as well as many things we know about the earth and its composition and phase relationships.

So far you have never once provided any information indicating your fantasies about what is in the interior of the earth are anything more than simply fantasies.

The heat that is claimed is not by observations, but 'guilt by association with other PO theories'. indirect evidences.

While this is not the entire reason for heat within the earth, perhaps you've heard of radioactive decay? Now imagine a bunch of radioactive elements deep within a pile of solid rock decaying. How quickly will you dissipate this heat?


Well, I know something of it. It is a surface thing.

HA HA HA HA HA!!!!^_^

Excellent, and they better get used to it, we will soon rule in an iron dictatorship with God forever and ever.

Dictatorship of IGNORANCE! (Did you even read the quote I posted???)

Is that your god??? Yeesh!

Pagans, and worshipers of other gods, and etc. the world has also known for a long time.

You see, I don't tend to "worship" my ignorance. I don't take what I don't know and place it upon a golden throne and crow about it as a virtue.

That seems to be what you do. The only evidence you have for any of your fantasies of "different pasts" and "cool interior of the earth" is that we haven't witnessed it directly. However all the data around it would indicate you are wrong.

So effectively you take NO DATA and claim it to be support!

That's hilarious.

I know I shouldn't laugh at people like you. You don't know any better. But at least I used to try to teach you. But after being taught you still insist on your ignorance.

And now we know that you worship that Ignorance on its golden throne. It is your love and the light of your life. It is the savior of all your thoughts and ideas.

Inliteratti lumen fidei, like the song says.

(BTW: to all Wilco fans I would like to apologize to Wilco for using a line from that song in a debate with Dad.)
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheOutsider
Upvote 0

FishFace

Senior Veteran
Jan 12, 2007
4,535
169
37
✟28,130.00
Faith
Atheist
I am glad that appeals to you. I would find it nice enough if I was teleported there, for coffee. But I am turned off by the whole astronaut thing myself.
If I am going to imagine things about the moon, I'll do it my way. Say, maybe, I get a ride in a royal UFO, something like the Scepter, or flying sapphire throne of God in Eze. I chose to take a whole hour to get there, and sip fine wine, and have good conversation with Daniel, and Eve, and, Marilyn Monroe, and Elvis, and St Paul on the way. I ask some questions about things I have wondered, and get good answers.

The difference is that I am imagining what it would be like to experience the known facts of the moon.

I could go on, but the thread really isn't about our imagining what the moon will be like.

No; we know what it's like. And from what we know, we can infer that it would be an awesome experience. You, for some reason, think that you need to have a spiritual influence to have such an experience.

But it does so only in your mind, see, cause in reality that conceptual 'razor' doesn't deal in things spiritual at all. Since neither does science, nothing is cut from something that never had what you imagine was cut in the first place!!!

If you reject Ockham's razor, then why don't you believe there is an invisible (spiritual) elephant in your cupboard?

If I have evidence? Try and retain some of the pages you read, things that are not solid have no solid evidence.

Fine, you are incapable of understanding figurative speech. I don't care whether it's solid evidence or not - any good evidence will do.

Because laws are known, and I assume they work just fine, as God set them up to work in this temporary state universe.

That doesn't tell me anything about how you know an invisible pink unicorn did not cause the ball to drop to your feet.

A tool that cannot be used out of the fishbowl. Keep it real.

Wrong. Ockham's razor is applicable everywhere. You can either take it or leave it. If you take it, then it cuts out your spirits. If you leave it, then I say you have an invisible spiritual elephant in your wardrobe.

Yes I can, when they try to whack spirits in the moon with the silly thing!

No you can't. Take it or leave it - it's your choice.

How would you know? That is one weak, and improper use of the word, yes. But not the main one, or best one.

Doesn't matter, it is a legitimate use.

I usually look for the spiritual influence to be spiritual, and physical influences to be physical in nature. Then, I work it from there.

So then whatever caused these people to go out and do physical works in the physical world, preach with their physical mouths and so on - was presumably physical. If it wasn't, how do you know it wasn't.

No spirit has the power to do anything save God grants it. Major spiritual events likely would have some precedent, or known motis operandi from the history of believers.
Your invention falls short on all counts.

You've proved nothing - an epic failure. You need to prove that God didn't grant the spirit the power to reverse gravity and give people false memories. If there were a precedent, we obviously wouldn't know about it - because they wouldn't remember it!

OK, so there is a lot to be said for the beauty of creation. It cannot nullify real spiritual influences from real spirits, now can it, though?!

What real spiritual influence? You've not proved there is such a thing.
 
Upvote 0

dad

Undefeated!
Site Supporter
Jan 17, 2005
44,905
1,259
✟25,524.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Glad to see you still don't know what a graph looks like.
Any child can draw a graph to where he or she has never been. I would expect someone in a debate forum to have a little support for lines they draw.

Unless and until you can show me any reason for there to be a reversal in the geothermal gradient then I guess I'll go with what we know about the interior of the earth.
Well in other words you seem to want your surface pattern we can see to go all the way to the core. No. It doesn't work that way. The reasons man has thought the core was hot are not from direct evidence, sorry to be the one to break it to you.

I know I have PERSONALLY explained to you many things about seismic wave propogation as well as many things we know about the earth and its composition and phase relationships.
Well, seismic waves only work on physical matter. The earth is eternal, and spiritual in it's foundation. At least the bible indicates spirits live there. That means there is more than the physical. Your whole scenario rests on an assumption, that you cannot show us science for here. If you can, do it.
If someone told me that the center of the earth was also spiritual as well as physical, and I had knowledge they were wrong, I would end the thing real fast. I would say something like,
'Now, sorry, that just is not so, we have drilled down in a boring machine, been to the core, and it is physical, I assure you'

You are simply talking through your hat.

So far you have never once provided any information indicating your fantasies about what is in the interior of the earth are anything more than simply fantasies.
No need to. neither can science. I will believe God, and give Him the benefit of the doubt.



While this is not the entire reason for heat within the earth, perhaps you've heard of radioactive decay? Now imagine a bunch of radioactive elements deep within a pile of solid rock decaying. How quickly will you dissipate this heat?
Imagine is a good word. Spiritual and physical material together does not decay as PO material does. But, one must assume that there is a lot of PO material, between here, and the foundations of the earth, so I would expect some decay! How much decay, in the surface areas of the earth, in the last 4400 years do you expect!!!? I'd say it is chump change, compared to the wild and woolly claims, based on the assumption the earth inside is not in the eternal state.



Dictatorship of IGNORANCE! (Did you even read the quote I posted???)

Is that your god??? Yeesh!
Call Him what you like. we shall rule with Him, yes, as sure as the sun shines.


You see, I don't tend to "worship" my ignorance. I don't take what I don't know and place it upon a golden throne and crow about it as a virtue.
Great, then start backing up your claims.
That seems to be what you do. The only evidence you have for any of your fantasies of "different pasts" and "cool interior of the earth" is that we haven't witnessed it directly. However all the data around it would indicate you are wrong.
No, no data indicates that, or I, not being the dishonest type, intellectually, would change positions according to actual evidences.

So effectively you take NO DATA and claim it to be support!
No, I challenge claims based on that. Even weak partial data. Your tales of some hellish fires in the center of earth need more than saying it, to make it so.


I know I shouldn't laugh at people like you. You don't know any better. But at least I used to try to teach you. But after being taught you still insist on your ignorance.
Yes, we can see here how you teach.

And now we know that you worship that Ignorance on its golden throne. It is your love and the light of your life. It is the savior of all your thoughts and ideas.
So the forum is now a place for petty insults, rather than discussion. I see.

Inliteratti lumen fidei, like the song says.
That's nice.
 
Upvote 0