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.
You have religion. Learn the difference. Prove that the daughter materials all got here by decay.
You should demonstrate that you have some comprehension of the issues, rather than moan.
Strawman. The issue is what laws existed in the past, when the material had it's origin. Your claim that it all originated by present state laws demands evidence that there was a present state, it is not evidence there was. You are hooped.Prove that it didn't.
You proclaim that you are clueless and love it.I proclaim that dad has been officially defeated.
Show us the observed missing stuff!!1. He has been unable to demonstrate that the observations presented are in any way inconsistent with a same state past.
2. He can't explain any of the observations using a different state past.
Then why do I get the same t when using different isotope pairs, just as we would expect to see with a same state past?
WHERE IS YOUR EXPLANATION????
That is fooishness. You simply mean that one can explain what we see using laws of this state, if we invoke enough magical missing stuff, and time, and believe for NO REASON that this present state also existed in the unknown past. (and of course that there is no God)
Evidence for a same state past are observations that are consistent with a same state past. That is exactly what have I have presented, and you have been unable to refute it.
I don't need faith. I just showed you that all of the observations are consistent with a same state past. That is evidence.
No it is evidence that you color stuff with your foolish godless religion. The operation of forces and laws in this state would have to be consistent with what existed and what exists!! Duh. One cannot look just at the processes in this state, and try to pretend that that represents a consistence for the total time being in this state. You seem to like to forget that a consistent creator would be responsible for all changes in nature in the future or any in the past since creation. You want us to bow the knee to current state processes as the very creator!! No. I am exposing that you have religion only here. I like that. You are welcome to it. Many of us have our own beliefs, thanks.
Rather than say things over and over as if there was a sliver of truth in them, slow down here, and, put the goods on the table. Let's have a looksee. For example, the missing stuff you claim existed, but is not here now. Any proof it was actually here?? Let's see what you got.Then why are the observations consistent with a same state past?
The numbers you use are meant to represent present state things, and are merely used to account for all things. When this nature started, one assumes that there was daughter material already if creation is where we all came from. So, how could a smart God change nature that included that daughter material, in some way that was not smooth, and consistent?? That is EVIDENCE that the change was not random, or ill planned! It is NOT evidence that there was never any change as your godless little belief system preaches on the rooftops. Hey, get a sign and walk the sidewalks!! Goat herders have more sense.
Then why do the equations still work when you go back billions of years?
Yes, they work right NOW!! Get it?They work right now. The equation produces the same t right now.
Who says they were part of creation???? You? You DO claim they are missing!! What a farce. How unobserved!!! How lacking in evidence!!Why would only the short lived isotopes be absent from the initial creation?
Absurd. The reason that things exist in rations need not be determined by how present state forces and laws make them behave now.
Because there is no reason why ratios at the start of creation in a different state past would be consistent with billions of years of a same state past as evidenced by you inability to produce such a reason.
Hey, for you, no doubt the tooth fairy is also consistent. So?
And when I do so, the results of the equation are consistent with a same state past which you still can't explain.
You simply mean that one can explain what we see using laws of this state, if we invoke enough magical missing stuff, and time, and believe for NO REASON that this present state also existed in the unknown past.
No it is evidence that you color stuff with your foolish godless religion. The operation of forces and laws in this state would have to be consistent with what existed and what exists!! Duh. One cannot look just at the processes in this state, and try to pretend that that represents a consistence for the total time being in this state.
Show us the observed missing stuff!!
You have religiously believed and preached that all the daughter materials got here solely by present state mechanisms rather than even address the issue as to what laws existed and how you know.
No observations of your missing and vanished materials have been shown here.
As for the ratios of isotopes that exist as per creation, and now exist in this state, you merely looked at how things now must work and insanely declared that is how they always did, and how all the stuff got here!
That actually doesn't follow. How would God changing nature in the future and heaven mean He was being 'tricky'? How would big differences before the fall mean God was tricky because it was changed later? Who said laws were the same pre flood? Not God. In fact things like man living near 1000 years indicate some big changes did happen. The tricky part comes from those who have claimed it was always the same, and concocted ungodly scenarios as a result.HI, so I just discovered this thread. I'd like to give my opinion about this idea of different state past. I see three problems with it.
Firstly, to assume that laws of nature were different in the past is to assume that God was trying to trick us into thinking something happened that didn't... Why would He do that?
Glad you admitted that!!Secondly, this idea is completely outside the realm of science because the entire process of acquiring knowledge rests on uniformitarianism...
That is where science is. Thanks for that.Without it, you can't know anything about anything because for all you know it might be different tomorrow.
To uncover some of how present nature works does not mean there is not more to reality! You only play in one part of the playground.Thirdly, my personal belief is that nature in so finely tuned for a reason. What better way for God to show us His power than to allow us to uncover the secrets of reality through science. But nature is completely unknowable under this different state past idea.
Since you use a uniform state to explain all things, anything else seems inconsistent to you. However your fantasy state past is inconsistent with the records of man and God. You need to do more than say 'gee it seems like there must have been a same state past'.1. He has been unable to demonstrate that the observations presented are in any way inconsistent with a same state past.
You tell us!? Why can't you prove the missing stuff you claim existed did exist? You should stop abusing the word 'observations'.Why not? Why can't we predict what we should see if there was a same state past, and then see if observations match those predictions?
Isn't that exactly how one would look for evidence of a same state past? If this isn't how one looks for evidence of a same state past, then please tell us how it is done.
Unless you show us something, I guess the answer is that you can't. So stop claiming it existed.Do you even engage your brain before typing? If it is missing, how can I show it to you?
Overruled. Making a construct based on faith in a uniform past, and then declaring you observed it is silly. There was none. You saw none. Your missing stuff is a joke.I have already addressed how I know that there was a same state past. You ignore it.
Then stop claiming they were here unless you can prove it.That's because they are missing.
Who cares why God never created the silly junk?? It is either here or not! It ain't. You want me to believe it was just so your uniform state past religion can look good.How do you explain their absence? Why are we only missing the short lived isotopes?
By itself it means nothing.If there was a same state past, then we should see agreement between different isotope pairs as I have shown over and over and over.
No, it is evidence you insist on describing created stuff in terms of time, just because you want to sell the lie that a same state past dunnit rather than a good God. You wouldn't know evidence if it bit your toe, and your idea of observations are pipe dreams that fit your religion.This is a basic prediction made by the same state hypothesis. We then measure these isotopes, and see if they match the predictions. If they do, then it is evidence of a same state past.
Strawman. The issue is what laws existed in the past, when the material had it's origin. Your claim that it all originated by present state laws demands evidence that there was a present state, it is not evidence there was. You are hooped.
Be honest, I do not do the same thing. That thing is precisely claiming science knows what state existed. That thing is claiming that the present nature and laws in action doing things like radioactive decay processes tell us that these processes always existed and are totally responsible for all the materials we see including all the daughter materials. This you do. Correct? Not me.Why is it a strawman when you use exactly the same thing?
Since you use a uniform state to explain all things, anything else seems inconsistent to you.
However your fantasy state past is inconsistent with the records of man and God.
You do not predict all things, get a grip!I use a uniform state to PREDICT all things, and what we observe matches those predictions. Therefore, we have evidence for a uniform state.
Not that lunacy again! The map is bigger than the physical and earth and the present laws and state. Your map is about as valid as a map of Disneyland. Your territory ranks with that of an ant colony.The map is not the territory.
The writings of man that have been called science falsely and wrongly contradict themselves, and are constantly needing a makeover. The writings from God have demonstrated power and bring life and happiness and peace and love and salvation. Your zombie predictions are not to be taken seriously. They bring death, and doubt, and despair, and doom and denial and delusion.If the facts contradict the writings of man, then it is the writings of men that are wrong, not the facts.
Be honest, I do not do the same thing. That thing is precisely claiming science knows what state existed. That thing is claiming that the present nature and laws in action doing things like radioactive decay processes tell us that these processes always existed and are totally responsible for all the materials we see including all the daughter materials. This you do. Correct? Not me.
I claim science does not know either way.
I advocate looking at the record of Scripture. That is nothing like what you do actually. The future in the bible is totally unlike the future predicted by man's science, which is based on this current nature only! Science claims the universe will go dark, the sun also, because of present state earth law causes and imagined great time. That is all they ever do when speaking of the future or the far past...try to interpret how it was or will by solely by using this state as the big measure.
This I do not do, your point is utterly overthrown.
You do not predict all things, get a grip!
The predictions of the bible are known to have happened.
Person A claims a certain nature by faith alone, and models the past based on that. You are person A. Person B looks at what God said, and interprets evidence accordingly, rather than in the outrageous godless methodology and philosophical way that person A insists that we all must do for no reason.Of course it is the same thing.
Person A: "I make a particular extraordinary claim."
Person B: "I request evidence to support your claim."
Person A: "You can't prove that my claim is false, therefore it must be considered as a possibility."
Nonsense. We all have evidences, so called science merely assaults them with it's antichrist zombie belief system of death.Science has a ton of evidence
Must be tough having that sort of undefined mental anguish I guess. Probably such tormented thoughts would be caused by them being locked into a cultish belief system, where they allow only certain evil interpretations of things. Hard to diagnose exactly when you are so vague.and it also has a lot of things which do not make any sense if your version is correct.
God's position is a record that is unchallenged by man and his wisdom. No one can run off and check out the future (or far past) as to whether it is like God says. Obviously. Why pretend?? You are in absolutely no position to claim He is wrong! All the models of science, such as the future cold dark dead universe are based on demonic inspiration, and self imposed info lobotomy!You have never presented any evidence to support your position,
You have failed to name them! Top that!nor have you shown how to explain the things which do not make sense under your idea.
How about you stop talking in vague circles?? Chose one side of your mouth, and go for it!How about you do one of these (preferably both) and then we'll talk.
God requires no human interpretation. He gave us stuff we could interpret out of love and mercy.Yeah, and your source is deeply flawed and requires human interpretation. You've got nothing solid.
I can see why you need to remain comically vague. Whatever you are specif about is easy to overthrow.And you aren't able to overthrow anything when you dismiss it without even understanding it.
Which predictions are these then? And btw you cannot state predictions that arein one part of the bible and then come true later in that same bible. Anyone can write that.
You do not predict all things, get a grip!
The predictions of the bible are known to have happened.
Not that lunacy again! The map is bigger than the physical and earth and the present laws and state.
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?