Lol rob 2.0
I and you already knows what science requires, that was also established in earlier posts.
So you do not have to belabr that issue.
You are clearly avoiding the issue now, and that is that you have faith in something, without any evidence of your own that you can produce.
That is the issue. I could care less if it were God, science, fruitcakes, or lugwrenches.
What "proof" do you have?
None.
Thus you are relying on your "faith" that someone somewhere actually does have it.
.
Sorry Charlie,
it is all too in true and in' hilarious:
I normally avoid laying out my personal stuff on the internets, but , I'm reeling so much right now, I'm asking everyone/anyone in sight what to do.
I had some nukes dropped on me this past week regarding the wife, which after looking back the past 1-2 years I should have seen it and I realize I am a ing idiot. I've mulled over everything a billion times and there's no where to go but to get a divorce.
I have a 7 year old and some have already told me I need to go all out to get full custody. Any other practical advice? Step 1? Step 2?
ity .
you, like robdiaz, do not have an understanding of the theory of evolution.
your idea of evolution is that one day a fish laid an egg and a lizard magically hatched. or one day an ape gave birth and a human emerged.
it doens't go ape-ape-ape-ape-ape-ape-ape-ape-ape-ape-ape-human!
nobody ever claimed such
Wow, you honestly thought I thought...hahaha!!!!!!!!
Ok man since the obvious doesn't work with you.
I was looking at that parrot and trying to imagine how the parrot (IN GENERAL) could have ever came from some sea whatever..ok?
Dude, whoa!
^ spiritually enlightened prison guard
i'm not avoiding any issue. you keep telling me science has no evidence or proof, when science is entirely based on evidence and observation. you keep trying to mash a square peg into a round hole
you keep saying the same thing
Key word....theory.
as do you. you keep saying "how did a fish become a monkey"
you dont understand evolution and you keep mocking it
lol magic
Pretty much says it all.Sorry Charlie,
it is all too in true and in' hilarious:
I normally avoid laying out my personal stuff on the internets, but , I'm reeling so much right now, I'm asking everyone/anyone in sight what to do.
I had some nukes dropped on me this past week regarding the wife, which after looking back the past 1-2 years I should have seen it and I realize I am a ing idiot. I've mulled over everything a billion times and there's no where to go but to get a divorce.
I have a 7 year old and some have already told me I need to go all out to get full custody. Any other practical advice? Step 1? Step 2?
ity .
Probably the only time in his pathetic life he ever told the absolute truth, about himself, his situation, and his existence.
theory in the realm of science is different than theory in the colloquial sense.
in everyday life, we see gravity as fact. in science, gravity is theory.
smh lol
^ troll
A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that is acquired through the scientific method, and repeatedly confirmed through observation and experimentation
Theory is a contemplative and rational type of abstract or generalizing thinking, or the results of such thinking
And you don't understand you, blake, and others have "faith" (belief without evidence) in something, as much as Rob or I do.
this is a false statement yet again. liar
This is true about science.
BUT IT IS NOT TRUE ABOUT YOU.
You accept it on faith.
not at all. you are a liar
Oh really, then you do not believe in science?
Not true. I said (and have said numerous times) that I believe in no other causal chain other than the one science is trying to piece to getting. That doesn't mean all by beliefs are governed by scientists. I make plenty of evaluations based solely on my experiences. Like if I believe my neighbor to be a jerk, it's not because I've done the tests and run the numbers. Beliefs are simply ways we paint the world based on our experiences. They're working theories we have about things that allow us to live life.
The idea that withholding belief is possible and especially that it's prudent doesn't jive with me. You can't do science without initial belief. If you have to belief about the beginning of existence, it's because you either haven't thought about it or are resisting doing so. And that's fine. But you'll never learn that way.
You make it sound like the actual beginning is well understood and supported it's not. The time after the Bang are, but there are many competing theories about the first instants. I've seen proposals that an atom-sized particle containing all the mass and energy in the universe showed up moments before the bang. If that's the case, then there was time before. For all we know, that particle of universe was sitting out there for ages, condensing until the forces became too coiled up for gravity to hold it down any longer. There's a ton of speculation about those first instants, and I wouldn't feel confident in making any strong assertions about them if I fancied myself a conservative intellectual.Why are you going back "before" time. Don't you realize that's a nonsensical concept?
Why do you need to consider that the Big Bang ends halfway through a cycle? Do you think time was linear during the Big Bang? It's not like you had space, and then a singularity, and then the BB happened. It's like the Big Bang happened. There's no "and then". I realize it's difficult to wrap your mind around it, but we are not programmers of the universe and we cannot view it from a remote perspective though we pretend we can. Our thoughts are time based, we cannot think of anything that isn't also time based (except concepts).
It can just be the duration something exists. I know you may call the beginning and end of something events. But I don't think that's accurate. Space is only measurable as the distance between objects, but objects themselves take up space. To say the start and stop of an event are separate events is like saying extreme of an object is actually a separate object.So you believe in Newtonian time? Time is absolutely a gap between events. Otherwise, I'd like to see you describe it without using events. I'd like to see even a concept of an eventless time existence.
Things exist in time just like they do in space. They exist because they take up a certain number of moments the same way they take up a certain number of atoms. Just because we perceive time in a negative sense (gaps) doesn't mean that's all it is.
Well that's what you get with religion (and any other type of static world-view). Thanks for the clarification.
I don't see what I'm saying to be in that same vein. That certainly seems to be a, "How can science explain this?" type of argument. In that regard, it's a horrible failed scientific argument. However, my argument is more philosophical than scientific. It won't ever be testable empirically. So it's just a battle of reasoning until people start attributing unnecessarily qualities to god like location, intelligence, mortal status, morality.
I enjoyed reading Hume when I was in school. A lot of the critique I'm giving to your understanding of logic comes from the work he and other empiricists did. I'm curious to see exactly what critique he gave to my belief. I don't want to answer generically when he may have actually said something interesting.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
