My Morphology Challenge

[The IbanezerScrooge]

Energy pretty much covers everything.

 

[VirOptimus]

-snip-

And Thalidomide was mislabeled too, wasn't it?

And the Challenger blew up because you were wrong too.

Revelling in death and suffering again, how sick.

 

[Sanoy]

Okay ... so man consists of mass and energy.

Anything else?

Gas...

Nevermind.

 

[Bugeyedcreepy]

Revelling in death and suffering again, how sick.

I also note he never answers the stiff questions - just clicks by these non-sequiturs everywhere he goes just to goad those who care about how we all live together in a modern society. I think he ought to hand in all his technology, go live in a desert hearding goats & try posting to this forum on prayer alone - I have a slight inkling he knows he couldn't do without all the science he despises so much...

 

[Bugeyedcreepy]

Did you even bother to read his response. A definition can change over time, yet that change has no bearing on the actual object in question.



Hmmm... you seem hung up on what you perceive to be past wrongs. I'm just curious, in your mind, if you demonstrate that you were wrong about something in the past, does that mean you are now incapable about being right about anything?



The Challenger did not blow up because we were wrong. The Challenger blew up because of faulty O-rings operating in conditions that exceeded the specs and their design.

There is a difference between being wrong, and making a mistake.

If you want to talk science and technology and your semantic of "wrong".
Here are list of wrongs:
--Cold Fusion Generator
--Time machine
--Star Trek "beam me up Scotty" transporters

Here are a list of mistakes:
--3-mile island
--Challenger explosion
--Exxon Oil Spill

in normal conversation, the terms "wrong" and "mistake" are near identical synonyms. But in the context of the argument you are trying to have, those words are NOT synonyms the way you are using them (or intend to use them)

though I'm not sure you can see or understand that...

I like you @dgiharris , I like you a lot!

Please, stay as long as you're able...

 

[AV1611VET]

I also note he never answers the stiff questions - just clicks by these non-sequiturs everywhere he goes just to goad those who care about how we all live together in a modern society. I think he ought to hand in all his technology, go live in a desert hearding goats & try posting to this forum on prayer alone -

I will when you stop breathing God's air and start breathing your own; created from elements you created ex nihilo.

I have a slight inkling he knows he couldn't do without all the science he despises so much...

Let me make this excellent point once again:

My eye doctor is a YEC.

 

[Bugeyedcreepy]

I will when you stop breathing God's air and start breathing your own; created from elements you created ex nihilo.

Oh look, another unsubstantiated claim.

Let me make this excellent point once again:

My eye doctor is a YEC.

...yet uses Science you don't believe in to fix your eyes. Even you can still enjoy the fruits of the science you don't believe in, why should your opthamologists be any different? Your beliefs are still on the wrong side of the evidence.

 

[VirOptimus]

I will when you stop breathing God's air and start breathing your own; created from elements you created ex nihilo.Let me make this excellent point once again:

My eye doctor is a YEC.

You think your faith gives you somekind of authority over us non-believers?

Your eye-doctors delusions is not a point in anyones favour.

 

[AV1611VET]

... yet uses Science you don't believe in ...

I have over half as many THREADS as you have POSTS, and you make this doosey of a statement?

For the record, here's what I accept & reject:

1. Bible says X, science says X = go with X
2. Bible says X, science says Y = go with X
3. Bible says Ø, science says Y = go with Y
4. Bible says Ø, science says Ø = speculate

Translation: you're mistaken.

 

[AV1611VET]

You think your faith gives you some kind of authority over us non-believers?

I'm not sure what you mean by this, so I'll answer YES.

Your eye-doctors delusions is not a point in anyones favour.

But it's certainly a point against those who think we must believe in an aged universe in order to be a doctor.

 

[VirOptimus]

I'm not sure what you mean by this, so I'll answer YES.But it's certainly a point against those who think we must believe in an aged universe in order to be a doctor.

To be a good doctor yes, to be a doctor no. Many doctors (as in any profession) has delusional ideas.

 

[Bugeyedcreepy]

I have over half as many THREADS as you have POSTS, and you make this doosey of a statement?

For the record, here's what I accept & reject:

1. Bible says X, science says X = go with X
2. Bible says X, science says Y = go with X
3. Bible says Ø, science says Y = go with Y
4. Bible says Ø, science says Ø = speculate

Translation: you're mistaken.

You can have ten times as many threads as I do posts for all the difference it makes - so let's just say that from here on, you'll always have ten times as many threads as I do posts, I'll even pretend that none of them are just counting threads that went nowhere. So, with that sorted, when discussing matters of reality, Science is the first and foremost tool for determining what is actually true from what is false. Why take the claim of an unknown author's writing from thousands of years ago over what is demonstrable fact today? That's you not liking the science that conflicts with your apriori belief.

Are you a fan of the Theory of Evolution, for example?

 

[AV1611VET]

You can have ten times as many threads as I do posts for all the difference it makes -

That's true.

You go from thread to thread distorting and lying about what I say and/or believe; even putting words in my mouth.

You ask a simple question, I explain it to you, and that usually opens the door to a variety of twenty questions, in the which I'm finally accused of "running away," or some such other bologna, when I decide I've had enough.

Then it's rinse-and-repeat all over again in another thread.

 

[AV1611VET]

Are you a fan of the Theory of Evolution, for example?

No.

 

[Bugeyedcreepy]

You go from thread to thread distorting and lying about what I say and/or believe; even putting words in my mouth.

You ask a simple question, I explain it to you, and that usually opens the door to a variety of twenty questions, in the which I'm finally accused of "running away," or some such other bologna, when I decide I've had enough.

Then it's rinse-and-repeat all over again in another thread.

Yet, you don't ever seem to answer the questions I ask when your answers create more questions, why is that?

Again, Science is the first and foremost tool for determining what is actually true from what is false. Why take the claim of an unknown author's writing from thousands of years ago over what is demonstrable fact today? That's you not liking the science that conflicts with your apriori belief.

Are you a fan of the Theory of Evolution, for example?

No.

Well, there's you with the Science you don't like. Thanks for playing.

 

[durangodawood]

Okay ... so man consists of mass and energy....

Yes.

But an ingredient list is insufficient.

You also need the rest of the recipe.

 

[Colter]

Okay ... so man consists of mass and energy.

Anything else, according to applied science?

In other words, is there a third ingredient? fourth? fifth?

Spirit

 

[Ophiolite]

@AV1611VET
Do you think you are in good enough shape to issue a morphology challenge?

 

[AV1611VET]

@AV1611VET
Do you think you are in good enough shape to issue a morphology challenge?

Let's put it this way:

My energy landscape has ruts in it.