Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,872 Year: 4,129/9,624 Month: 1,000/974 Week: 327/286 Day: 48/40 Hour: 2/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The one and only non-creationist in this forum.
subbie
Member (Idle past 1282 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 76 of 558 (678259)
11-06-2012 11:05 AM
Reply to: Message 75 by Panda
11-06-2012 10:42 AM


Re: Vatican sophistry
That explains what you are doing, not why.

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. -- Thomas Jefferson
We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate
Howling about evidence is a conversation stopper, and it never stops to think if the claim could possibly be true -- foreveryoung

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by Panda, posted 11-06-2012 10:42 AM Panda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 77 by Panda, posted 11-06-2012 11:12 AM subbie has seen this message but not replied

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 3741 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 77 of 558 (678261)
11-06-2012 11:12 AM
Reply to: Message 76 by subbie
11-06-2012 11:05 AM


Re: Vatican sophistry
Panda writes:
Why would we want to discuss anything with [Mad], when [Mad] have clearly left reality behind.
subbie writes:
I was wondering the same thing, which makes your 9 posts in this thread rather curious.
Panda writes:
We are simply here responding to [Mad's] trolling in whatever way we feel like.
subbie writes:
That explains what you are doing, not why.
You asked why I was having a discussion with Mad.
My reply was that I am not having a discussion with Mad (because he is a troll).
Are you now asking 'why' I am not having a discussion with Mad?
I think I answered that in my first sentence.

"There is no great invention, from fire to flying, which has not been hailed as an insult to some god." J. B. S. Haldane

This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by subbie, posted 11-06-2012 11:05 AM subbie has seen this message but not replied

  
foreveryoung
Member (Idle past 610 days)
Posts: 921
Joined: 12-26-2011


(2)
Message 78 of 558 (678267)
11-06-2012 12:00 PM
Reply to: Message 60 by NoNukes
11-06-2012 12:19 AM


Re: Abuse is not just on topic. It is the topic
nonukes writes:
well if that's what Alfred wants, that's the way it is.
That sounds similar to this:

This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by NoNukes, posted 11-06-2012 12:19 AM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

  
Aware Wolf
Member (Idle past 1448 days)
Posts: 156
From: New Hampshire, USA
Joined: 02-13-2009


(2)
Message 79 of 558 (678276)
11-06-2012 1:34 PM
Reply to: Message 52 by Alfred Maddenstein
11-05-2012 9:39 PM


Keep posting, cat!
Man, I have no idea what you are talking about most of the time, but I love reading your posts. They've got a kind of sing-songie flow to them. They remind me of many rock or pop songs who's lyrics come way close to making sense but don't actually, like by the bands Yes or Coldplay.
Edited by Aware Wolf, : grammar

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 11-05-2012 9:39 PM Alfred Maddenstein has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 440 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 80 of 558 (678280)
11-06-2012 2:35 PM
Reply to: Message 30 by Alfred Maddenstein
11-04-2012 10:06 PM


Re: Still garbled.
Alfred Maddenstein writes:
You evade fleshing out you conception of creation of a single atom from pure nothing, Macca. Tell the audience how it's done. What is the physical mechanism apart from your second-hand crypto-creo faith?
I haven't said that I even have a conception of "how" an atom can be created from nothing. I'm saying that that conception is no more dfficult than the alternative - and the difficulty of conceiving something has no bearing on the reality of that something anyway.
Edited by ringo, : Aded missing word "created".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 11-04-2012 10:06 PM Alfred Maddenstein has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 82 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 11-06-2012 8:36 PM ringo has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10084
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.1


(1)
Message 81 of 558 (678284)
11-06-2012 3:24 PM
Reply to: Message 66 by Alfred Maddenstein
11-06-2012 5:25 AM


Re: Vatican sophistry
You've got a grave problem with definitions.
Wow, a website dedicated to semantic fallacies.
Otherwise what is exactly the contribution of bigbangism to progress and science that you are hinting at?
The BB explains galactic redshift, the CMB, time dilation in distant type Ia supernovae, and a whole host of other observations.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 11-06-2012 5:25 AM Alfred Maddenstein has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 83 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 11-06-2012 9:22 PM Taq has replied

  
Alfred Maddenstein
Member (Idle past 3995 days)
Posts: 565
Joined: 04-01-2011


Message 82 of 558 (678299)
11-06-2012 8:36 PM
Reply to: Message 80 by ringo
11-06-2012 2:35 PM


Re: Still garbled.
What is so difficult about the alternative, Macca? Do you have trouble conceiving the atoms to exists? All exist, no matter how many, all interconnected and separated proportionately by varying distances you have the choice of calling either space or time. Simple to conceive. You don't have to strain yourself and ape authority like in the case of imagining nothing, singularities, big holes and expanding black bunks, curved vacuums and suchlike nonsense. It's all around you. It's present, dude.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by ringo, posted 11-06-2012 2:35 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 85 by ringo, posted 11-07-2012 1:45 PM Alfred Maddenstein has replied

  
Alfred Maddenstein
Member (Idle past 3995 days)
Posts: 565
Joined: 04-01-2011


Message 83 of 558 (678303)
11-06-2012 9:22 PM
Reply to: Message 81 by Taq
11-06-2012 3:24 PM


Re: Vatican sophistry
You mean offers no plausible explanation to those observations. Redshift of the signal explained with stretching intergalactic distances is strictly for birds. Space, time and light speed signal are three sides of a triangle. It's Maxwell's wavelength times frequency. Adding the stretched wavelength to the distance the signal travels is a howler. It's sneaking a fourth side to the triangle. Impossible violation of the formula. No wonder they've got the cosmos measurements all screwed up and have to cook the data to fit the curves. It's all mediaeval and Ptolemaic.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by Taq, posted 11-06-2012 3:24 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 84 by Taq, posted 11-07-2012 10:47 AM Alfred Maddenstein has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10084
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.1


Message 84 of 558 (678367)
11-07-2012 10:47 AM
Reply to: Message 83 by Alfred Maddenstein
11-06-2012 9:22 PM


Re: Vatican sophistry
Redshift of the signal explained with stretching intergalactic distances is strictly for birds.
I guess I don't understand what you are getting at here. Are you saying that expansion would not produce redshifts?
Space, time and light speed signal are three sides of a triangle.
Since when? You seem to be making stuff up.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 11-06-2012 9:22 PM Alfred Maddenstein has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 89 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 11-08-2012 4:04 AM Taq has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 440 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 85 of 558 (678385)
11-07-2012 1:45 PM
Reply to: Message 82 by Alfred Maddenstein
11-06-2012 8:36 PM


Re: Still garbled.
Alfred Maddenstein writes:
Simple to conceive.
But reality is seldom simple. Easy answers are seldom satisfying.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 11-06-2012 8:36 PM Alfred Maddenstein has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 86 by vimesey, posted 11-07-2012 5:58 PM ringo has seen this message but not replied
 Message 87 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 11-07-2012 8:12 PM ringo has replied

  
vimesey
Member (Idle past 101 days)
Posts: 1398
From: Birmingham, England
Joined: 09-21-2011


Message 86 of 558 (678416)
11-07-2012 5:58 PM
Reply to: Message 85 by ringo
11-07-2012 1:45 PM


Re: Still garbled.
Easy answers are seldom satisfying.
Well, they can be - but only to the simple minded

Could there be any greater conceit, than for someone to believe that the universe has to be simple enough for them to be able to understand it ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by ringo, posted 11-07-2012 1:45 PM ringo has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 88 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 11-08-2012 3:47 AM vimesey has not replied

  
Alfred Maddenstein
Member (Idle past 3995 days)
Posts: 565
Joined: 04-01-2011


Message 87 of 558 (678424)
11-07-2012 8:12 PM
Reply to: Message 85 by ringo
11-07-2012 1:45 PM


Re: Still garbled.
You got it, Macca. Complexity is conserved. Reality is always complex enough anywhere so it is not to be resolved to a primitive singularity. Neither can it go to the other extreme and prove to be as convoluted as the imagination of a human monkey.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by ringo, posted 11-07-2012 1:45 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 93 by ringo, posted 11-08-2012 10:58 AM Alfred Maddenstein has replied

  
Alfred Maddenstein
Member (Idle past 3995 days)
Posts: 565
Joined: 04-01-2011


Message 88 of 558 (678443)
11-08-2012 3:47 AM
Reply to: Message 86 by vimesey
11-07-2012 5:58 PM


Re: Still garbled.
Exactly, Whimsy. Only simple-minded crypto-creos are satisfied with primitive solutions like that of all things starting at once in the same place offered by big-bangism.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by vimesey, posted 11-07-2012 5:58 PM vimesey has not replied

  
Alfred Maddenstein
Member (Idle past 3995 days)
Posts: 565
Joined: 04-01-2011


Message 89 of 558 (678444)
11-08-2012 4:04 AM
Reply to: Message 84 by Taq
11-07-2012 10:47 AM


Re: Vatican sophistry
No, what I am saying is that expansion of space is a ludicrous concept not explaining in any way the observation of the redshift of the signal. Space is an abstraction and not an expandable fabric while the Universe is anywhere already so could not possibly expand. Therefore the explanation of the shift to the red end of the spectrum of the distant radiation signal offered by the quacks is strictly for birds. Apart from making a mockery of the original Maxwell formula.
Of course, mathematically the relation could be easily reduced to the relation of sides in a triangle. Speed of light is just a conversion factor between space and time measurements. The cat is not making anything up.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by Taq, posted 11-07-2012 10:47 AM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 90 by Dr Adequate, posted 11-08-2012 7:36 AM Alfred Maddenstein has replied
 Message 94 by Taq, posted 11-08-2012 4:39 PM Alfred Maddenstein has replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 312 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 90 of 558 (678455)
11-08-2012 7:36 AM
Reply to: Message 89 by Alfred Maddenstein
11-08-2012 4:04 AM


Re: Vatican sophistry
But what should we say to Maddenstein except: "You are a fucking halfwit"?
If the moderators would like to make a suggestion, I'm all ears. But what should we say, what can we say, except that he is mentally handicapped and we cannot cure him?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 89 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 11-08-2012 4:04 AM Alfred Maddenstein has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 91 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 11-08-2012 8:21 AM Dr Adequate has not replied
 Message 92 by NoNukes, posted 11-08-2012 8:43 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024