sandwiches
Mas sabe el diablo por viejo que por diablo.
Something was different alright. I also don't see any dromedaries in my living. Something's go to be different compared to Egypt... the laws of physics, perchance?
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.
I see no spirit kings or spirits marrying people here. Something had to be different. I see no one living many centuries here. Something had to be different.
Well, something on earth for starters. Since you don't know about the far universe anyhow ...how would it be an issue?And how do you get from "something" to "the entire universe"?
Camels still exist. So does beer and coffee. One lump or two?Something was different alright. I also don't see any dromedaries in my living.
Camels still exist. So does beer and coffee. One lump or two?
Magical? Is that what you call all things that are not under your present state nose?
Lie. There is and was no same state past proof presented. Not here. Not anywhere. Ever..
False. What we see we do not know what caused.
Example???? Name something you see!!!!???
Sure but they don't exist here... So, I wonder what's different here from Egypt?
Anyways... we'll continue our cartoon show tomorrow.
Night!
No, it';s what I call things that are made up when they have no evidence to support them, but are only held because they fit in with what you have already decided is true...
False. I exposed any offerings as biased and circular same state based to the core.Yes there was. Just because you disagree doesn't invalidate it.
Ne we don't.Ye we do.
Is is quite valid. Things decay. So?radioactive decay! You've never been able to show why this is invalid!
Every single claim you've made against it fails miserably because you can never explain why the different techniques produce results that agree!
The state of the far away universe is the issue here. And I see no evidence from you proving it is the same. All I have said is that I don't know. I do assume that the spiritual is a part of whatever stars are. That is a biblical observation. Well supported.
False. I exposed any offerings as biased and circular same state based to the core.
Ne we don't.
Is is quite valid. Things decay. So?
Get a grip, I have no claim against decay. I just point out that we do not know it took place in the past, as your lack of evidence validates.
I see no spirit kings or spirits marrying people here. Something had to be different. I see no one living many centuries here. Something had to be different.
Yes. Your posts are meaningless drivel.I see no Fairy Godmothers or talking cats wearing quality footwear. Starting to see a pattern, dad?
Get serious. Not only do you not know it is our nature, you don't even know it's far!The evidence is this:
What we see in the distant universe fits perfectly if the laws of nature out there are the same as the laws of nature around Earth.
No. Show us one and how it matches what!In other words, we can look at a distant star, and what we see of it matches perfectly with the ideas of nuclear fusion and such that we observe taking place in the sun.
No, in your head it all matches. Try to say how, so we all can have a look.If you are right, then what we see in the distant universe matches what we see in the local universe by an amazing coincidence. And this would lead to the position, "It's completely different, but amazingly looks exactly the same."
Nonsense. No cross check is done that isn't inbred. You merely look at the pattern, and bandy about old ages as if you made the pattern with them. No. Give an example of a cross check, and I'll put it in the cross hairs.It's not just the fact that things decay. it's HOW they decay. The rate at which they decay. The fact that since we have different materials that decay at different rates, we can cross check them against each other, and they are in agreement. The fact that we also have non-radioactive dating techniques that can also be used for cross checking, and they are also in agreement.
You are dreaming. That is why you stay vague.This would simply not be possible if your position was correct.
No. None. Show us!We have evidence in that we have rocks that show a decay of several million years.
You don't. You embed age with belief only.If the process had only been operating for a few thousand years, how could we see so many rocks with millions of years of decay?
Nonsense! Nothing had to decay to get daughter material, before it was daughter material. You just look at the stuff as if it all cam from decay.And if it wasn't caused by actual decay, but something else that simply made it look like decay, how do you explain that rocks from the same layers always date to the same age, even if they come from different placces far away from each other? Is this another one of those amazing coincidences?
Get serious. Not only do you not know it is our nature, you don't even know it's far!
No. Show us one and how it matches what!
No, in your head it all matches. Try to say how, so we all can have a look.
Nonsense. No cross check is done that isn't inbred. You merely look at the pattern, and bandy about old ages as if you made the pattern with them. No. Give an example of a cross check, and I'll put it in the cross hairs.
You are dreaming. That is why you stay vague.
No. None. Show us!
You don't. You embed age with belief only.
Nonsense! Nothing had to decay to get daughter material, before it was daughter material. You just look at the stuff as if it all cam from decay.
There is lots to suggest that they never existed.
None of them have been proven to have been in effect have they? If there was a rapid separation of the continents, thermo dynamic was not here as we know it. No killing heat was produced.Show one law of physics that never existed.
None of them have been proven to have been in effect have they? If there was a rapid separation of the continents, thermo dynamic was not here as we know it. No killing heat was produced.
We shall see.Yes we do.
Without it, the HR diagram would not exist.
" One peculiar characteristic of this form of the H-R diagram is that the temperatures are plotted from high temperature to low temperature, which aids in comparing this form of the H-R diagram with the observational form."
HertzsprungâRussell diagram - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Making a plot of stars is easy. Now where your Waterloo comes in is in showing that the temperature really is high, and how much we have seen going to low! Let's see you really make a case for how you know the temperatures even?
Example of a way they behave you predict?? I would think that having a few elements around them could be interpreted in other ways, rather than 'evolution'!!Sprectral analysis of distant stars shows that they have certain elements inside them. Our knowledge of those elements on earth tells us that stars with those elements must behave in a certain way. Our analysis of those stars matches exactly.
No. I am tnot the one pretending to have the universe mapped out, and claiming precise things. Science does that. If you can't defend and discuss them, what are you going here?Wow. Pot calling the kettle black! You accuse ME of being vague, when your specific evidence that shows that that laws of the universe were different in the past is "history". Man, you are hypocritical.
So you offer a link. What do you want me to do? Have you proof of a same state past, so that the things we see in the rocks take on your same state past meaning? No. That means you got nothin.Here you go. Now, before you start handwaving this away, let me point out that you asked me to show you some rocks that have been dated to millions or billions of years old. I have just done so.
Why try to mask it in a big link?
OK. They show no ages. Easy. What in them did you think showed ages? Zircon? As above, we need to know what nature they were formed in.Now, it is up to you to explain how these rocks could show such ages if radioactive decay has only been occuring for a few thousand years.
No. Just aware that imposing beliefs is all you do and can do.My goodness. You really are desperate to discredit anything that disagrees with your view, aren't you?
This proves beyond any doubt that you have no understanding of radio dating.
Name some aspect of it then, you should be able to get a fast win here if you are correct..
I must admit, you strike me as mostly talk so far.
I can't, because I can't prove any more than science can that our nature existed. So I look to the best record man has, the sacred history. It shows details like animals all being in one place at one time. That means that the separation came after, no? I am still here, so the killing heat never happened.LOL. Instead of using that as an argument for a "different state" past. you should be using that for an argument against a rapid separation of the continents in the past!
I can't, because I can't prove any more than science can that our nature existed. So I look to the best record man has, the sacred history. It shows details like animals all being in one place at one time. That means that the separation came after, no? I am still here, so the killing heat never happened.
None of them have been proven to have been in effect have they? If there was a rapid separation of the continents, thermo dynamic was not here as we know it. No killing heat was produced.
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?