Space was Warm.

[Asimov]

Excuuuuuuse me?

I mean that you have no basis for your belief except emotional reasoning.

 

[dad]

Not only does your theory

Let's just clear that up right now, then, shall we?

. . ."theory A noun 1 hypothesis, possibility, theory a tentative theory about the natural world; a concept that is not yet verified but that if true would explain certain facts or phenomena; "a scientific hypothesis that survives experimental testing becomes a scientific theory"; "he proposed a fresh theory"

.. .. I am not dealing with the box of the physical only present natural world here. We have science for that. And that is all science can do. I simply point out that it is a gross and total misrepresentation of science to pretend to carry it through time any great distance!

.. .. The spiritual is so well known, and always has been, it is far far far beyond being able to be called mere theory. It is a known quantity of man's existance!
The afterlife concept, for example is cross religious, and pretty universal. That could not exist in a natural only future, and world.

.. .. Discovering that the future and past of the bible has to be different, and that no science can oppose that truth, is not a mere theory. It is as much a discovery as they credit Columbus with, in finding a new world, or some of the journeys of discovery like the Louis and Clark expedition, etc. So, it is a discovery. One science can't refute, or deny, and that covers far more than just the territory science CAN cover. But it covers that as well.

postulate a fundamentally different set of physical laws in the universe of the past, but it also predicts that those alternate laws of physics will be reinstated in the future.

The bible does that. Science is limited to the present natural.

If that is true, then how was that geo column laid down in a way which corresponds to our understanding of the current laws of physics.

Well things correspond to more than one thing. It also corresponds to the different past. How is that?

If your theory were true, and the geo-column were laid down pre-flood, and the "new physics" was established 100 years post-flood, then there should be a change in the way that sediment layers form today as opposed to "pre-split". We do not see such a change in the geological stratum or the ways in which it is formed. In short, deposition is as it was and has always been.

.. .. Says who? In what way can you say that the cambrian, or etc was laid down in a way that only could be under the present natural?
You forget that there was life, water, and dirt, and etc in our different past as well. In what way do you now claim some unique hold on the way things were laid down?????

 

[dad]

I mean that you have no basis for your belief except emotional reasoning.

Say whaaaaat?

 

[dad]

I asked for Bible evidence that indicates your theory. These passages do no such thing.

There was a warning, I gave the reference. No idea what you are talking about. If you haven't figured out heaven, and the garden were quite different from the present, and think that is some closet secret, yet you are too scared to open a zip file when someone takes, (foolishly) the time to supply you with it, you are a joker.

 

[Nathan Poe]

There was a warning, I gave the reference. No idea what you are talking about. If you haven't figured out heaven, and the garden were quite different from the present, and think that is some closet secret,

We know that in the mythology, heaven and Eden were different. I suppose we always assumed that God had something to do with that.

Why would you insist on taking God out of the equation?

yet you are too scared to open a zip file when someone takes, (foolishly) the time to supply you with it, you are a joker.

Perhaps we simply don't trust you? Lots of malicious code out there, you know...

 

[dad]

We know that in the mythology, heaven and Eden were different. I suppose we always assumed that God had something to do with that.

He made it, yes. I don't think He sent a fairy to every tree to make it grow fast, right up till Noah's day, though. There was a different natural.

Why would you insist on taking God out of the equation?

I don't, but let's not have Him running wround like a turkey trying to make things in the different past all happen by independant seperate miracles. Occam says the simple and logical idea is that He simply had a different natural at the time.

Perhaps we simply don't trust you? Lots of malicious code out there, you know...

OK. Maybe he'll find it elsewhere. Ha.

 

[Nathan Poe]

He made it, yes. I don't think He sent a fairy to every tree to make it grow fast, right up till Noah's day, though. There was a different natural.

Well, I don't believe in fairies. That's your branch of science.

I don't, but let's not have Him running wround like a turkey trying to make things in the different past all happen by independant seperate miracles. Occam says the simple and logical idea is that He simply had a different natural at the time.

Because any other way is too difficult for the Omnipotent. Mustn't tax His limitless powers, right?

 

[Wiccan_Child]

He made it, yes. I don't think He sent a fairy to every tree to make it grow fast, right up till Noah's day, though. There was a different natural.

Why not? He plays hide-and-seek in Eden, why not include faery folk?

Occam says the simple and logical idea is that He simply had a different natural at the time.

Occam says that your god doesn't exist, but nevermind.

OK. Maybe he'll find it elsewhere. Ha.

I'm thinking www.landoverbaptist.org, or maybe even www.fstdt.com.

 

[dad]

Well, I don't believe in fairies. That's your branch of science.

They were not dispatched to a sextillion places in the different past, just to help it perform as the present. That is your branch of science.



Because any other way is too difficult for the Omnipotent. Mustn't tax His limitless powers, right?[/quote]
Being a retard God wouldn't be taxing His powers, it would be a figment of your PO based imagination that the past natural needed patching up somehow to make it a present conforming time.

 

[dad]

Why not? He plays hide-and-seek in Eden, why not include faery folk?

I never said there were none, I just said that the natural of the day, meant that angels, or whatever was available didn't need to run around making trees grow in a week. The different unniverse, light, and processes meant that just was the norm of the day.

Occam says that your god doesn't exist, but nevermind.

Occam was a Christian monk, and is in heaven, agreeing with me, but nevermind.

 

[Ondoher]

I never said there were none, I just said that the natural of the day, meant that angels, or whatever was available didn't need to run around making trees grow in a week. The different unniverse, light, and processes meant that just was the norm of the day.



Occam was a Christian monk, and is in heaven, agreeing with me, but nevermind.

If there is a heaven, and Occam is there, I'm sure he looks at you and cries.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

I never said there were none, I just said that the natural of the day, meant that angels, or whatever was available didn't need to run around making trees grow in a week. The different unniverse, light, and processes meant that just was the norm of the day.

This 'OP' nonsense is going nowhere. If the physical laws were variable, then the universe would be in unpredictable chaos, with nothing provable or evidenced, or anything. Since this is clearly not the case, it is safe to assume that the physical laws are constant.

Occam was a Christian monk, and is in heaven, agreeing with me, but nevermind.

Irrelevant. I'm sure you realise that we're talking about Occam's Razor. I was merely using your improper terminology. Occam's Razor posits that, of two otherwise identicle theories, the one with less entities is the more probable, and should therefore be assumed true till replaced, or disproven. Since your theory invokes an uneccessary entity to change the physical laws, while my theory invokes no extra entites, my theory is the most likely. I'm sure how you can see this extend to theology in general.

 

[dad]

If there is a heaven, and Occam is there, I'm sure he looks at you and cries.

Yeah right. I'm sure he sits up there in heaven with a cute gal in his arms, sipping on a nice glass of wine, saying to you ' Gee, I wish I would have been an atheist, and so I could now be dead, rather than being an immortal, that can fly, explore the universe, learn the secrets of it, eat like a king, rule earth, and never get sick, and have a lovely mansion, and swimming pool, etc'

No, don't think so! If you were right he would not exist at all! You neither have any authority to comment on his monk past, or heavenly present!

 

[Ondoher]

Yeah right. I'm sure he sits up there in heaven with a cute gal in his arms, sipping on a nice glass of wine, saying to you ' Gee, I wish I would have been an atheist, and so I could now be dead, rather than being an immortal, that can fly, explore the universe, learn the secrets of it, eat like a king, rule earth, and never get sick, and have a lovely mansion, and swimming pool, etc'

No, don't think so! If you were right he would not exist at all! You neither have any authority to comment on his monk past, or heavenly present!

For a person such as yourself who thinks that parsimony is a garnish for your food, you really shouldn't be talking about Occam. He was a rational man.

 

[dad]

This 'OP' nonsense is going nowhere. If the physical laws were variable, then the universe would be in unpredictable chaos, with nothing provable or evidenced, or anything.

Who said the PO laws were 'variable'? That is preposterous, outrageous nonsense!

Since this is clearly not the case, it is safe to assume that the physical laws are constant.

I assume the same, constant since the split, when they came to be.

Irrelevant. I'm sure you realise that we're talking about Occam's Razor.

As I said, which is very relevant, he was a monk. Trying to paganize his ideas is silly.

I was merely using your improper terminology. Occam's Razor posits that, of two otherwise identicle theories, the one with less entities is the more probable, and should therefore be assumed true till replaced, or disproven.

Don't be silly, the same past is not identical to a different past!!!! Where did you get that idea? The same past has nothing whatsoever to back it up, and is a pure dream from the getgo! A dream that people spend a lot of their lives trying to get their poor overheated heads around year after wasted year in education!!! That is almost the opposite of simple!
The different past is backed by the big guns. The bible, and known spiritual factor. It can be understood by a young child!

'God made the universe, then man got so bad, He had to change it, and make it seperate from this physical one. Later, when bad man learns his lesson, he can come out from the PO corner'!

Since your theory invokes an uneccessary entity to change the physical laws, while my theory invokes no extra entites, my theory is the most likely.

Hey your theory invokes nothing at ALL, but imagination, while ignoring God, and the spiritual most of us know about! Get a grip.

 

[UniversalAxis]

so dad, why don't you take a minute and describe these alternative physics.

How was gravity different, or electromagnetic radiation?

How do these different physical laws cause phenomina to occur in ways that so resemble the ways they should occur under present conditions?

Just to be clear, I'm asking for a thorough explanation.

 

[Nathan Poe]

If there is a heaven, and Occam is there, I'm sure he looks at you and cries.

Nah, he's probably laughing. Nothing's funny in heaven, so Earth is their only source of humor.

 

[Nathan Poe]

Yeah right. I'm sure he sits up there in heaven with a cute gal in his arms,

Having lustful thoughts in heaven?

sipping on a nice glass of wine,

Why would he need wine in heaven?

saying to you ' Gee, I wish I would have been an atheist, and so I could now be dead, rather than being an immortal, that can fly, explore the universe, learn the secrets of it, eat like a king, rule earth, and never get sick, and have a lovely mansion, and swimming pool, etc'

Heaven has swimming pools now? I must have missed that verse in the Bible.

No, don't think so! If you were right he would not exist at all! You neither have any authority to comment on his monk past, or heavenly present!

Nor do you -- and you embarass yourself when you try.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Who said the PO laws were 'variable'? That is preposterous, outrageous nonsense!

You! You have have, on countless occasions, claimed that the past was a 'different natural', or through some other warped syntax claimed that we cannot know the past because the past was somehow 'different'.

I assume the same, constant since the split, when they came to be.

Keywords there being 'since the split'. You imply that there was a change in the physical laws, which implies that the physical laws are subject to change.

As I said, which is very relevant, he was a monk. Trying to paganize his ideas is silly.

There is nothing Pagan about Occam's Razor. It is simply a name for an important scientific tool that, in this case, is being applied to theology.

Don't be silly, the same past is not identical to a different past!!!! Where did you get that idea?

You totally misunderstand what I said.
We have two theories:
1) The physical laws have not changed
2) The physical laws have been changed by an entity
Since yours invokes an extra entity, your theory violates Occam's Razor.

The same past has nothing whatsoever to back it up, and is a pure dream from the getgo!

The 'same past' theory, as you call it, has logical inferrance to back it up. The 'different past' theory is nothing but ad hoc irrationalities.

A dream that people spend a lot of their lives trying to get their poor overheated heads around year after wasted year in education!!!

I call these dreamers Apologetics.

That is almost the opposite of simple!

Inanimate and regular mechanisms, or divine unpredictible variation of the fabric of the spacetime continuum and the laws inherent therein?

The different past is backed by the big guns. The bible, and known spiritual factor.

Your 'big guns' are laughable.
You would cite the Bible is evidence of a 'different past' theory, to a Wiccan scientist? You do realise that not everyone believes it to be a useful text, don't you? You do realise that, in my opinion, the Bible is a sadistic and merciless text that encourages racism, sexism, genocide, xenocide, slavery, homophobia, rape, incest, beastiality... (appropriate Biblical verses available upon request). You do realise it is no more evidence of a 'different past' than Pastafarianism?

And this 'known spiritual factor'. Are you seriously claiming that the paranormal has been emprically proven?

It can be understood by a young child!

But not, it seems, the adult US population.

'God made the universe, then man got so bad, He had to change it, and make it seperate from this physical one. Later, when bad man learns his lesson, he can come out from the PO corner'!

Drivel.

Hey your theory invokes nothing at ALL, but imagination, while ignoring God, and the spiritual most of us know about! Get a grip.

You first statement ('...your theory invokes nothing at all' (emphasis removed)) is correct. The Theory of Evolution invokes less entities than your countertheory. Therefore, according to Occam's Razor, my theory is more likely to be true than yours. How much more likely mine is depends on the number of extra entities you invoke and respective improbability of them existing.

 

[dad]

so dad, why don't you take a minute and describe these alternative physics.

OK.

How was gravity different, or electromagnetic radiation?

Well, one thing to keep in mind was that the universe fabric change affected things at every level. Quantum, atomic, and etc. Apparently there was no radioactive decay, for example.
With anything that affects the atomic level, we need to look there. For example..

. . ."shorter visible light waves are produced by the energy state fluctuations of negatively charged electrons within atoms. The shortest form of electromagnetic radiation, gamma waves, results from decay of nuclear components at the center of the atom.
http://www.human-evolution.org/visual_electro.php
So, right there, we can see that an atomic change is likely to affect em radiation!
Gravity, is a force that attacts physical objects together. It is reasonable to assume that if the matter in the far past universe was merged, that is, physical AND spiritual, together, that another force was in place.
After all, can you even tell us precisely what it is now, and how it works, etc???


. "The most fascinating thing about gravitation is that, while we all experience it, and engineers can estimate its force accurately enough to build bridges that don't fall down and send rockets to Saturn, we just don't know how it works.

"Gravitation is the tendency of masses to move toward each other. . . . Exactly why two masses separated in space have a gravitational attraction to one another remains largely unknown .​

...So we know how to calculate and predict gravity's effects, using either Newton's laws or Einstein's equations as appropriate. But we still don't know how gravity works. We have an accepted standard description (General Relativity), but no mechanism."
..So in a sense we do understand how gravity works. The current hypothesis is that mater emits "gravitational waves" when it accelerates (but how?).

One reason I wrote this post is that I am puzzled. We don't even have a solid "theory of gravitation" (there are competing theories), and the theories we do have don't explain everything.
http://sxxz.blogspot.com/2005/08/gravity-just-another-theory.html
(A summary from a biologist, not in the field, but I think he had it close)

How do these different physical laws cause phenomina to occur in ways that so resemble the ways they should occur under present conditions?

Such as?