PRO

Where Your Ideas can change Minds

Please visit our new forum at

http://www.4forums.com

CON


YouDebate.com Forum
» back to YouDebate.com
Register | Profile | Log In | Lost Password | Active Users | Help | Board Rules | Search | FAQ |
Custom Search
» You are not logged in.   log in | register

  YouDebate.com Forum
   Creationism vs Evolution Debates
     Origin of Reality

Topic Jump
« Back | Next »
[ Single page for this topic ]
Forum moderated by: admin
    

    
peddler8111

|     |       Report Post



Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Is there any one here other than Demon that believs [knows] there was an origin to reality and who is working on it.
The whole idea seems absurd to me.


-------
peddler
 


Posts: 242 | Posted: 12:43 AM on May 31, 2005 | IP
Demon38

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Can't refute the points so you fall back to your old favorite, "thats absurd".
Face it peddler, you don't know what your talking about!
 


Posts: 1664 | Posted: 01:55 AM on May 31, 2005 | IP
peddler8111

|     |       Report Post



Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from Demon38 at 01:55 AM on May 31, 2005 :
Can't refute the points so you fall back to your old favorite, "thats absurd".
Face it peddler, you don't know what your talking about!

No one seems to know what you are talking about.
I posed this question just to check my own sanity.
You make no point. All you do is make a broad statement that some scientist is working on a theory and therefore it is fact.

I don't comprehend how reality can have an origin. It is a concept. If unreality used to exist, the fact it existed would make it reality. Therefore unreality cannot exist. It is a word to describe an imaginary condition, not a field of scientific study. It is a place insane people dwell not scientist.
All you do is call me a liar.
I want someone else to defend your position on this.






-------
peddler
 


Posts: 242 | Posted: 08:50 AM on May 31, 2005 | IP
Peter87

|      |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Actualy I agree with Demon here. Hey and on all the other stuff in his posts, becuase he brings evidence and proof, where as you bring, no becuase thats absurd and god did it.


-------
Why should we bow to the will of anyone? Especialy a man who our country but another voted for?
 


Posts: 301 | Posted: 09:38 AM on May 31, 2005 | IP
peddler8111

|     |       Report Post



Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Apparently it is not only I who find that reality could have had a beginning.
Where are your compadres?
Could it be they find the idea as brainless as I do.
Time will tell.
Maybe you can create a personality to agree with you. That I believe is your best bet.



-------
peddler
 


Posts: 242 | Posted: 1:19 PM on May 31, 2005 | IP
Peter87

|      |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Peddler I think the majority of people agree with demon here.


-------
Why should we bow to the will of anyone? Especialy a man who our country but another voted for?
 


Posts: 301 | Posted: 3:07 PM on May 31, 2005 | IP
peddler8111

|     |       Report Post



Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from Peter87 at 09:38 AM on May 31, 2005 :
Actualy I agree with Demon here. Hey and on all the other stuff in his posts, becuase he brings evidence and proof, where as you bring, no becuase thats absurd and god did it.

He brings evidence and proof? Talk/origins say so and thats it? Scientific proof of anything is exceedingly rare. for evolution non existent. Only opinions.

Since you wish to defend Demon on this why don't you. Saying you agree is not an  argument. Agree with what? How could reality have a beginning.
I am suprised anyone defended this. You may notice you are the only one.

I think you are making up stories as well and have no clue what you are saying. Otherwise you would address the issue posted.





-------
peddler
 


Posts: 242 | Posted: 10:14 PM on May 31, 2005 | IP
Box of Fox

|     |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

You can condemn science all you want. But to actually think that religion or belief or faith is any better is foolish.

So if unreality doesn't exist because we are always in reality, why in the world did you as if there was an origin to it? You were just asking for a flame. Stop trying to downsize people who don't agree with you. It is pathetic.
 


Posts: 85 | Posted: 10:23 PM on May 31, 2005 | IP
peddler8111

|     |       Report Post



Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from Peter87 at 3:07 PM on May 31, 2005 :
Peddler I think the majority of people agree with demon here.


Well are any of you capable of explaining how reality could have an origin? Or do you just argee because he disagrees with me?
I think that is the case.

You need to be more specific .




-------
peddler
 


Posts: 242 | Posted: 11:29 PM on May 31, 2005 | IP
Lord Iorek

|     |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from peddler8111 at 10:14 PM on May 31, 2005 :
How could reality have a beginning.
I am suprised anyone defended this. You may notice you are the only one.

I think you are making up stories as well and have no clue what you are saying. Otherwise you would address the issue posted.


How could reality have a beginning? Easy, if it exists then it came from somewhere(you obviously need to pick up a book)


There! you said it, you're making it up! Or do you not know what you are talking about.

Aditionally, Demon tries to maintain the topic but YOU screw it up, talking about incest and evolution in a surrealist's mind. Demon keeps having to set you straight even though nothing will do that. And at least he doesn't make topics that basically say, "Peddler is a moron who knows nothing about what he talks about."

So please I ask you nicely, go over to the religion forums where you can trade Bible verses instead of making my life a living hell (i'm actually looking forward to the actuall hell because it must be ten times better than reading your nonsense everyday)

You see this, I'm a little angry right now...


-------
"At the age of six I wanted to be a cook. At seven I wanted to be Napoleon. And my ambition has been growing steadily ever since." - Salvador Dali

Guide the future by the past, long ago the mould was cast. - Rush
 


Posts: 121 | Posted: 12:06 AM on June 1, 2005 | IP
Apoapsis

|     |       Report Post



Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

If "origin of reality" means the origin of our present universe, then yes, there are many people working on this.   Modern particle accelerators reproduce energy densities that approach conditions very soon after the "big bang".  The results that they give feed back into the theoretical models.  In a few years they expect to be able to verify some predictions of M-theory to be able to start to narrow down which of the several versions is the most useful.

Particle accelerator measurements of string theory

I attended a seminar about istring theory a few months ago.  The guy was able to start from first principles and derive Maxwell's field equations with relativistic corrections with a just a couple of steps.


-------
Pogge:” This is the volume of a sphere with a 62 kilometer (about 39 miles) radius, which is considerably smaller than the 2,000 mile radius of the Earth.”
Wikipedia:” For Earth, the mean radius is 6,371.009 km(≈3,958.761 mi; ≈3,440.069 nmi).”
Wisp to Lester (on Pogge): Do you admit he was wrong about the basics?
Lester: No

 


Posts: 1747 | Posted: 06:02 AM on June 1, 2005 | IP
peddler8111

|     |       Report Post



Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from Box of Fox at 10:23 PM on May 31, 2005 :
You can condemn science all you want. But to actually think that religion or belief or faith is any better is foolish.

So if unreality doesn't exist because we are always in reality, why in the world did you as if there was an origin to it? You were just asking for a flame. Stop trying to downsize people who don't agree with you. It is pathetic.

Demon says there was and won't admit he made it up. I asked if anyone agrees with him
And everyone agrees with him. Therefore you asked it! You are so full of hate you attack me and don't even stop to ask yourself why!

I am downsizing people who don't agree with me?
You are defending a fellow evolutionist and don't even know why.
It is Demon that brought this up. Like most evolutionist he always calls me a liar.
By your statment you are agreeing that unreality cannot exist and you disagree with Demon.

Is this your code of ethics? I am wrong on one issue we argee on  because I disagree on others? Anyone who believes in evolution is right even if you don't agree with them as long as a creationist agrees with you?

You "downsize" yourself. You lack character. You are basically and fundementally dishonest.





-------
peddler
 


Posts: 242 | Posted: 07:52 AM on June 1, 2005 | IP
peddler8111

|     |       Report Post



Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:


How could reality have a beginning? Easy, if it exists then it came from somewhere(you obviously need to pick up a book)
What books teaches if it exists it had a beginning? Newton taught that everything that had a beginning had a cause. What caused reality? If unreality existed what was it like?
I think you are making this up as you go along.


There! you said it, you're making it up! Or do you not know what you are talking about.
Making what up? I asked the question. Demon made it up and you are following in his footsteps. Why would I make something up and then argue that I don't believe it?
I don't know how you think, I am wondering if you think.

Aditionally, Demon tries to maintain the topic but YOU screw it up, talking about incest and evolution in a surrealist's mind. Demon keeps having to set you straight even though nothing will do that. And at least he doesn't make topics that basically say, "Peddler is a moron who knows nothing about what he talks about."
The topic was do creationist believe we all came from one man and one woman. They do so the whole topics was dishonest to start with. It should hane been why do they believe that.
Anyway my response was that no matter what you believe there was one man and one woman. No one really wanted to explain how a population of animals, males and females could evolve from a population of whatever. Evolutionist hate to discuss origins. It was not a matter of me changing the subject it was no one liked my argument, pity.
As far as me starting this post Demon calls me a lia so much it is pointless to talk to him anymore. He has a strange set of ethics. If someone is mistaken they are a liar, if they disagree they are a liar. I am the lone ranger here if you haven't noticed.

So please I ask you nicely, go over to the religion forums where you can trade Bible verses instead of making my life a living hell (i'm actually looking forward to the actuall hell because it must be ten times better than reading your nonsense everyday)
I find that encouraging. I guess you would prefer that everyone you speak with agrees with you.
The real hell is not a place you should go. It is your choice .

You see this, I'm a little angry right now...


Why  be angry? It is bad for your heart.
I admit I smile when you say it . That is wrong of me.

Try harder next time this was one of your more lame arguments. I have faith in you .



-------
peddler
 


Posts: 242 | Posted: 08:17 AM on June 1, 2005 | IP
peddler8111

|     |       Report Post



Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from Apoapsis at 06:02 AM on June 1, 2005 :
If "origin of reality" means the origin of our present universe, then yes, there are many people working on this.   Modern particle accelerators reproduce energy densities that approach conditions very soon after the "big bang".  The results that they give feed back into the theoretical models.  In a few years they expect to be able to verify some predictions of M-theory to be able to start to narrow down which of the several versions is the most useful.

Particle accelerator measurements of string theory

I attended a seminar about istring theory a few months ago.  The guy was able to start from first principles and derive Maxwell's field equations with relativistic corrections with a just a couple of steps.

Why do you defend this guy?
He said there are codmologist working on the ORIGIN OF THE START OF REALITY.
He is lying, making up stories.
He refuse to admit that origins are a start!
He is an embarrasment to your cause.
you are encouraging him.





-------
peddler
 


Posts: 242 | Posted: 10:45 AM on June 5, 2005 | IP
Apoapsis

|     |       Report Post



Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from peddler8111 at 10:45 AM on June 5, 2005 :

Why do you defend this guy?
He said there are codmologist working on the ORIGIN OF THE START OF REALITY.
He is lying, making up stories.
He refuse to admit that origins are a start!
He is an embarrasment to your cause.
you are encouraging him.


Cosmologists are working on the start of the universe, our present reality.  If you want names look at the follwing articles.  You are pretty quick with the lying label.  Doesn't say much for your witness.

Ekpyrotic universe: Colliding branes and the origin of the hot big bang

The Cold Big-Bang Cosmology as a Counter-example to Several Anthropic Arguments
A general Friedmann big-bang cosmology can be specified by fixing a half-dozen cosmological parameters such as the photon-to-baryon ratio Eta, the cosmological constant Lambda, the curvature scale R, and the amplitude Q of (assumed scale-invariant) primordial density fluctuations. There is currently no established theory as to why these parameters take the particular values we deduce from observations. This has led to proposed `anthropic' explanations for the observed value of each parameter, as the only value capable of generating a universe that can host intelligent life. In this paper, I explicitly show that the requirement that the universe generates sun-like stars with planets does not fix these parameters, by developing a class of cosmologies (based on the classical `cold big-bang' model) in which some or all of the cosmological parameters differ by orders of magnitude from the values they assume in the standard hot big-bang cosmology, without precluding in any obvious way the existence of intelligent life. I also give a careful discussion of the structure and context of anthropic arguments in cosmology, and point out some implications of the cold big-bang model's existence for anthropic arguments concerning specific parameters.

(Edited by Apoapsis 6/6/2005 at 07:43 AM).

(Edited by Apoapsis 6/6/2005 at 09:11 AM).

(Edited by Apoapsis 6/6/2005 at 09:12 AM).


-------
Pogge:” This is the volume of a sphere with a 62 kilometer (about 39 miles) radius, which is considerably smaller than the 2,000 mile radius of the Earth.”
Wikipedia:” For Earth, the mean radius is 6,371.009 km(≈3,958.761 mi; ≈3,440.069 nmi).”
Wisp to Lester (on Pogge): Do you admit he was wrong about the basics?
Lester: No

 


Posts: 1747 | Posted: 07:14 AM on June 6, 2005 | IP
peddler8111

|     |       Report Post



Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from Apoapsis at 07:14 AM on June 6, 2005 :


Cosmologists are working on the start of the universe, our present reality.  If you want names look at the follwing articles.  You are pretty quick with the lying label.  Doesn't say much for your witness.


Quick ? Demon has called me a liar as many times as everyone I have ever met in my life has. Anything he does not agree with you on makes you a liar.
Please pay attention!
He said that cosmotologist are working on , and I quote:
The Origin of the Start of Reality

Numerous time I have pointed out to him that an Origin is the start of something but he will not concede even that.

He did make this up and continues to call me a liar . I have a few times been proven wrong here and admitted it , very few. I have accused a few falsely and I have apologized. Demon is a mean spirited person and you should let him alone as to associated yourself with him is not the image you wish to have.
All of the information you presented is irrelevant , it has nothing to do with his story.

But I would like to ask one question of you? Are the cosmotologist you say are working on the start of our reality, whatever that means, in any way at all looking at the Big Bang as part of their research?







-------
peddler
 


Posts: 242 | Posted: 11:16 PM on June 6, 2005 | IP
Apoapsis

|     |       Report Post



Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from peddler8111 at 11:16 PM on June 6, 2005 :


All of the information you presented is irrelevant , it has nothing to do with his story.

But I would like to ask one question of you? Are the cosmotologist you say are working on the start of our reality, whatever that means, in any way at all looking at the Big Bang as part of their research?


Did you even read the titles of the articles I posted?

For your information, the "big bang" was first postulated by a Christian scientist.  It met significant resistance because it was so close to the Genisis account.  It was accepted because of the overwhelming evidence.


-------
Pogge:” This is the volume of a sphere with a 62 kilometer (about 39 miles) radius, which is considerably smaller than the 2,000 mile radius of the Earth.”
Wikipedia:” For Earth, the mean radius is 6,371.009 km(≈3,958.761 mi; ≈3,440.069 nmi).”
Wisp to Lester (on Pogge): Do you admit he was wrong about the basics?
Lester: No

 


Posts: 1747 | Posted: 07:56 AM on June 7, 2005 | IP
peddler8111

|     |       Report Post



Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from Apoapsis at 07:56 AM on June 7, 2005 :
Quote from peddler8111 at 11:16 PM on June 6, 2005 :


All of the information you presented is irrelevant , it has nothing to do with his story.

But I would like to ask one question of you? Are the cosmotologist you say are working on the start of our reality, whatever that means, in any way at all looking at the Big Bang as part of their research?


Did you even read the titles of the articles I posted?

For your information, the "big bang" was first postulated by a Christian scientist.  It met significant resistance because it was so close to the Genisis account.  It was accepted because of the overwhelming evidence.


We are not communicating.
First of all the Origin of the Start is nonsense.
An origin is a beginning , a start.
I gave Demon many chances to simply say it was a misquote but he won't . If I say anything that he disagrees with , right , wrong or indifferent , I am a liar. I got so frustrated I thought he might realise this was not an acceptable method of discourse if his peers told him that. Therefore I proposed the question at hand.
So far not one of his peers has either bothered to actually read what he says or has defended him even though there is no defense.
Fairness is a rare trait here and lately you are the only one that has exibited that trait , at least as far as the evolutionist side. The only  other "creationist" here and I disagree on everything but certain scientific points so I am the lone ranger . I'm okay with that but by not at least being fair with me it gives me the right to attack the opposition on moral grounds.

I know the history of the Big Bang Georges Lemaitre is credited with the idea.
He said:
" That instant would have been the moment of creation, and as he was also an abbot of the Roman Catholic church argued that God had created 'a primæval atom' which had grown to become the Universe"

He was no doubt a Catholic but a Christian is another matter. He worships a different god that I do. Jesus Christ was the Creator of all things. John ch 1. He created out of nothing many times while He was here. The weak god the abbot worshipped was the same weak god that theistic evolutionist do. Not the Lord God Almighty.

The biggest promoter of the Big Bang was the science fiction writer Gamow.
That says it all.

The real point is that you are defending Demon because he is on your side not because you agree with him or his ethics.
I will give you the benefit of the doubt that you do not realise this but he called me a liar for daring to insinuate that cosmotologist working on the Origin of the Start of Reality had anything whatsoever to do with the subject of the Big Bang.
It is obvious from this post that you think that is the center of their research.

If you continue to defend him I will lose faith in your ethics as well. I hope that is not the case.





-------
peddler
 


Posts: 242 | Posted: 09:26 AM on June 7, 2005 | IP
Apoapsis

|     |       Report Post



Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

He was no doubt a Catholic but a Christian is another matter. He worships a different god that I do. Jesus Christ was the Creator of all things. John ch 1. He created out of nothing many times while He was here. The weak god the abbot worshipped was the same weak god that theistic evolutionist do. Not the Lord God Almighty.


Interesting that you are so qualified to judge others.  I thought the mark of a Christian was humility?


-------
Pogge:” This is the volume of a sphere with a 62 kilometer (about 39 miles) radius, which is considerably smaller than the 2,000 mile radius of the Earth.”
Wikipedia:” For Earth, the mean radius is 6,371.009 km(≈3,958.761 mi; ≈3,440.069 nmi).”
Wisp to Lester (on Pogge): Do you admit he was wrong about the basics?
Lester: No

 


Posts: 1747 | Posted: 10:48 AM on June 7, 2005 | IP
peddler8111

|     |       Report Post



Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from Apoapsis at 10:48 AM on June 7, 2005 :
He was no doubt a Catholic but a Christian is another matter. He worships a different god that I do. Jesus Christ was the Creator of all things. John ch 1. He created out of nothing many times while He was here. The weak god the abbot worshipped was the same weak god that theistic evolutionist do. Not the Lord God Almighty.


Interesting that you are so qualified to judge others.  I thought the mark of a Christian was humility?


I did not judge him. God does. I can read believe it or not.
I notice you evaded the entire question of this post.
Are you afgreeing that Demon was justified for calling me a liar for thinking the cosmotologist he refered to but never referenced were at all interested in the Big Bang.
Or despite the fact that you said the same thing I did you still take his side.
Now I am questioning your integrity.
If you refuse to give a strait answer I will have no choice but to believe you have none.
What will it be?




-------
peddler
 


Posts: 242 | Posted: 12:46 PM on June 7, 2005 | IP
Apoapsis

|     |       Report Post



Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

He was no doubt a Catholic but a Christian is another matter. He worships a different god that I do.


You don't need God,  you are declaring who is or is not a Christian.  This would get you banned on all of the Christian run forums I've seen.


-------
Pogge:” This is the volume of a sphere with a 62 kilometer (about 39 miles) radius, which is considerably smaller than the 2,000 mile radius of the Earth.”
Wikipedia:” For Earth, the mean radius is 6,371.009 km(≈3,958.761 mi; ≈3,440.069 nmi).”
Wisp to Lester (on Pogge): Do you admit he was wrong about the basics?
Lester: No

 


Posts: 1747 | Posted: 2:02 PM on June 7, 2005 | IP
peddler8111

|     |       Report Post



Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from Apoapsis at 2:02 PM on June 7, 2005 :

You don't need God,  you are declaring who is or is not a Christian.  This would get you banned on all of the Christian run forums I've seen.

That would beg the question:
Are they Christian run?
If you sit in a chicken house once a week does that make you a chicken?

Rev 22:19  And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
The Bible judges him. The Bible is God's Word.
The big bang denies Genesis completely .

Apparently your desire to defend a fellow evolutionist outwieghs your personal ethics.







(Edited by peddler8111 6/7/2005 at 4:48 PM).


-------
peddler
 


Posts: 242 | Posted: 4:44 PM on June 7, 2005 | IP
Apoapsis

|     |       Report Post



Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from peddler8111 at 4:44 PM on June 7, 2005 :

The Bible judges him.


That clarifies it perfectly, you worship the Bible.






-------
Pogge:” This is the volume of a sphere with a 62 kilometer (about 39 miles) radius, which is considerably smaller than the 2,000 mile radius of the Earth.”
Wikipedia:” For Earth, the mean radius is 6,371.009 km(≈3,958.761 mi; ≈3,440.069 nmi).”
Wisp to Lester (on Pogge): Do you admit he was wrong about the basics?
Lester: No

 


Posts: 1747 | Posted: 5:52 PM on June 7, 2005 | IP
peddler8111

|     |       Report Post



Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from Apoapsis at 5:52 PM on June 7, 2005 :
Quote from peddler8111 at 4:44 PM on June 7, 2005 :

The Bible judges him.


That clarifies it perfectly, you worship the Bible.


Your logic is fussy. I worship The God of The Bible.
You however worship time and chance.

You really are no different than Demon only more polite. Winning an argument is more important to you than your ethics.







-------
peddler
 


Posts: 242 | Posted: 9:32 PM on June 7, 2005 | IP
Demon38

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

You really are no different than Demon only more polite.

Hey, Apoapsis, take it as a compliment!  And I freely admit I have a temper, I'm Irish/Italian and I don't suffer fools lightly!
 


Posts: 1664 | Posted: 04:58 AM on June 11, 2005 | IP
peddler8111

|     |       Report Post



Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from Demon38 at 04:58 AM on June 11, 2005 :
You really are no different than Demon only more polite.

Hey, Apoapsis, take it as a compliment!  And I freely admit I have a temper, I'm Irish/Italian and I don't suffer fools lightly!
You must be so disconnected from reality you don't associate with yourself if that is the case.
Oterwise you could not put up with yourself.
A sad state of affairs that is.





-------
peddler
 


Posts: 242 | Posted: 12:32 AM on June 12, 2005 | IP
Demon38

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

You must be so disconnected from reality you don't associate with yourself if that is the case.
Oterwise you could not put up with yourself.
A sad state of affairs that is.


Ha hahahaaa!!!  This coming from the guy who doesn't understand science!  This coming from the guy who doesn't understand biology!!
Now that's funny!
 


Posts: 1664 | Posted: 03:57 AM on June 12, 2005 | IP
Apoapsis

|     |       Report Post



Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from peddler8111 at 9:32 PM on June 7, 2005 :

Your logic is fussy. I worship The God of The Bible.

You still require qualifiers don't you?

So, if God gave you a revelation that your interpretation was incorrect, you would reject that, wouldn't you?


You however worship time and chance.

You really are no different than Demon only more polite. Winning an argument is more important to you than your ethics.


Claiming to be omniscient again?  You continue to show that you don't need God.   Not when you have your own infallibility.



-------
Pogge:” This is the volume of a sphere with a 62 kilometer (about 39 miles) radius, which is considerably smaller than the 2,000 mile radius of the Earth.”
Wikipedia:” For Earth, the mean radius is 6,371.009 km(≈3,958.761 mi; ≈3,440.069 nmi).”
Wisp to Lester (on Pogge): Do you admit he was wrong about the basics?
Lester: No

 


Posts: 1747 | Posted: 11:43 AM on June 12, 2005 | IP
peddler8111

|     |       Report Post



Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from Apoapsis at 11:43 AM on June 12, 2005 :
You still require qualifiers don't you?
I did not create my own god to fit my personal lifestyle if that is what you mean.
Without qualifiers you might as well worship your cat.

So, if God gave you a revelation that your interpretation was incorrect, you would reject that, wouldn't you?
A revelation has no need of an interpretation.
Save this link:
http://dictionary.reference.com/

The act of revealing or disclosing.
Something revealed, especially a dramatic disclosure of something not previously known or realized.
Theology. A manifestation of divine will or truth.
Revelation Abbr. Rev. or Rv. Bible. See table at Bible.

Claiming to be omniscient again?  You continue to show that you don't need God.   Not when you have your own infallibility.


No human is infallible. Although there are degrees of fallability.
Demon says 99% of Americans believe in evolution , you infer that the polls, Gallop and others that say  that is insane are misleading.
He has the conviction to make assine statements that are easily disproved and you really don't say anything .
Which view is more flawed?
It is kinda of like the deep intellectual thought that goes into deciding if a glass of nerve gas if half full or half empty.


[b]

(Edited by peddler8111 6/14/2005 at 1:34 PM).


-------
peddler
 


Posts: 242 | Posted: 2:54 PM on June 13, 2005 | IP
Apoapsis

|     |       Report Post



Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Peddler, please fix your tags.


-------
Pogge:” This is the volume of a sphere with a 62 kilometer (about 39 miles) radius, which is considerably smaller than the 2,000 mile radius of the Earth.”
Wikipedia:” For Earth, the mean radius is 6,371.009 km(≈3,958.761 mi; ≈3,440.069 nmi).”
Wisp to Lester (on Pogge): Do you admit he was wrong about the basics?
Lester: No

 


Posts: 1747 | Posted: 11:14 AM on June 14, 2005 | IP
Demon38

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Demon says 99% of Americans believe in evolution , you infer that the polls, Gallop and others that say  that is insane are misleading.


Liar, show me where I said 99% of Americans believe in evolution.  I said over 99% of the biologists and life science researchers in America accept evolution!

And for God's sake, learn how to use this site, reading your gibberish causes almost as many headaches as your ridiculous claims!
 


Posts: 1664 | Posted: 3:12 PM on June 14, 2005 | IP
peddler8111

|     |       Report Post



Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from Demon38 at 3:12 PM on June 14, 2005 :
Demon says 99% of Americans believe in evolution , you infer that the polls, Gallop and others that say  that is insane are misleading.


Liar, show me where I said 99% of Americans believe in evolution.  I said over 99% of the biologists and life science researchers in America accept evolution!

And for God's sake, learn how to use this site, reading your gibberish causes almost as many headaches as your ridiculous claims!

According to you their opinion is the only one that matters.
According to you most Christians believe in evolution.
Does it seem a bit odd to you 99% of the biologist, according to Demonology, come from 49% of the population? I would like you to back that up with something other than Demon says.
Also if you wish to continue this conversation we both need to refrain from the insults. Although I must admit I enjoy it it must stop. If not I will not answer any more of your post.

[/b]



(Edited by peddler8111 6/15/2005 at 07:46 AM).


-------
peddler
 


Posts: 242 | Posted: 07:13 AM on June 15, 2005 | IP
Apoapsis

|     |       Report Post



Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from peddler8111 at 2:54 PM on June 13, 2005 :


So, if God gave you a revelation that your interpretation was incorrect, you would reject that, wouldn't you?
A revelation has no need of an interpretation.


Only if you are either:

1)  Onmiscient
2)  Arrogant

Which are you?


Save this link:
http://dictionary.reference.com/

The act of revealing or disclosing.
Something revealed, especially a dramatic disclosure of something not previously known or realized.
Theology. A manifestation of divine will or truth.
Revelation Abbr. Rev. or Rv. Bible. See table at Bible.


That's nice, but it doesn't support your viewpoint at all.




-------
Pogge:” This is the volume of a sphere with a 62 kilometer (about 39 miles) radius, which is considerably smaller than the 2,000 mile radius of the Earth.”
Wikipedia:” For Earth, the mean radius is 6,371.009 km(≈3,958.761 mi; ≈3,440.069 nmi).”
Wisp to Lester (on Pogge): Do you admit he was wrong about the basics?
Lester: No

 


Posts: 1747 | Posted: 11:15 AM on June 15, 2005 | IP
Demon38

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

According to you their opinion is the only one that matters.

Yes, the epxerts who study biology, geology, astronomy are the ones who are best qualified for determining what is valid scientifically.  Are you saying the common man is better suited for determining what is valid???

According to you most Christians believe in evolution.

No according to me, according to the statistics...
The Catholic Church's position on evolution, from here:
Catholic
"The Catholic Church’s position regarding evolution is that its sees no contradiction between the scientific theory of evolution and the Church’s view of man’s creation by God. Both Pope Pius XII in 1950 and Pope John Paul II in 1996 have stated that evolution, so long as it does not attempt to say that man’s soul does not come from God, is not inconsistent with what a Catholic can believe in."

And from here:
Evolution
"In Europe and in most of the rest of the educated world, there is no longer a controversy around evolution.  It is taught as it should be, devoid of religious dogma.  Only here is the "Godly" US is there any controversy.  Even the Catholic church has opined that evolution happened.  Their only twist is that it was divinely inspired as in "Theistic Evolution."  "

And from here:EvolutionII
"In other industrialized countries, Miller said, 80 percent or more typically accept evolution, most of the others say they are not sure and very few people reject the idea outright.
"In Japan, something like 96 percent accept evolution," he said. Even in socially conservative, predominantly Catholic countries like Poland, perhaps 75 percent of people surveyed accept evolution, he said. "It has not been a Catholic issue or an Asian issue," he said"

So i've supported my position with fact and statistics, you've supported your position with nothing but ignorance and incredulity...

Does it seem a bit odd to you 99% of the biologist, according to Demonology, come from 49% of the population? I would like you to back that up with something other than Demon says.

But I've been supporting my claims with real evidence, real statistics, you haven't been able to do this.  

Also if you wish to continue this conversation we both need to refrain from the insults.

Fine but you must realize you can't make unfounded statements and claim them as facts, like you have done throughout this site.
If you want to debate, be prepared to back up your statements with facts and evidence, not use your father as proof when no one but you knows what his views were and why he had them.  
 


Posts: 1664 | Posted: 3:22 PM on June 15, 2005 | IP
peddler8111

|     |       Report Post



Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from Apoapsis at 11:15 AM on June 15, 2005 :
Quote from peddler8111 at 2:54 PM on June 13, 2005 :


So, if God gave you a revelation that your interpretation was incorrect, you would reject that, wouldn't you?
A revelation has no need of an interpretation.


Only if you are either:

1)  Onmiscient
2)  Arrogant

Which are you?


Save this link:
http://dictionary.reference.com/

The act of revealing or disclosing.
Something revealed, especially a dramatic disclosure of something not previously known or realized.
Theology. A manifestation of divine will or truth.
Revelation Abbr. Rev. or Rv. Bible. See table at Bible.


That's nice, but it doesn't support your viewpoint at all.




I really have no clue what you are trying to say. You asked me what would happen if I misinterpreted a revelation from God. I showed you with the dictionary that revelations do not require an interpretation at all.
You sound like Demon. The dictionary saying you are incorrect means the dictionary is wrong.?
Do you have a viewpoint?




-------
peddler
 


Posts: 242 | Posted: 3:23 PM on June 15, 2005 | IP
Apoapsis

|     |       Report Post



Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from peddler8111 at 3:23 PM on June 15, 2005 :
I really have no clue what you are trying to say. You asked me what would happen if I misinterpreted a revelation from God. I showed you with the dictionary that revelations do not require an interpretation at all.


The dictionary does not say that.



-------
Pogge:” This is the volume of a sphere with a 62 kilometer (about 39 miles) radius, which is considerably smaller than the 2,000 mile radius of the Earth.”
Wikipedia:” For Earth, the mean radius is 6,371.009 km(≈3,958.761 mi; ≈3,440.069 nmi).”
Wisp to Lester (on Pogge): Do you admit he was wrong about the basics?
Lester: No

 


Posts: 1747 | Posted: 3:56 PM on June 15, 2005 | IP
Apoapsis

|     |       Report Post



Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from peddler8111 at 3:23 PM on June 15, 2005 :
Do you have a viewpoint?


My opinion based on my observations of your actions is that you are smarter than you act, smart enough to be able to intelligently discuss all of the science that we have brought up point by point.

However, you are afraid to do so, probably because use you realize that if you left your anger behind you could not counter any of the points brought up, and would be forced logically to change your mind.  This leaves you in a bad spot, since your background and upbringing has painted you into a position that you cannot logically defend.  You would also be betraying your father if you admitted the truth.

Hence you come in here and try to counter reason with anger, because it's all you have left.

If you think you are representing Christianity, it's a pretty pathetic effort.





-------
Pogge:” This is the volume of a sphere with a 62 kilometer (about 39 miles) radius, which is considerably smaller than the 2,000 mile radius of the Earth.”
Wikipedia:” For Earth, the mean radius is 6,371.009 km(≈3,958.761 mi; ≈3,440.069 nmi).”
Wisp to Lester (on Pogge): Do you admit he was wrong about the basics?
Lester: No

 


Posts: 1747 | Posted: 5:36 PM on June 15, 2005 | IP
peddler8111

|     |       Report Post



Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from Apoapsis at 5:36 PM on June 15, 2005 :
Quote from peddler8111 at 3:23 PM on June 15, 2005 :
Do you have a viewpoint?


My opinion based on my observations of your actions is that you are smarter than you act, smart enough to be able to intelligently discuss all of the science that we have brought up point by point.

However, you are afraid to do so, probably because use you realize that if you left your anger behind you could not counter any of the points brought up, and would be forced logically to change your mind.  This leaves you in a bad spot, since your background and upbringing has painted you into a position that you cannot logically defend.  You would also be betraying your father if you admitted the truth.

Hence you come in here and try to counter reason with anger, because it's all you have left.

If you think you are representing Christianity, it's a pretty pathetic effort.




Everyone has an opinion. Yours is very imaginative if you think I am afraid to admit something.
Be specific.





-------
peddler
 


Posts: 242 | Posted: 11:45 PM on June 15, 2005 | IP
Apoapsis

|     |       Report Post



Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from peddler8111 at 11:45 PM on June 15, 2005 :

Everyone has an opinion. Yours is very imaginative if you think I am afraid to admit something.
Be specific.


OK, one more time, state the specific circularity in the fission track dating process.

Please don't trot out another tedious page of misquotes.  Use your own words.





-------
Pogge:” This is the volume of a sphere with a 62 kilometer (about 39 miles) radius, which is considerably smaller than the 2,000 mile radius of the Earth.”
Wikipedia:” For Earth, the mean radius is 6,371.009 km(≈3,958.761 mi; ≈3,440.069 nmi).”
Wisp to Lester (on Pogge): Do you admit he was wrong about the basics?
Lester: No

 


Posts: 1747 | Posted: 12:31 PM on June 16, 2005 | IP
peddler8111

|     |       Report Post



Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from Apoapsis at 12:31 PM on June 16, 2005 :
Quote from peddler8111 at 11:45 PM on June 15, 2005 :

Everyone has an opinion. Yours is very imaginative if you think I am afraid to admit something.
Be specific.


OK, one more time, state the specific circularity in the fission track dating process.

Please don't trot out another tedious page of misquotes.  Use your own words.





First , you be specific. How did I misquote someone?



-------
peddler
 


Posts: 242 | Posted: 11:57 PM on June 16, 2005 | IP
Demon38

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

First , you be specific. How did I misquote someone

Let's see, you misquoted Feduccia, Patterson, Gould and Dobzhansky, for starters...

 


Posts: 1664 | Posted: 02:12 AM on June 18, 2005 | IP
Apoapsis

|     |       Report Post



Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from peddler8111 at 11:57 PM on June 16, 2005 :

First , you be specific. How did I misquote someone?


By copying from a quote mine instead of checking the original source.

How many of the original writings have you read before you quoted them???

Quote mine project


-------
Pogge:” This is the volume of a sphere with a 62 kilometer (about 39 miles) radius, which is considerably smaller than the 2,000 mile radius of the Earth.”
Wikipedia:” For Earth, the mean radius is 6,371.009 km(≈3,958.761 mi; ≈3,440.069 nmi).”
Wisp to Lester (on Pogge): Do you admit he was wrong about the basics?
Lester: No

 


Posts: 1747 | Posted: 07:39 AM on June 18, 2005 | IP
Raelian1

|      |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from peddler8111 at 12:43 AM on May 31, 2005 :
Is there any one here other than Demon that believs [knows] there was an origin to reality and who is working on it.
The whole idea seems absurd to me.



I don't quite understand what you mean by "origin of reality" but the simple fact is that the univerese has always exists and will always exist. Ther is no beginning or end. "Reality" has always been around. Hope that answered your question.


-------
Proud member of rael.org
 


Posts: 68 | Posted: 11:38 AM on June 23, 2005 | IP
    
[ Single page for this topic ]

Topic Jump
« Back | Next »
[ Single page for this topic ]
Forum moderated by: admin
    

Topic options: Lock topic | Unlock topic | Make Topic Sticky | Remove Sticky | Delete thread | Move thread | Merge thread

 

© YouDebate.com
Powered by: ScareCrow version 2.12
© 2001 Jonathan Bravata. All rights reserved.