Reply With Quote
Since when am I trying to baffle you? You clearly understand exactly what I mean and have said as much earlier. Science requires the infinite to produce the universe. I believe God to be infinite. So where is the problem exactly?
So what's the advantage of believing in your god vs the FSM
Since when am I trying to baffle you? You clearly understand exactly what I mean and have said as much earlier. Science requires the infinite to produce the universe. I believe God to be infinite. So where is the problem exactly?
Lol. You've mistaken me for someone else. Surprising since you're a genius and all.
I never said how smart I was. I said I understood field theory and particle physics after describing Ehlers topology and talking about the nature of time given big bang models. If that means I am smart in your book then so be it but I wasn't claiming to have a high IQ or appeal to any sense of authority.
No the people that you shouldn't trust are those that appeal to authority claiming that they are attorneys or those that will post anything that even resembles what they want to be true. Frankly given your supposed education you should understand field theory and the topology I am talking about. You claim to have an engineering degree after all or do they not teach electrodynamics and control theory at UTSA?
God isn't the flying spaghetti monster as it is not infinite. It is just a product of the infinite.
How about the infinite flying spaghetti monster or the infinite cosmic teapot or the infinite invisible monkey?
All I get from this is that your worried that I think I am smarter than you. Keep flailing all you like but you are so typical its amusing.
Wrong, but that didn't answer the question. What's the advantage for a person to believe in your god vs the FSM?
It really doesn't matter what you call it. Infinite, is infinite.
The funny thing is that my idea of infinite God didn't require your precious particle physics or field theory. It just required reading a bunch of dusty ancient writings.
It really doesn't matter what you call it. Infinite, is infinite.
The funny thing is that my idea of infinite God didn't require your precious particle physics or field theory. It just required reading a bunch of dusty ancient writings.
Wrong huh? Prove I am wrong. Then you will find the advantages on your own. Oh wait... you are a special kind of idiot and can't do it yourself.
Ancient texts claim the FSM is infinite. Your god is a product of the infinitely powerful FSM. That's why there's no advantage to your belief in your weaker god.
And there it is.... Full re .
Says the guy that believes in a weak, insecure god that loves blood sacrifices.
FSM>>>bible god
You're like one of those guys in a meeting who talks a lot, but doesn't really say anything.
Maimonides, a Rabbi in the Ayyubid caliphate, created your iteration of infinity first and Aquinas picked up on it in Summa. Maimonides at least understood the nature of zero as a source. Both deified it and Aquinas predecessors refused to change their position from your position of this concept = God for the next 400 years. I know about that too.
My precious science is demonstrated true empirically nonetheless despite your role models obstructions. As I pointed out, Ehler was banished to Russia because of his views. I've read how you claim the possibility of God in each point of existence trying cheesey mysticism and similar unfounded assertions. Wishcasting isn't going to make your God true. If you actually read up on infinity there are many forms of infinity as clearly and easily shown by applying L'hopital's rule.
I like Thoreau's take that reason and faith shouldn't contradict.
You're like one of those guys in a meeting who talks a lot, but doesn't really say anything.That is what I think of that. You claim to be an engineering graduate from UTSA. We looked up their catalog remember? You should know these topics I am discussing as they are part of the engineering degree program at UTSA.A stupid man's report of what a clever man says can never be accurate, because he unconsciously translates what he hears into something he can understand.
So that either means you have poor retention and have not worked to maintain your knowledge or it means that you are a lying. Either way I don't care as you have no credibility and that quote is apt.
You're like the secretaries that like to talk about other people in the officeYou're like one of those guys in a meeting who talks a lot, but doesn't really say anything.
Lol, UTSA smack. How will I go on?
That wasn't UTSA smack. I was simply observing the courses that you would have had to take to get an engineering degree from where you claim to have one. We've been over this before.Lol, UTSA smack. How will I go on?
You had to have studied infinity and the complex conjugate I am discussing here in order to get your degree. The quality of the school is irrelevant. That is the basis of me saying you are either stupid/lazy and you didn't learn or that you are lying and don't have an engineering degree.
I really wasn't paying attention to anything you were discussing. Simply observing that you are a pompous blowhard with a bad case of verbal diarrhea.
we know all about your poor reading skills from your multiple posts of articles you clearly had not read. you can dress it up as virtue or excuse if you like but your method is already well known.
That made me lol IRL
You are the absolute stupidest mother er when trying to call out an alt.
What up CTOA
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions