Mr Strawberry
Newbie
So if you lost your faith you'd still get worked up about those other things on your list? Hmm, I think not somehow.
Upvote
0
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.
That's fine.
Try doing it and being right at the same time; will you please?
I don't mind you making a list, but it bugs me if I have to correct it.
It wouldn't be if you actually had them.
The fact that you can't tell me how many there are, shows me the world is not in possession of this daisy chain I'm asking for.
Either that, or there were no animals in between to leave anything behind.
Nice.
That leaves about what? 30 more quadrillion to go?
Swell.
You just severly narrowed the playing field.
I'm sure I mentioned cyanobacteria to man -- not chimpanzee to man.
No.
But when it comes to phantom evolution, you'd better be able to cough up a daisy chain if you want me to buy into it.
So if you lost your faith you'd still get worked up about those other things on your list? Hmm, I think not somehow.
It also wouldn't be an issue for the bible if we had the Ark of the covenant and it had unexplainable powers,
It seems you didn't get that memo either, this is a fictitious fable too.Oh, please.
"Unexplainable powers"?
The "power" came from above the Ark, not the Ark itself.
Not to mention the ninth Person in it as well.
It wouldn't surprise me at all if Samson was 98 pounds and stood 4'2".
Had he been the "Mr. America" that Hellholewood portrays him, the Philistines wouldn't have been so perplexed as to where he got his strength.
Unexplainable beyond the supernatural is what I was implying. Also, those tablets were supposedly directly touched by god, do you honestly think that such an object would be like any other stone tablet?Oh, please.
"Unexplainable powers"?
The "power" came from above the Ark, not the Ark itself.
Not to mention the ninth Person in it as well.
It wouldn't surprise me at all if Samson was 98 pounds and stood 4'2".
Had he been the "Mr. America" that Hellholewood portrays him, the Philistines wouldn't have been so perplexed as to where he got his strength.
I beg your pardon?
I'm second to none here denying deep time.
The more you guys post about what I believe, the more wrong you are.
You're not following. What comes across is that you seem to have a problem with being related to the rest of the animal kingdom that has nothing to do with your religious beliefs. If you lost your faith it appears that you would still balk at the idea of being a part of the animal kingdom. The other items on your list, however, would no longer matter to you as they are merely things you cling to as part of your religion and in and of themselves are just meaningless arbitrary, abstract arguments. That's all.Until I do, try to respect accuracy, will you?
Especially ... especially ... if you adhere to the scientific method.
When you don't walk your talk, it makes me wonder how effective you think it really is.
You do believe in deep time, AV -- you just believe it was fraudulently "embedded."
This is what they want to believe, despite the fact the fossil record supports no such belief. The fossil record nowhere supports the connecting line below. And if they ever get around to studying the rest of the fossils and correct those 2 of every 3 they got wrong - that tree will become gap games of even greater scope. Those dots will all disappear, connected by nothing but the imagination it already is.
Like I said, the more you guys talk about what I believe, the wronger you are.
In and of itself I mean. You have no objection to time having gone on for billions of years in itself. Why would you? Denying the whole picture - that's a laugh, you haven't even got a picture. The order? These are all just pointless bible quibbles. They don't actually matter to you in themselves. Denial of sin nature? Well, to be honest you'd feel a hundred percent better if you woke up tomorrow without that disgusting idea warping your views and opinions relating to humanity and the world into something less than wholesome and pleasant, and that's putting it mildly, but you're too far gone to explain that one to you. But none of these things really matter to you in themselves, they are just things you have to adhere to in order to get your prize of eternity as god's favourite bathtime loofer. But being related to the rest of the animal kingdom? You don't like that at all for some reason. That really upsets you. Weird.
Why would one accept the standard claims of time which go against every theory and experiment there is? Do or do not clocks slow under acceleration?
Yet they continue to use the rate of clocks as they tick today -
The fact that you can never show how we are wrong says that we have it right. For example . . .
You claim that rocks are millions and billions of years old by radiometric dating because of embedded age. Is this correct?
Let's see what your little scenario would involve.
1. In order for rocks to have the wrong age by radiometric dating due to an accelerated frame of reference, the rocks and the Earth would need to be in different frames.
2. This would require every single rock that has ever been dated to be taken off the Earth, accelerated to nearl luminal speeds for long time periods, and then brought back to Earth.
Rates only differ BETWEEN FRAMES OF REFERENCE. That is Relativity 101.
So the twin needs to be in earth's frame so he doesn't age slower???? The twin that ages slower sees no discrepancy in his clock - he ages slower due only to acceleration. Just as you see none in yours. Only someone in another frame can see any discrepancies.
Only when like you we ignore all of science.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinetic_energy
"In physics, the kinetic energy of an object is the energy that it possesses due to its motion. It is defined as the work needed to accelerate a body of a given mass from rest to its stated velocity. Having gained this energy during its acceleration, the body maintains this kinetic energy unless its speed changes."
So deny all you like, but the very science you "claim" to follow shows how wrong you are.
No relativity 101 is that is clocks slow under acceleration. The twin as he accelerates notices no change in his clock - yet he ages slower. Now you deny that very theory because you do not want to accept the reverse. That as things slow - time speeds up.
It's the rest of the science:
"the body maintains this kinetic energy unless its speed changes..... The same amount of work is done by the body in decelerating from its current speed to a state of rest."
Quit denying all of science in an attempt to save your falsified beliefs.
K looks kind of like an alienWhat features are these fossils missing that a real transtional would have?
Hey for that matter why accept ANY claim of time!? Maybe we just don't really know what it is all about.Why would one accept the standard claims of time which go against every theory and experiment there is? ..
You claim that rocks are millions and billions of years old by radiometric dating because of embedded age. Is this correct?
Hey for that matter why accept ANY claim of time!? Maybe we just don't really know what it is all about.
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?