Battle Talk ~ Battle Royale VII
- Thread starter Nathon Detroit
- Start date
- Status
attention
New member
Yeah. Right. Jack, what is the problem?
I am not having a problem with evolution theory being true, the only one who has a problem with that is you.
That was only an electric manifestation of electric currents, which can be explained at the basis of the existence of electrons and electric potentials, but still the electrons themselves are never directly observed.
Yeah! Right Jack. We OBSERVE the effects of the Big Bang, of Black Holes and of electrons.
In the same way the biological diversity and mechanisms in biology is what we OBERSERVE as the effects of evolution.
There is NO other scientific explenation.
Outside of your imagination, you can however not proof that.
But it would be possible for me to also imagine that, so I am not trying to make you look ridiculous when imagining that.
But that imagination does not proof any fact.
We simply DON'T KNOW that.
Right! We only study and observe the effect of this conjectured Big Bang, which is the observable universe that existed in the far past in a more condense, hotter and significantly smaller and expanded since then.
In that sense, the conjecture or theory of the Big Bang actually makes sense, since it can explain a lot of facts we actually DO observe, and no other scientific theory has the same explenatory power as the Big Bang has. The Big Bang replaced the previous cosmic theories of an infinite and eternal universe (Newton universe) in which no overall changes would took place (no cosmic evolution) and the Steady-State theory (expansion of the universe and simutaniously creation of matter, so that the effect was that the universe stays the same).
But we know that the Big Bang is not the complete picture, so we study now also hypthesis that try to say something meaningfull about the state of the universe prior to the Big Bang, and conjecture possible mechanisms that could cause the effect of the Big Bang.
Cosmic inflation is such an emerging new theory in this field.
It seems, there is never an end to scienitific knowledge....
Last edited:
Heino
New member
Is there any reason why you are so rude? English is my second language. I may speak and write it fluently, but I occaisionally make mistakes, especially when not performing a spell-check and grammer check on everything I write. Like everyone else, I'm only human. I assure you that I am a biologist, and that I work in a lab at a large Biotech firm in massachusettes. Oh look, I forgot to capitalize Massachusetts in the previous sentence. Does that mean I don't really speak and write English?
Heino
New member
Are you under the impression that I am an atheist? I most certainly am not. I am a Lutherin, but I have no problem accepting evolutionary theory. I believe that it is simply one of the many devices that God created to accomplish his works.
One does not need to be atheist to accept evolutionary theory.
ex_fundy
New member
Have you ever worked with real Biologists? If not, then you really have no reason to make such an assumption. milli, micro, nano, pico, etc. prefixes are not nearly as common in biology as they are in physics or real-time computing (my field). Just because you've picked up bits and pieces of scientific concepts and terminology doesn't mean you understand the working knowledge a biologist uses in their daily work. Evolution is a field of slow changes, not nano-second measurements.
attention
New member
Flood story
Flood story
Here is an interesting article about this subject of the flood story mentioned in this thread earlier.
True story of Atlantis
Flood story
Here is an interesting article about this subject of the flood story mentioned in this thread earlier.
True story of Atlantis
attention
New member
Yeah. But according to mr One Eyed Jack, such is only a fantasy.
In fact everything is a fantasy, untill YOU actually observe it.
That is science (according to his hypothesis), everything else is a fantasy.
Thus, the only scientific theory one could come up with is the theory that the whole world came into existence when you were born, and will come to an end the day you die.
Heino
New member
I can let everyone be assured that we are all nerds. All of my comrades at work are quite nerdy and fail to double check things like grammar and spelling. Sine the new FDA regulations were put into effect, we are dilligent about paperwork and ethics, but among each other, we send cryptic and sometimes unreadable messages. I often am told by my friends that my English is better than theirs is!
One Eyed Jack
New member
Are you saying that we can't observe other planets in our own solar system? You said extraterrestrial, not extrasolar. You need to get your mind out of automatic discredit mode and pay attention to what's being said.
You are terrible right about that. I was meaning to say extra-solar. But you mentioned "observers" on other planets, so that automatically invokes the fact that no observers on planets in the solar system exist outside of earth itself.
But I apologize. Attention should have paid attention to what he said.
--------
"Heusdens"="Attention" currently working from another PC.
One Eyed Jack
New member
No, I didn't. I was very specific about somebody on Earth observing other planets in our solar system.
I never said there were. Why do you always make up strawmen and attribute words to me that I never said?
You should have paid better attention to what I said too. Say, why are you referring to yourself in the third person, anyway?
D the Atheist
New member
One Eyed Jack,
ex_fundy said in post number 2300 “The amount of water for 30,000 sheep would be aproximately 31,704 gallons every day. It would be highly unliikely that 8 people could lower buckets and pull that much water up every day (while still doing all their other feeding chores). And don't forget the contanimation in the water.
To which you replied:
This is not an answer to ex-fundy, it is an excuse to suit your point of view without any back up evidence. In fact not many animals can go for days without water. To use the exception of animals that can is misleading at best. Living in a hot, un-air-conditioned tub would most likely make for thirst, not reduce it.
You have not shown any evidence to disprove the 30,00 gallons, or even suggested a lower figure of your liking.
Here is your chance: What quantity of water was required each day (Mean)? Name the animals that do not need liquid water and explain how they do get it?
I did say I was not going to wade through all that stuff. A boa constrictor and Anaconda are large members of the reptile family with similar habits and needs.
I was pointing out that reptiles, even large reptiles, are not a good average or any example for other animals surviving without food in very adverse conditions in the Ark of imagination.
But Jack, you will no doubt continue to play on the irrelevant and bypass the relevant to satisfy your own mind. (And I expect a smarmy comment on this)
ex_fundy said in post number 2300 “The amount of water for 30,000 sheep would be aproximately 31,704 gallons every day. It would be highly unliikely that 8 people could lower buckets and pull that much water up every day (while still doing all their other feeding chores). And don't forget the contanimation in the water.
To which you replied:
This is not an answer to ex-fundy, it is an excuse to suit your point of view without any back up evidence. In fact not many animals can go for days without water. To use the exception of animals that can is misleading at best. Living in a hot, un-air-conditioned tub would most likely make for thirst, not reduce it.
You have not shown any evidence to disprove the 30,00 gallons, or even suggested a lower figure of your liking.
Here is your chance: What quantity of water was required each day (Mean)? Name the animals that do not need liquid water and explain how they do get it?
I did say I was not going to wade through all that stuff. A boa constrictor and Anaconda are large members of the reptile family with similar habits and needs.
I was pointing out that reptiles, even large reptiles, are not a good average or any example for other animals surviving without food in very adverse conditions in the Ark of imagination.
But Jack, you will no doubt continue to play on the irrelevant and bypass the relevant to satisfy your own mind. (And I expect a smarmy comment on this)
Since my last post I have just seen 8 more pages showing the impossibilities of the Ark.
Yet Jack still sticks to his unfounded fantasy.
You have to admire that degree of determination.. but then I guess Ludd was determined too.
Yet Jack still sticks to his unfounded fantasy.
You have to admire that degree of determination.. but then I guess Ludd was determined too.
attention
New member
D the Atheist:
What is the use of trying to discredit a fairy tale? In a fairy tale such a thing (supplying water to animals on the imaginary arch of noach) is not a problem. That is why it is a fairy tale.
But even faity tales contain some elements of truth. The flood did happen, and also other cultures have ancient writings and fairy tales of floods. This does not proof a worldwide flood, but even that was - to some extend - something that *could* have been the case. Perhaps around 11.000 BC, because of the melting of ice caps, triggered by dust from a giant vulcanic eruption.
There are scientific indications that such an event could have occured, at least it is assumed that many parts that are now under water, once were land. The phenomena of the ice age, and the rising of the sea water level due to melting of huge amounts of ice, is in itself not something improbable. Science / geology assumes that that in fact did happen.
However, to my knowledge, it is not assumed that rising of ocean levels could have caused the inundation of ALL the land (including the mountains).
That what makes up the fictuous part of the story of Noach, as also the tale that a pair of all the living animals were shipped on that arch, and could surive a year, makes it into fiction.
If it were only a small amount of animals (those who serve human society, like sheep, cows, horses, and like) it could be credible, but one can't take a pair of every animal on earth. That's for sure. Even nowadays we did not yet discover ALL the animal species, we still discover new ones.
Anyone any idea just about the number of insect species that exist? I bet it would be enough to fill 20 arcs already!!
The flood story and the arch, however most likely occured in some or other way, and formed the basis for this bible story.
The problem is that the story is realy misinterpreted if it is believed literally. Noach could in NO POSSIBLE way have gathered all the species of animals in all the continents, there is NO POSSIBLE way that a gigantic catastrophe on earth would have flooded ALL LAND (including mountains) etc. etc.
What is the use of trying to discredit a fairy tale? In a fairy tale such a thing (supplying water to animals on the imaginary arch of noach) is not a problem. That is why it is a fairy tale.
But even faity tales contain some elements of truth. The flood did happen, and also other cultures have ancient writings and fairy tales of floods. This does not proof a worldwide flood, but even that was - to some extend - something that *could* have been the case. Perhaps around 11.000 BC, because of the melting of ice caps, triggered by dust from a giant vulcanic eruption.
There are scientific indications that such an event could have occured, at least it is assumed that many parts that are now under water, once were land. The phenomena of the ice age, and the rising of the sea water level due to melting of huge amounts of ice, is in itself not something improbable. Science / geology assumes that that in fact did happen.
However, to my knowledge, it is not assumed that rising of ocean levels could have caused the inundation of ALL the land (including the mountains).
That what makes up the fictuous part of the story of Noach, as also the tale that a pair of all the living animals were shipped on that arch, and could surive a year, makes it into fiction.
If it were only a small amount of animals (those who serve human society, like sheep, cows, horses, and like) it could be credible, but one can't take a pair of every animal on earth. That's for sure. Even nowadays we did not yet discover ALL the animal species, we still discover new ones.
Anyone any idea just about the number of insect species that exist? I bet it would be enough to fill 20 arcs already!!
The flood story and the arch, however most likely occured in some or other way, and formed the basis for this bible story.
The problem is that the story is realy misinterpreted if it is believed literally. Noach could in NO POSSIBLE way have gathered all the species of animals in all the continents, there is NO POSSIBLE way that a gigantic catastrophe on earth would have flooded ALL LAND (including mountains) etc. etc.
Last edited:
attention
New member
Re: Re: Flood story
Re: Re: Flood story
I can't say wether that "Atlantis" (see my link) story is a true story or not. It seems the writer did try to base himself on scientific evidence for his story, and I know of no fact he mentions that makes his story incredible on a scientific account.
If you think otherwise, then please let us know.
Re: Re: Flood story
I can't say wether that "Atlantis" (see my link) story is a true story or not. It seems the writer did try to base himself on scientific evidence for his story, and I know of no fact he mentions that makes his story incredible on a scientific account.
If you think otherwise, then please let us know.
Last edited:
- Status