Moon was Created

[TheOutsider]

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.)

Theologians, they don't know nothing about my soul...

 

[thaumaturgy]

So the forum is now a place for petty insults, rather than discussion. I see.


That's nice.

WHICH ONE OF US POSTED A PICTURE OF AN ORANGUTAN FLIPPING ME OFF before taking it down?



[bible]Luke 6:31[/bible]

 

[dad]

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

Yes you are indeed. Imagining. Dream of splashing in the dust there all you like. Fine.

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.

I usually look for a spiritual reason for a spiritual effect, yes. I suppose your point is that there ain't no such thing as real spirits, and that 'spiritual' really means a part of the physical, and natural. Try proving that one!

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

I do not reject the imaginary razor, it is just that I do not chase dragons with it. It can be used within the fishbowl as a little tool, and in it's little place, it is fine. It is not a ghostbusting razor, however, and simply does not chase spirits anywhere.

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

The evidences for the spiritual must be plentiful, because most folks on earth believe in some form of spiritual. That is figuratively solid evidence. Men on the moon proclaimed a great spiritual impact, how is that not evidence?

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

I go by the bible, and science. There needs to be a reason that universal laws, here in this temporary universe, are suspended, or overruled.

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.

You don't even believe in spirits, do you? Now you claim that an imaginary razor cuts them out????! Strange. Why would I believe someone that thinks he cuts out spirits with a phantom razor, when he says there is an elephant ghost in the cupboard?? Try to base things on some semblance of reality.

Doesn't matter, it is a legitimate use.

Not really. I say it is not legitimate to call stuff something else than what it is. It really is almost an insult to the word. If I say a ghost of Houdini's mother saved his life under a river covered in ice, like he claimed she did, that is a spiritual experience. It involves a spirit. If I say God inspired the bible, temporarily possessing men to pen the words, that is spiritual. It involves a Spirit. If I say a Spirit will bring a new universe, and this state universe will forever pass away, and be no more, that is spiritual, in involves the great Spirit.
If you say that it was a spiritual experience because you felt a certain way, then why would we not say drug addicts are spiritual? They must feel different. The only reason seeing creation is spiritual, is because a Spirit made it! Attributing things spiritual, to some physical mental cause, or some such is an inapplicable misuse, and misunderstanding of what spiritual really is.

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.

By it's effects on others. Like a ripple effect of a rock on water, there had to be a spiritual impact to start with.

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!

No, that is not being of a sound mind. There is no need to fear such boggy men. Gravity can be locally overridden, yes of course, there is precedent for that. But we know who did it, and usually why. We also have records of it, and many witnesses, not some isolated tales from someone that thinks he was abducted by aliens or something.

 

[MrGoodBytes]

dad, do you or do you not agree that the temperature in a mine increases the deeper you go?

 

[thaumaturgy]

Well, seismic waves only work on physical matter.

How do you know?

No need to. neither can science. I will believe God, and give Him the benefit of the doubt.

[bible]Luke 6:31[/bible]

(Gosh that one seems to come up a lot with you "True Christians".)

Great, then start backing up your claims.

[bible]Luke 6:31[/bible]

There it is again!!!

I think you need to go back and re-learn that stuff I told you about a few months ago on the topics of:

Seismic Wave Refraction

You, not being the "dishonest type", will agree that some data is certainly more than no data.

(Do you know how s-waves propogate through LIQUID? Ever hear of an S-wave shadow zone? Do you know how P-waves refract? Do you know about the very different effect of a p-wave shadow zone?)

No, those are just more big words for you and you won't bother to learn them anymore than you learned them months ago when I posted nearly the same information in nearly the same discussion.

Of course, you, not being the "dishonest type", were more than able to take on that data and soundly trounce it, right?
http://www.zionoil.com

 

[dad]

WHICH ONE OF US POSTED A PICTURE OF AN ORANGUTAN FLIPPING ME OFF before taking it down?



[bible]Luke 6:31[/bible]

That perceived incident was a reaction, not an action. Like if someone pokes one in the eye, the hand goes up. But I decided not to respond, that time, in kind.
Use your grace period wisely.

 

[dad]

dad, do you or do you not agree that the temperature in a mine increases the deeper you go?

No. Not if we go down, say over 200 miles! But, you can change my mind if you have done that, or have proof.
There obviously is heat near the surface of the earth. How far that goes we don't really know. Do we?

 

[thaumaturgy]

dad, do you or do you not agree that the temperature in a mine increases the deeper you go?

MrGoodbytes, Dad will agree that it increases and shows no sign of turning around but he'll use his beloved ignorance to say that we don't know what it will do even further.

When presented with information about seismic wave refraction he'll blow past it as well.

His points rely solely on ignorance.

Since scientists haven't gone down to the core with a meat thermometer (the only way Dad knows how to take temperatures or estimate physical processes), he assumes that there is no way anyone can possibly even come close to knowing.

So he'll use that "ignorance" and make it into his entire theology and geology.

Of course Dad's ignorance is not science's but Dad can't be expected to know that. He's too in love with "ignorance" to light the candle.

 

[thaumaturgy]

That perceived incident was a reaction, not an action. Like if someone pokes one in the eye, the hand goes up. But I decided not to respond, that time, in kind.
Use your grace period wisely.

Well, technically, you are correct. I did post a joke picture of a psychologist. You responded by flipping me off with an orangutan.

[bible]Luke 6:29[/bible]

I recommend you use your "Grace period" wisely as well.

 

[dad]

How do you know?

That should be obvious, have you ever tested them on merged matter?

[bible]Luke 6:31[/bible]

(Gosh that one seems to come up a lot with you "True Christians".)

I do likewise, if I claim science.

[bible]Luke 6:31[/bible]

There it is again!!!

I think you need to go back and re-learn that stuff I told you about a few months ago on the topics of:

Seismic Wave Refraction

I have heard lots of stuff about that, some even from folks that know what they are talking about. Point? Yes, there are seismic waves.
http://eqseis.geosc.psu.edu/~cammon/HTML/Classes/IntroQuakes/Notes/waves_and_interior.html

You, not being the "dishonest type", will agree that some data is certainly more than no data.

I agree with the data AS FAR AS IT GOES!!! Not like some, who may feel inclined to Buzz Lightyear it to infinity and beyond, in their imagination.

(Do you know how s-waves propogate through LIQUID? Ever hear of an S-wave shadow zone? Do you know how P-waves refract? Do you know about the very different effect of a p-wave shadow zone?)

Yes. That is why they think that the outer core is liquid. Why?

Of course, you, not being the "dishonest type", were more than able to take on that data and soundly trounce it, right?

I am not sure what point you think you had. Unless it gets on the table, I guess it stays in your head.

 

[dad]

Well, technically, you are correct. ...

True.

 

[MrGoodBytes]

No. Not if we go down, say over 200 miles!

The Kola Borehole (for connaisseurs of fundamentalism, this is where the famous "Screams from Hell" hoax originated) showed a steady increase in temperature, up to 180°C (356°F) at the maximum depth of 12.2 kilometres. Unless you have evidence to the contrary, it is safe to assume that going deeper would lead to an increase in temperature again.

Do you have any reason at all to assume that at 200 miles down, the temperature decreases?

But, you can change my mind if you have done that, or have proof.
There obviously is heat near the surface of the earth. How far that goes we don't really know. Do we?

We know that it goes at least 12 km down, and there is no reason to assume that this trend stops anywhere.

 

[dad]

Of course Dad's ignorance is not science's...

Of course not, it is their own. I give credit where credit is due. Science is largely ignorant, gasp, of many things. Most of the known universe, for example is unknown, dark matter and energy, say they! We also know relatively little about the center of the earth by science, and of that little, little is even right!!

 

[AirPo]

His points rely solely on ignorance.

I think it's more like creative thinking.

 

[dad]

]

The Kola Borehole (for connaisseurs of fundamentalism, this is where the famous "Screams from Hell" hoax originated) showed a steady increase in temperature, up to 180°C (356°F) at the maximum depth of 12.2 kilometres.

That is less than 8 lousy miles!! Hey, I am with you that far.

Unless you have evidence to the contrary, it is safe to assume that going deeper would lead to an increase in temperature again.

No. I think that it is not safe to project that to the core. We do have evidences of magma deep down, and volcanism, etc etc. So, I would agree that it goes a lot deeper in places than 8 miles down, the heat.

Do you have any reason at all to assume that at 200 miles down, the temperature decreases?

Yes. There is no reason to assume it increases, an the earth is young, and created, and spiritual inside. I would suspect that the rapid continental separation may have produced a lot of the heat we do have under there. But I see no reason to imagine it goes thousands of miles!!! If one gets into it, one might raise the issue of heat transference over time, but I would be way ahead of the game there anyhow.

We know that it goes at least 12 km down, and there is no reason to assume that this trend stops anywhere.

There is no reason to assume it goes on. If you claim it does, you need reasons.

 

[thaumaturgy]

We also know relatively little about the center of the earth by science, and of that little, little is even right!!

You have been shown that we know quite a bit about the interior of the earth. You've now been shown it a couple times.

If you have substantive information to post rejecting that data then either post it or drop it.

If you can explain seismic wave refraction and propogation in terms of:

1. Density variations in the inner earth
2. Compositional variations based on density data
3. Phase of the zones (liquid vs solid)
4. Radiative heat flux within the mass of the earth

with resort to a "cool" interior, or you wish to attempt to do so, then do so.

Otherwise realize that there is a signficant amount of data to what the interior is like, as opposed to your made up story which rests on no data.

End of story.

You are one who is honest about the discussion of the earth, right?

 

[thaumaturgy]

the earth is young, and created, and spiritual inside.

NOTE:
Stated without any supporting evidence.

[bible]Luke 6:31[/bible]

I would suspect that the rapid continental separation may have produced a lot of the heat

NOTE:
Stated without any evidence that such a thing actually occurred.

[bible]Luke 6:31[/bible]

NOTE 2:
Stated without an understanding of how plate tectonics works or that this alone indicates a plastic aesthenosphere which indicates differences in phase, temperature and/or pressure.

But I see no reason to imagine it goes thousands of miles!!!

NOTE:
Argument from personal ignorance and incredulity. No supporting information.

[bible]Luke 6:31[/bible]

If one gets into it, one might raise the issue of heat transference over time, but I would be way ahead of the game there anyhow.

NOTE:
Word salad. No actual information.

[bible]Luke 6:31[/bible]

There is no reason to assume it goes on. If you claim it does, you need reasons.

NOTE:
Argument from personal incredulity.

SUMMARY:

Dad's arguments have no support but demand support for opposition.

 

[dad]

You have been shown that we know quite a bit about the interior of the earth. You've now been shown it a couple times.

If you have substantive information to post rejecting that data then either post it or drop it.

Nonsense, we do not know that much about it. get a grip.

If you can explain seismic wave refraction and propogation in terms of:

1. Density variations in the inner earth
2. Compositional variations based on density data
3. Phase of the zones (liquid vs solid)
4. Radiative heat flux within the mass of the earth

with resort to a "cool" interior, or you wish to attempt to do so, then do so.

Yes, no problem. We simply look at what we really know. The density of the earth is calculated by mass, namely the stuff we find near the surface! It is assumed that the inner earth would be the same. Meaning that rock density increases towards the earth's center. Of course we add in good old gravity, and a few things there as well. Then, an imaginary picture is attained of how it must operate, assuming these things! All very well and good, IF the temporary state surface reflects the spiritual also interior. But, of course we don't know that, in any way.
Now, all you need to do is read the waves for what they are, rather than what you assume they should be saying.

Otherwise realize that there is a signficant amount of data to what the interior is like, as opposed to your made up story which rests on no data.

The data consists of things like waves passing through stuff we can't see! The wiggle and bounce of the waves needs interpreting, and we do that solely based on stuff we know up here, and how that works. If we bounced a wave through, say, transparent gold, in the new heavens coming, might it act like it was going through liquid?

You are one who is honest about the discussion of the earth, right?

Thanks.

 

[dad]

NOTE:
Stated without any supporting evidence.

Science has nothing to say about it, and no supporting evidence of a counter case, so I can talk on authority of the bible evidence that supports the heck out of it.

Stated without an understanding of how plate tectonics works or that this alone indicates a plastic aesthenosphere which indicates differences in phase, temperature and/or pressure.

I do not accept the plate tectonic theory. And you need to support any plastic claims you make here.

NOTE:
Argument from personal ignorance and incredulity. No supporting information.

We may be very incredulous when looking at what science is ignorant of.

Dad's arguments have no support but demand support for opposition.

In other words, what, you can't support your science claims here? maybe go find someone that can, and pay her or him to post for you.

 

[thaumaturgy]

In other words, what, you can't support your science claims here? maybe go find someone that can, and pay her or him to post for you.

POST 204