Guest gudloos@yahoo.com Posted June 13, 2007 Posted June 13, 2007 On 12 Jun., 19:30, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <1181644398.763698.134...@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, > > > > > > > > gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: > > On 12 Jun., 02:37, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > In article <1181603881.651499.322...@n15g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > On Jun 12, 1:05 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > In article <1181558587.524968.174...@q66g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>, > snip > > > Free will explains many things--howwever, most people--even Christians--do > > > not understand free will. > > > We have a hard time with square circles too. Are you good at drawing square circles? > > > > Insurance companies blame God for all natural disasters. Perhaps there > > > reasoning is that God is responsible since those natural disasters would > > > not have happened if God had not created the world. > > > Gosh, do you think that might be it? > > One of the positive things about it is the insurance companies (unlike > yourself) are acknowledging that God created the earth.- I am not surprised that you would think so. The existence of your god along with the existence of free will remains a contradiction but only in the real world, nothing for you to worry about. Quote
Guest gudloos@yahoo.com Posted June 13, 2007 Posted June 13, 2007 On 12 Jun., 19:47, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <1181649511.087693.129...@o11g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > <phippsmar...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > On Jun 12, 12:52 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > In article <1181614348.455145.11...@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > > <phippsmar...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Jun 12, 9:25 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > In article > > <1181604194.743582.114...@o11g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > > > > > > > > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Jun 12, 1:39 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > > > > I agree that people just choose to believe whatever they want to > > > believe. > > > > > > > That is true for atheists and is also true for Christians. > > > > > > > Assertion. We know you swallow every lie that your fellow Godbots > > > > > > tell you. We don't. We rely on actual evidence. That's all there is > > > > > > to it and none of your lies will change the actual truth. > > > > > > An atheists swallow everything the scientists tell them if it supports > > > > > their belief system. > > > > > When your assertions have been corrected and yet you repeat them > > > > anyway they can now be fairly called lies. You know better than to > > > > say atheists believe ANYTHING and yet you continue to repeat that lie. > > > > It's a lie to state that I swallow every lie that my fellow Godbots tell > > > me. > > > No, it's not. You've demonstrayted time and time again that you are > > willing to believe anything you are told EXCEPT when the person who > > says it is a non believer. That is your prejudice. > > > Don't ever accuse me of lying again. You wouldn't like me when I am > > angry. > > > Martin > > Did I call you a liar? The answer is no.- Skjul tekst i anf Quote
Guest gudloos@yahoo.com Posted June 13, 2007 Posted June 13, 2007 On 12 Jun., 19:42, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <1181643770.817395.36...@n15g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, > > > > > > gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: > > On 11 Jun., 21:54, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > In article <0de0k4-blk....@spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason snip > > A person that has been healed is evidence that he was healed. It is > > not evidence of a god. > > Yes, that is true. If I provided physical evidence which indicated that > her leg bone grew 2 inches--how would you explain how it happened?- I would not be able to explain it, and that is not evidence that god did it. Quote
Guest gudloos@yahoo.com Posted June 13, 2007 Posted June 13, 2007 On 12 Jun., 20:22, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <UGwbi.623$ma....@bignews4.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" > > > > > > <mmman...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > "Jason" <J...@nospam.com> wrote in message > >news:Jason-1106072153560001@66-52-22-96.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > > > In article <utqr63he40hh9n29rh2c80f0p1v05gj...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch > > > <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: snip > > >> If God exists, He must hate you for telling so many lies about what He > > >> did. > > > > Imagine how God feels about atheists. > > > I would imagine he holds them in higher esteem than lying creationists that > > make him look bad :-)). > > I disagree. King Saul was a servant of God during the early years of his > life. God protected him and blessed his life. During the last several > years of his life, he turned his back on God--he became an atheist. No, there is nothing in the story that says he became an atheist. He still believed in god. He > even visited a witch in order to ask questions. The end result was that > God no longer protected him or blessed his life. He was killed during a > battle. > During the early years of his life, he was involved in many battles and > God kept him from being harmed or killed during those battles.- Skjul tekst i anf Quote
Guest gudloos@yahoo.com Posted June 13, 2007 Posted June 13, 2007 On 12 Jun., 20:28, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <1181649884.050718.194...@d30g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > > > > <phippsmar...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > On Jun 12, 1:22 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > In article <1181611488.232237.92...@d30g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > > <phippsmar...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Jun 12, 8:31 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > God > > > > > God doesn't exist. > > > > > created mankind, he > > > > > gave us free will. > > > > > Free will doesn't exist. > > > > > You're 0 for 2. > > > > I disagree--Free Will does exist. Once a person understands free will, > > > many Bible doctrines and even issues related to life; sociological and > > > psychological issues--make sense. For example, I now understand why some > > > people do wonderful thing such as doctors that spend a month each year in > > > third world countries. I also understand why some people do terrible > > > things such as becoming murderers or rapists. > > > Are you still telling us that you would be capable of killing ten > > people a day if you didn't believe in God? What about the men who > > killed 3000 people on September 11th because they believed in their > > god? > > > Martin > > Martin, > Those people that do such things are not pleasing to God. > They may believe or think that their actions are pleasing to God--but they > are wrong. You can find many cases in history where people done terrible > things that they believed were pleasing to God--but were not pleasing to > God. > Jason- Skjul tekst i anf Quote
Guest gudloos@yahoo.com Posted June 13, 2007 Posted June 13, 2007 On 12 Jun., 20:31, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <1181649634.232900.8...@a26g2000pre.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > > > > > > <phippsmar...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > On Jun 12, 1:00 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > In article <1181614412.939840.97...@g37g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > > <phippsmar...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Jun 12, 9:39 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > In article <kkor63tinbmus479tfljt5ib6lmn7o9...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch > > > > > > <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, 11 Jun 2007 17:31:38 -0700, in alt.atheism > > > > > > J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > > > > > > <Jason-1106071731380...@66-52-22-97.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > > > > > > > ... > > > > > > >Bramble, > > > > > > >I agree with many of the points you made. When God created > mankind, he > > > > > > >gave us free will. He did not create robots that were > programmed to do > > > > > > >only good things. As a result of free will, people can decide > to do great > > > > > > >and wonderful things or can use their free will to decide to commit > > > > > > >criminal acts. > > > > > > > >God is indirectly responsible since he created the solar system and > > > > > > >created life--including mankind. However, when people end up in > prison > > > > > > >it's not God's fault. It's the fault of the person that was > > > exercising his > > > > > > >or her free will. > > > > > > > >Do you see my point? > > > > > > > Man came about as a result of evolution. That is what the > evidence shows > > > > > > us. If God created man, He used evolution. You refuse to accept that > > > > > > fact. You prefer lies to the truth, ignorance to knowledge. You call > > > > > > your God a liar. > > > > > > > Why? > > > > > > The first chapter of the book of Genesis states that God > > > > > You keep talking about your imaginary friend as if he were real. You > > > > need to be commited for psychiatric observation. > > > > They will have to build a lot of mental hospitals. According to the 2005 > > > Time Almanac, there are 1.9 billion Christians in the world. (page 359). > > > Yes, the rational people of the world have a lot of work to do. You > > don't think we know that? > > > Martin > > Martin, > They place Christians in prisons and mental hospitals in communist > countries. Do you want the government to do the same thing in America? Why would you ask such an insulting question? Nothing was said that suggested such a thing. Such a question amounts to a lie. > > A Christian in Viet Nam was recently murdered by prison guards. Which has nothing to do with anything being discussed. What a nasty, vicious creature you are. Quote
Guest gudloos@yahoo.com Posted June 13, 2007 Posted June 13, 2007 On 12 Jun., 19:30, "Robibnikoff" <witchy...@broomstick.com> wrote: > "Jason" <J...@nospam.com> wrote in message > > news:Jason-1206071128330001@66-52-22-95.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > > > > > > > In article <1181649884.050718.194...@d30g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > <phippsmar...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > >> On Jun 12, 1:22 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > >> > In article <1181611488.232237.92...@d30g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, > >> > Martin > > >> > <phippsmar...@hotmail.com> wrote: > >> > > On Jun 12, 8:31 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > >> > > > God > > >> > > God doesn't exist. > > >> > > created mankind, he > >> > > > gave us free will. > > >> > > Free will doesn't exist. > > >> > > You're 0 for 2. > > >> > I disagree--Free Will does exist. Once a person understands free will, > >> > many Bible doctrines and even issues related to life; sociological and > >> > psychological issues--make sense. For example, I now understand why > >> > some > >> > people do wonderful thing such as doctors that spend a month each year > >> > in > >> > third world countries. I also understand why some people do terrible > >> > things such as becoming murderers or rapists. > > >> Are you still telling us that you would be capable of killing ten > >> people a day if you didn't believe in God? What about the men who > >> killed 3000 people on September 11th because they believed in their > >> god? > > >> Martin > > > Martin, > > Those people that do such things are not pleasing to God. > > They may believe or think that their actions are pleasing to God--but they > > are wrong. You can find many cases in history where people done terrible > > things that they believed were pleasing to God--but were not pleasing to > > God. > > Jason > > Who are you to judge? > -- > Robyn > Resident Witchypoo > BAAWA Knight! > #1557- Skjul tekst i anf Quote
Guest gudloos@yahoo.com Posted June 13, 2007 Posted June 13, 2007 On 12 Jun., 21:07, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > You want to try again. I'll find 10 or 20 more questions for you.- Skjul = > > tekst i anf=F8rselstegn - > > > Yes, we all know that you are not capable of being embarrassed by your > > dishonesty. It is odd that you are proud of it though. Thank you for confirming my statement about you. You are a very strange person. > > Questions for Evolutionists > > BlueBar > > 1. Where did the space for the universe come from? > > 2. Where did matter come from? > > 3. Where did the laws of the universe come from (gravity, inertia, etc.)? > > 4. How did matter get so perfectly organized? > > 5. Where did the energy come from to do all the organizing? > > 6. When, where, why, and how did life come from dead matter? > > 7. When, where, why, and how did life learn to reproduce itself? > > 8. With what did the first cell capable of sexual reproduction reproduce? > > 9. Why would any plant or animal want to reproduce more of its kind > since this would only make more mouths to feed and decrease the chances of > survival? (Does the individual have a drive to survive, or the species? > How do you explain this?) > > 10. How can mutations (recombining of the genetic code) create any > new, improved varieties? (Recombining English letters will never produce > Chinese books.) > > 11. Is it possible that similarities in design between different > animals prove a common Creator instead of a common ancestor? > > 12. Natural selection only works with the genetic information > available and tends only to keep a species stable. How would you explain > the increasing complexity in the genetic code that must have occurred if > evolution were true? > > 13. When, where, why, and how did: a) Single-celled plants become > multicelled? (Where are the two- and threecelled intermediates?) b) > Single-celled animals evolve? c) Fish change to amphibians? d) Amphibians > change to reptiles? e) Reptiles change to birds? (The lungs, bones, eyes, > reproductive organs, heart, method of locomotion, body covering, etc., are > all very different!) How did the intermediate forms live? > > 14. When, where, why, how, and from what did: a) Whales evolve? b) Sea > horses evolve? c) Bats evolve? d) Eyes evolve? e) Ears evolve? f) Hair, > skin, feathers, scales, nails, claws, etc., evolve? > > 15. Which evolved first (how, and how long, did it work without the > others)? a) The digestive system, the food to be digested, the appetite, > the ability to find and eat the food, the digestive juices, or the body Quote
Guest gudloos@yahoo.com Posted June 13, 2007 Posted June 13, 2007 On 12 Jun., 21:19, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <OIAbi.1872$L8....@bignews8.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" > > > > > > <mmman...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > "Jason" <J...@nospam.com> wrote in message > >news:Jason-1206071030510001@66-52-22-95.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > > > In article <1181644398.763698.134...@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, > > > gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: > > > >> On 12 Jun., 02:37, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > >> > In article <1181603881.651499.322...@n15g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, > > >> > Martin > > > >> > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > >> > > On Jun 12, 1:05 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > >> > > > In article <1181558587.524968.174...@q66g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>, > > > >> > > > gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: > > >> > > > > On 10 Jun., 15:56, Martin Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > >> > > > > > > On 10 Jun., 02:03, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > >> > > > > > > > Since God created the world and all life forms--God is > > > indirectly > > >> > > > > > > > responsible for everything that happens--even if it is > > >> > > > > > > > evil. > > >> > Does that > > >> > > > > > > > mean that a murderer can blame God for the murder--I don't > > > think so. > > > >> > > > > > Jason will change his mind if he ever snaps and kills ten > > >> > > > > > people in > > >> > > > > > one day as he's threatened to do. > > > >> > > > > It is amazing that he (and so many others) can serenely > > >> > > > > contradict > > >> > > > > themselves, apparently without it bothering them in the least. > > >> > > > > He > > >> > > > > tells us that god is responsible for everything, but he is not > > >> > > > > responsible for any crimes committed. He will, no doubt, attempt > > >> > > > > to > > >> > > > > justify it by mentioning free will, which, of course, also > > >> > > > > contradicts > > >> > > > > god being responsible for everything. A whirling dervish has > > >> > > > > nothing > > >> > > > > on Jason. > > > >> > > > There is no contradiction. I will simplify it for you by giving you > > >> > > > an > > >> > > > example. Parents have a son that commits a murder when he is 30 > > > years old. > > >> > > > Will the son or the parents be sent to prison? The answer is that > > > the son > > >> > > > will be sent to prison since he was guilty of the murder. Yes, the > > > parents > > >> > > > were indirectly responsible since the murder would not have been > > > committed > > >> > > > if the parents had not had that son. > > > >> > > But you're not claiming the parents to be omniscient or ominipotent. > > >> > > Nor have you established that anybody has free will to go beyond what > > >> > > their instincts and memories would have them do. All you've done is > > >> > > assert that the murderer was guilty and the parents had no direct > > >> > > responsibility. > > > >> > > Martin > > > >> > As a result of free will, people can do good or do evil. God is > > >> > indirectly > > >> > responsible since he created mankind. > > > >> God is supposed to be all-powerful and all-knowing; that makes him > > >> responsible for everything period. > > > >> > If God had never created mankind, people would not do evil things. On > > >> > the > > >> > other hand, people would not be able to do wonderful things. > > > >> He would still be responsible. > > > >> > Free will explains many things--howwever, most people--even > > >> > Christians--do > > >> > not understand free will. > > > >> We have a hard time with square circles too. > > > >> > Insurance companies blame God for all natural disasters. Perhaps there > > >> > reasoning is that God is responsible since those natural disasters > > >> > would > > >> > not have happened if God had not created the world. > > > >> Gosh, do you think that might be it? > > > > One of the positive things about it is the insurance companies (unlike > > > yourself) are acknowledging that God created the earth. > > > Why don't you poll their shareholders to see if your assertion is true. > > If they don't believe in God, why do they continue to write it in their > policies?- It is a standard legal phrase. It merely means that the damage was the result of a natural event. No doubt most employees of most insurance companies do believe in some kind deity, but the phrase does not have any religious significance. You will, no doubt, continue to ask the above question repeatedly along with all the others that have become part of your act. Is it your intention to look dishonest and silly? Quote
Guest Michael Gray Posted June 13, 2007 Posted June 13, 2007 On Wed, 13 Jun 2007 02:32:58 -0700, gudloos@yahoo.com wrote: - Refer: <1181727178.118144.230950@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com> >On 12 Jun., 18:01, "Robibnikoff" <witchy...@broomstick.com> wrote: >> "Jason" <J...@nospam.com> wrote in >> >> snip >> >> > Martin, >> > Dr. Gish, Dr. Morris and Cheryl Prewitt are preaching to the choir. She >> > does not need to carry her medial records and X rays with her when she >> > gives her testimony. We believed her when she gave her testimony and >> > enjoyed hearing her sing various songs. Perhaps she does carry the medical >> > records with her in case she speaks to a group that includes skeptics but >> > I doubt that she speaks to such groups of people. She would not enjoy >> > giving her testimony to people that took turns calling her a liar. >> > Jason >> >> Gee, really? What a profound revelation >> -- >> Robyn >> Resident Witchypoo >> BAAWA Knight! >> #1557 > >One wonders why Jason enjoys being called a liar. It is the only attention that he can both seek and get, my son. -- Quote
Guest gudloos@yahoo.com Posted June 13, 2007 Posted June 13, 2007 On 12 Jun., 21:22, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <5d83hcF31q6f...@mid.individual.net>, "Robibnikoff" > > > > > > <witchy...@broomstick.com> wrote: > > "Jason" <J...@nospam.com> wrote in message > >news:Jason-1206071128330001@66-52-22-95.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > > > In article <1181649884.050718.194...@d30g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > <phippsmar...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > >> On Jun 12, 1:22 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > >> > In article <1181611488.232237.92...@d30g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, > > >> > Martin > > > >> > <phippsmar...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > >> > > On Jun 12, 8:31 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > >> > > > God > > > >> > > God doesn't exist. > > > >> > > created mankind, he > > >> > > > gave us free will. > > > >> > > Free will doesn't exist. > > > >> > > You're 0 for 2. > > > >> > I disagree--Free Will does exist. Once a person understands free will, > > >> > many Bible doctrines and even issues related to life; sociological and > > >> > psychological issues--make sense. For example, I now understand why > > >> > some > > >> > people do wonderful thing such as doctors that spend a month each year > > >> > in > > >> > third world countries. I also understand why some people do terrible > > >> > things such as becoming murderers or rapists. > > > >> Are you still telling us that you would be capable of killing ten > > >> people a day if you didn't believe in God? What about the men who > > >> killed 3000 people on September 11th because they believed in their > > >> god? > > > >> Martin > > > > Martin, > > > Those people that do such things are not pleasing to God. > > > They may believe or think that their actions are pleasing to God--but they > > > are wrong. You can find many cases in history where people done terrible > > > things that they believed were pleasing to God--but were not pleasing to > > > God. > > > Jason > > > Who are you to judge? > > It's easy to judge the actions of the men that killed 3000 people on 9/11..- Skjul tekst i anf Quote
Guest gudloos@yahoo.com Posted June 13, 2007 Posted June 13, 2007 On 12 Jun., 22:03, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <Xns994D94878C66Ffreddyb...@66.150.105.47>, Fred Stone > > > > > > <fston...@earthling.com> wrote: > > J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > >news:Jason-1206071222580001@66-52-22-95.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net: > > > > In article <5d83hcF31q6f...@mid.individual.net>, "Robibnikoff" > > > <witchy...@broomstick.com> wrote: > > > >> "Jason" <J...@nospam.com> wrote in message > > >>news:Jason-1206071128330001@66-52-22-95.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > > >> > In article <1181649884.050718.194...@d30g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, > > >> > Martin <phippsmar...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > >> >> On Jun 12, 1:22 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > >> >> > In article > > >> >> > <1181611488.232237.92...@d30g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, > > >> >> > Martin > > > >> >> > <phippsmar...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > >> >> > > On Jun 12, 8:31 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > >> >> > > > God > > > >> >> > > God doesn't exist. > > > >> >> > > created mankind, he > > >> >> > > > gave us free will. > > > >> >> > > Free will doesn't exist. > > > >> >> > > You're 0 for 2. > > > >> >> > I disagree--Free Will does exist. Once a person understands free > > >> >> > will, many Bible doctrines and even issues related to life; > > >> >> > sociological and psychological issues--make sense. For example, > > >> >> > I now understand why some > > >> >> > people do wonderful thing such as doctors that spend a month > > >> >> > each year in > > >> >> > third world countries. I also understand why some people do > > >> >> > terrible things such as becoming murderers or rapists. > > > >> >> Are you still telling us that you would be capable of killing ten > > >> >> people a day if you didn't believe in God? What about the men who > > >> >> killed 3000 people on September 11th because they believed in > > >> >> their god? > > > >> >> Martin > > > >> > Martin, > > >> > Those people that do such things are not pleasing to God. > > >> > They may believe or think that their actions are pleasing to > > >> > God--but they are wrong. You can find many cases in history where > > >> > people done terrible things that they believed were pleasing to > > >> > God--but were not pleasing to God. > > >> > Jason > > > >> Who are you to judge? > > > > It's easy to judge the actions of the men that killed 3000 people on > > > 9/11. > > > It's easy to find people who will tell us what a blasphemous infidel you > > are for saying that the 9/11 Jihadists were not pleasing Allah with > > their actions. > > You already know that millions of people in America agree that the actions > of those men were not pleasing to Jehovah. > Meaning that they, like you, are judging god. What is their authority? > > > > > > -- > > Fred Stone > > aa# 1369 > > "When they put out that deadline, people realized that we were going to > > lose," said an aide to an anti-war lawmaker. "Everything after that > > seemed like posturing."- Skjul tekst i anf Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted June 13, 2007 Posted June 13, 2007 On Jun 13, 3:45 pm, "Jeckyl" <n...@nowhere.com> wrote: > "Jason" <J...@nospam.com> wrote in message > > news:Jason-1206072140050001@66-52-22-63.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > > > Bob, > > There is a world of difference between conducting scientific experiments > > in labs compared to creating a star. > > > The scientists believe that it happened naturally. It's very likely that > > it involved elements (or a combination of elements) and amino acids. > > > If it happened once--naturally--scientists should be able to cause it > > happen again. > > So you think scientist should be able to create stars in the laboratory? > And their failure to do so implies that there is a 'god' who created them > instead? Of course if his god created mankind then his god should be able to do it again. Don't hold your breath wanting for another species of man to appear. Martin Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted June 13, 2007 Posted June 13, 2007 On Jun 13, 5:38 pm, gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: > On 12 Jun., 19:21, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > Do you have objective evidence that these are two of the steps involved in > > the evolution of mankind: > > STEP 1 Single cell (example: bacteria) > > STEP 2 Single animal cell (with DNA nucleus capable of sexual reproduction). > Why do you keep posting the above nonsense? You know it is not an > honest portrayal of what the theory of evolution says. How can you > possibly think you are making a point? Really Jason, I have asked > this before; are you too cowardly to respond? How is this dishonest of Jason? It is a fantastic improvement on his question of "life evolving from non-life" (in that he was confusing chemical evolution with biological evolution, two very different processes). The only dishonesty here is that he knows full well that we do have plenty of evidence to support the process of bacteria-like cells evolving into ameoba-like cells but likes to pretend that we don't. Martin Quote
Guest Mike Posted June 13, 2007 Posted June 13, 2007 Jason wrote: > In article <bh8u6392nggiaah9q242nudpl2v4vhruuu@4ax.com>, Free Lunch > <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote: >> Are you actually interested in the answers, or will it be like the rest >> of your questions, an attempt to deflect from the fact that you believe >> a bunch of religious lies and refuse to look at physical evidence? > > I will read your answers. The whole problem is that you'll then ignore everything you read and go on about your ignorant way. Quote
Guest Mike Posted June 13, 2007 Posted June 13, 2007 Jason wrote: >>> You want to try again. I'll find 10 or 20 more questions for you.- Skjul = >> tekst i anf=F8rselstegn - >> >> Yes, we all know that you are not capable of being embarrassed by your >> dishonesty. It is odd that you are proud of it though. > > > Questions for Evolutionists > > BlueBar > > > 1. Where did the space for the universe come from? Where did god come from? > 2. Where did matter come from? Where did what-ever god is made of come from? > 3. Where did the laws of the universe come from (gravity, inertia, etc.)? Where did the "law of god" come from? > 4. How did matter get so perfectly organized? How did god get so perfectly organized? > 5. Where did the energy come from to do all the organizing? Where did god's energy come from? > 6. When, where, why, and how did life come from dead matter? When, where, why and how did god come from dead matter? > 7. When, where, why, and how did life learn to reproduce itself? When, where, why and how did god learn to reproduce itself? (Remember, Jesus was the son of God, supposedly.) > 8. With what did the first cell capable of sexual reproduction reproduce? With what did god reproduce? > 9. Why would any plant or animal want to reproduce more of its kind > since this would only make more mouths to feed and decrease the chances of > survival? (Does the individual have a drive to survive, or the species? > How do you explain this?) Why would god want to reproduce more of it's kind since this would only make more gods to worship and decrease the chances of any one god getting worshipped? (Does god have a drive to survive, or the species? How do you explain this?) <snip more crap. If you don't get the point by now, you won't ever get it.> Quote
Guest Ralph Posted June 13, 2007 Posted June 13, 2007 "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message news:Jason-1206072039260001@66-52-22-63.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > In article <zJFbi.1835$H7.1053@bigfe9>, "Ralph" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> > wrote: > >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message >> news:Jason-1206071637480001@66-52-22-63.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... >> > In article <1181683568.769547.221730@n15g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, >> > bramble <leopoldo.perdomo@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> >> On 12 jun, 15:20, gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: >> >> > On 12 Jun., 08:12, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> >> > > > But the parents are not responsible for the behavior of an adult >> >> > > > competent child. They may regret have given birth to that >> >> > > > child, >> >> > > > but >> >> > > > they are not legally responsible for his actions after attaining >> >> > > > majority. They may have raised him in a way that led him to >> >> > > > commit >> >> > > > his >> >> > > > crimes, but that is a psychological issue rather than a legal >> >> > > > one. >> >> > > > It >> >> > > > might be a moral issue, depending on how they raised him. >> >> > >> >> > > > > Jason >> >> > >> >> > > cactus, >> >> > > My point was that God is like the parents. >> >> > >> >> > What utter nonsense! The parents are not all-powerful. They cannot >> >> > possibly be responsible for everything the child does. >> >> > >> >> > In much the same way the >> >> > >> >> > > parents were indirectly responsible for the murder since the >> >> > > murder >> >> > > would >> >> > > not have happened if the son had never been born--God is >> >> > > indirectly >> >> > > responsible for evil, since evil would never have happened if God >> >> > > had >> >> > > not >> >> > > created the solar system and life. >> >> > >> >> > Your analogy is transparently invalid. >> >> >> >> If parents would had the ability to change for the better the behavior >> >> of his son, he would surely do it. We want that he would be free, but >> >> free to drive a reasonable life. We, as parents, do no want our kids >> >> to fall into a pool of shit. >> >> But, sometimes, we are too busy or we are not enough vlever, and our >> >> kids began to show bad a attitude, and we do not know how to change or >> >> reverse this. >> >> If we were like gods, our kids would have freedom to behave in a nice >> >> manner and to keep out of trouble. But we are not gods. >> >> So, go is a very bad parent. And this analogy posited by Jason is not >> >> valid. >> >> If there is a god, he would surely change all that. And this is one >> >> of the proves that there is not any god. >> >> Bramble >> > >> > God could have created robots that were programmed by God to do only >> > kind >> > and wonderful things and never do bad things such as murder. Instead of >> > creating programmed robots, God created people that had free will. >> > People >> > will eventually be judged by God in relation to how they used their >> > free >> > will. Did they love God or turn their backs on God? Did they violate >> > God's >> > commandments or follow the commandments? Did they love or hate? Did >> > they >> > do good or evil? etc. >> > Jason >> >> Or god could have just not created man. Why did god chose this moment in >> eternity to create life? Was he lonely? God worshippers should use a >> little >> reason when thinking of their god. > > He wanted to have fellowship and a relationship with mankind. Think about your answer. You are telling me that a god created the entire universe. This god has existed and will exist forever. At some point this all-being needs the fellowship of a human?? How arrogant and ignorant. Quote
Guest Bob T. Posted June 13, 2007 Posted June 13, 2007 On Jun 12, 11:50 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <1181708780.876674.162...@a26g2000pre.googlegroups.com>, George > > > > > > Chen <georgech...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > On Jun 13, 12:29 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > In article <1181699263.750690.39...@q19g2000prn.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > > <phippsmar...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Jun 13, 7:58 am, "Ralph" <mmman...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > "Martin Phipps" <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote in message > > > > > >news:1181691449.474813.233740@a26g2000pre.googlegroups.com... > > > > > > > On Jun 13, 1:41 am, "Ralph" <mmman...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > >> "Jason" <J...@nospam.com> wrote in message > > > > > > >>news:Jason-1206071021200001@66-52-22-95.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > > > > > > >> > In article <1181646992.799917.21...@o11g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, > > > > > >> > gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: > > > > > > >> >> On 12 Jun., 02:47, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > >> >> > In article > > <1181601347.999940.35...@r19g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,> > > > >> >> > Martin > > > > > > >> >> > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > >> >> > > > In article > > <Jason-1006071559590...@66-52-22-36.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>, > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > >> >> > > > > She has > > > > > >> >> > > > > witnessed to thousands of people. > > > > > > >> >> > > Wow. She's lied to a lot of people then. I find that > completely > > > > > >> >> > > and > > > > > >> >> > > utterly morally reprehensible. It is also typical Godbot > > > > > >> >> > > behaviour. > > > > > > >> >> > > Martin > > > > > > >> >> > the alternative is "she told the truth to a lot of people then." > > > > > > >> >> For which you have absolutely no objective evidence. You > have even > > > > > >> >> pretty well made it clear that you believe it because you > want to. If > > > > > >> >> one is a rational being, objective evidence is something > that has to > > > > > >> >> be accepted, whether we like what it supports or not; but > you believe > > > > > >> >> because you want to and, supposedly, reject evidence that does not > > > > > >> >> support what you like. This makes you irrational and dishonest. > > > > > > >> > Do you have objective evidence that time and physics did not exist > > > > > >> > prior > > > > > >> > to the Big Bang? > > > > > > >> Mathematics says it didn't. > > > > > > > It's more than mathematics. The big bang apparently happened and > > > > > > inflationary theory explains how it happened. Even without > > > > > > inflationary theory we have the second law of thermodynamics which > > > > > > tells us that the big bang was the beginning of time. Even with all > > > > > > this, it is still reasonable to suppose that it wasn't a "first cause" > > > > > > in that one would suppose that there had to be existing preconditions > > > > > > that made the big bang possible in the first place. > > > > > > I understand what was involved. I just don't intend to waste my > time and a > > > > > willful fool like Jason. > > > > > Answering his stupid questions is fun. It's when he accuses him of > > > > not answering him that I get pissed off. That plus the fact that he > > > > never bothers to answer any of OUR questions, saying "I don't have my > > > > chemistry text anymore" or "I donated that book to a second hand book > > > > store". > > > > > > >> > Do you have objective evidence that these are two of the > steps involved > > > > > >> > in > > > > > >> > the evolution of mankind: > > > > > >> > STEP 1 Single cell (example: bacteria) > > > > > >> > STEP 2 Single animal cell (with DNA nucleus capable of sexual > > > > > >> > reproduction). > > > > > > >> Those aren't the steps of evolution. Why do you continue to be so > > > > > >> ignorant? > > > > > > > Okay, look, I have to say that it is a bit ironic for you to claim > > > > > > that the gradual change over several generations of a bacteria like > > > > > > cell into an ameoba like cell is not evolution in action. > > > > > > Simple Martin, because it wasn't STEP 1 and STEP 2. > > > > > STEP 1.0 and STEP 2.0? It's a recipe for mankind. Just add heat and > > > > water and wait 3.5 billion years. > > > > It's speculation. Speculation is not evidence. There are two other > > > possibilities: > > > 1. intelligent designer > > > With all due respect (and at this point we honestly affording you very > > little) this is not a possibility because God does not exist. > > > > 2. ancient astronauts from another planet. > > > Which doesn't answer the question of where life ultimately came from. > > Nor does God belief for that matter: do you believe God to be alive? > > If life requires creation then who created God? > > > > You choice is abiogenesis. > > > My choice is an intelligent designer. > > > Erick Von Dannikan's choice is ancient astronauts. > > > You and Erick have a lot in common, You're both kooks who believe > > things without evidence. > > Speculation is not evidence. The advocates of creation science have fossil > evidence. No, they don't. The fossil evidence is all on the side of evolution. > Erik has Stonehenge, Pyramids, cave drawings of ancient > astronauts and cave drawings of space ships. EvD has a bunch of horseshit speculation that was thoroughly debunked years ago. I'm sure you can find a full discussion of the flaws in his "ancient astronaut" nonsense on the web. - Bob T. > Jason- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Quote
Guest Ralph Posted June 13, 2007 Posted June 13, 2007 "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message news:Jason-1206072052190001@66-52-22-63.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > In article <DKFbi.1837$H7.1544@bigfe9>, "Ralph" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> > wrote: > >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message >> news:Jason-1206071629120001@66-52-22-63.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... >> > In article <Xns994DB060B8F89freddybear@66.150.105.47>, Fred Stone >> > <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote: >> > >> >> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in >> >> news:Jason-1206071303440001@66-52-22-41.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net: >> >> >> >> > In article <Xns994D94878C66Ffreddybear@66.150.105.47>, Fred Stone >> >> > <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in >> >> >> news:Jason-1206071222580001@66-52-22-95.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net: >> >> >> >> >> >> > In article <5d83hcF31q6f3U1@mid.individual.net>, "Robibnikoff" >> >> >> > <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote: >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message >> >> >> >> news:Jason-1206071128330001@66-52-22-95.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... >> >> >> >> > In article >> >> >> >> > <1181649884.050718.194220@d30g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, >> >> >> >> > Martin <phippsmartin@hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> On Jun 12, 1:22 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> >> >> >> >> > In article >> >> >> >> >> > <1181611488.232237.92...@d30g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, >> >> >> >> >> > Martin >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> > <phippsmar...@hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> > > On Jun 12, 8:31 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> >> >> >> >> > > > God >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> > > God doesn't exist. >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> > > created mankind, he >> >> >> >> >> > > > gave us free will. >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> > > Free will doesn't exist. >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> > > You're 0 for 2. >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> > I disagree--Free Will does exist. Once a person understands >> >> >> >> >> > free will, many Bible doctrines and even issues related to >> >> >> >> >> > life; sociological and psychological issues--make sense. >> >> >> >> >> > For >> >> >> >> >> > example, I now understand why some >> >> >> >> >> > people do wonderful thing such as doctors that spend a >> >> >> >> >> > month >> >> >> >> >> > each year in >> >> >> >> >> > third world countries. I also understand why some people do >> >> >> >> >> > terrible things such as becoming murderers or rapists. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Are you still telling us that you would be capable of killing >> >> >> >> >> ten people a day if you didn't believe in God? What about >> >> >> >> >> the >> >> >> >> >> men who killed 3000 people on September 11th because they >> >> >> >> >> believed in their god? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Martin >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > Martin, >> >> >> >> > Those people that do such things are not pleasing to God. >> >> >> >> > They may believe or think that their actions are pleasing to >> >> >> >> > God--but they are wrong. You can find many cases in history >> >> >> >> > where people done terrible things that they believed were >> >> >> >> > pleasing to God--but were not pleasing to God. >> >> >> >> > Jason >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Who are you to judge? >> >> >> > >> >> >> > It's easy to judge the actions of the men that killed 3000 people >> >> >> > on 9/11. >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> It's easy to find people who will tell us what a blasphemous >> >> >> infidel >> >> >> you are for saying that the 9/11 Jihadists were not pleasing Allah >> >> >> with their actions. >> >> > >> >> > You already know that millions of people in America agree that the >> >> > actions of those men were not pleasing to Jehovah. >> >> > >> >> >> >> Is your religion a popularity contest? >> > No--what is your opinion about those men that killed 3000 people on >> > 9/11? >> >> They thought they were being true to their god. What is your opinion? > > They were murderers that have no understanding of the true God. They think you have no understanding of the true god. See Jason, when it comes to belief in god the truth resides in the minds of each believer and that is what makes all religions dangerous. Quote
Guest Ralph Posted June 13, 2007 Posted June 13, 2007 "Martin" <phippsmartin@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:1181698389.379926.218680@d30g2000prg.googlegroups.com... > On Jun 13, 7:53 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > >> I rejected abiogenesis and common sense > > We agree. > > Seconds? > > Martin I second. Quote
Guest Mike Posted June 13, 2007 Posted June 13, 2007 Jason wrote: > In article <1k8u63p8g5ekm82c78psrvmlh24v5qbs6t@4ax.com>, Free Lunch > <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > >> On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 12:07:52 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism >> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in >> <Jason-1206071207530001@66-52-22-95.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >>>>> You want to try again. I'll find 10 or 20 more questions for you.- > Skjul = >>>> tekst i anf=F8rselstegn - >>>> >>>> Yes, we all know that you are not capable of being embarrassed by your >>>> dishonesty. It is odd that you are proud of it though. >>> >>> Questions for Evolutionists >>> >>> BlueBar >>> >>> >>> 1. Where did the space for the universe come from? >> That question shows a profound lack of understanding of cosmological >> origins. > > not an answer--try again. Yes, it was. It pointed out how the question was meaningless. >>> 2. Where did matter come from? >> It's a form of energy and is a result of the Big Bang. > good answer--but where did the energy re: Big Bang come from? Go read a book on cosmology. Oh, wait, that's too boring for you so you'd rather read a book of fiction (the bible.) >>> 3. Where did the laws of the universe come from (gravity, inertia, etc.)? >> Like the first question, the question betrays be a misunderstanding of >> physics so deep that it would be impossible to clarify it. > not an answer When the question is meaningless, there is no answer. "How far north is 4:00pm?" >>> 4. How did matter get so perfectly organized? >> You assume a fact not in evidence. Where did you get the idea that >> matter is (perfectly) organized. > good answer. And yet you'll ask the same question again later. >>> 5. Where did the energy come from to do all the organizing? >> Like the first question, the question betrays be a misunderstanding of >> physics so deep that it would be impossible to clarify it. Energy and >> matter are the same. > >>> 6. When, where, why, and how did life come from dead matter? >> 3.5 to 4 billion years ago on earth, almost certainly on other planets >> as well. It happened because it was a natural result of the environment >> in which the chemical reactions were taking place. We don't know the >> details how, yet, but we know there are a number of valid possible >> paths. The matter wasn't dead. > > You answer is based on speculation No, it's based on evidence. Ever heard of the word? > >>> 7. When, where, why, and how did life learn to reproduce itself? >> Learn? What a strange characterization. Life never learned to reproduce >> itself, it happened as a result of biochemical reactions. > > Speculation--do you have evidence? Loads. Any evidence for your god? >>> 8. With what did the first cell capable of sexual reproduction reproduce? >> You are also misinformed about sexual reproduction. For what it's worth, >> there are still a huge number of organisms that swap genetic material >> even though they don't really reproduce sexually and there are a fair >> number of complex organisms that can reproduce sexually or not. > > I did not write the questions You posted them so you must have agreed with them. --it's my guess the question was related to > life forms that reproduce as a result of males and females having sex. > With that in mind, try again. You are an idiot. With that in mind, the first cell to reproduce sexually (by gene-swap) did so with others of it's species. But those cells could ALSO reproduce asexually (by cell division) so it didn't have to wait for another of its kind to show up. It MADE the others of its kind. <snip other answers from Free Lunch that you had no response to.> Quote
Guest Mike Posted June 13, 2007 Posted June 13, 2007 Jason wrote: > Repost the questions and your answers. I don't save old posts. I probably > agreed with your answers which is the reason I did not comment. For > example, Martin answered the questions I posted yesterday and I did not > disagree with any of his answers so I did not comment related to every > answer. He actully answered one of the questions despite the fact that the > question was poorly worded. I did not compile the list of questions. I > googled "Questions for evolutionists" and found lots of sites. I.e. you're a troll who has no real interest in the responses but just want to try and come up with more questions. Quote
Guest Robibnikoff Posted June 13, 2007 Posted June 13, 2007 "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message news:Jason-1206072004470001@66-52-22-63.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > In article <nocu63t7m5lckkpctjabhghvrbj10nrdap@4ax.com>, John Baker > <nunya@bizniz.net> wrote: > >> On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 16:53:45 -0700, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> snip > > Would you like for me to post her testimony again. She stated that she > watched her leg bone grow two inches? Go ahead. It still doesn't prove that this alleged incident was caused by a god. -- Robyn Resident Witchypoo BAAWA Knight! #1557 Quote
Guest Mike Posted June 13, 2007 Posted June 13, 2007 Jason wrote: > In article <f4gu9b$a4v$1@news04.infoave.net>, Mike > <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > >> Jason wrote: >>> In article <mkorj4-ugf.ln1@spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason >>> <kbjarnason@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> [snips] >>>> >>>> On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 18:01:13 -0700, Jason wrote: >>>> >>>>>> Thus to assert that space or time exist in or before the > singularity is to >>>>>> attempt to impose rules which apply _within_ a system, to something which >>>>>> is not, itself, part of that system and for which there is no > foundation n >>>>>> which to build a case that it, too, follows the same or similar rules. >>>>> Martin told me something about this in one of his posts. >>>> So have I. The question is when are you going to turn on your brain and >>>> let that information filter in, then process it and deal with the >>>> consequences of it? >>> Kelsey, >>> In response to another post, I decided to google this term: BEFORE THE BIG >>> BANG. I did not write down the number of sites that showed up but it was >>> over 10. I copied and pasted this from one of the sites that I found: >>> >>> What happened >>> before the Big Bang long has frustrated cosmologists, both amateur and >>> professional. >>> Though Einstein's theory of general relativity does an excellent job of >>> describing the universe almost back to its beginning, near the Big Bang >>> matter becomes so dense that relativity breaks down, says Penn State >>> physicist Abhay Ashtekar. "Beyond that point, we need to apply quantum >>> tools that were not available to Einstein." >>> >>> Now Ashtekar and two of his post-doctoral researchers, Tomasz Pawlowski >>> and Parmpreet Singh, have done just that. Using a theory called loop >>> quantum gravity, they have developed a mathematical model that skates >>> right up to the Big Bang -- and steps through it. On the other side, >>> Ashtekar says, exists another universe with space-time geometry similar to >>> our own, except that instead of expanding, it is shrinking. "In place of a >>> classical Big Bang, there is in fact a quantum Bounce," he says. >>> >>> Loop quantum gravity, one of the leading approaches to the unification of >>> general relativity with quantum physics, was pioneered at the Institute of >>> Gravitational Physics and Geometry at Penn State, which Ashtekar directs. >>> The theory posits that space-time geometry itself has a discrete "atomic" >>> structure, Ashtekar explains. Instead of the familiar space-time >>> continuum, the fabric of space is made up of one-dimensional quantum >>> threads. Near the Big Bang, this fabric is violently torn, and these >>> quantum properties cause gravity to become repulsive, rather than >>> attractive. >> A few points. >> >> 1: That still doesn't help your ideas of "can a time traveller go back >> in time, could they observe the big bang?" idea since there's still no >> way to be OUTSIDE of the universe to observe it. >> >> 2: That doesn't show that anything could survive intact through the big >> bang (so we still can't travel past it back in time.) >> >> 3: This idea is still in the very initial stages of being developed and >> might not even pan out. >> >> 4: Many mathematical models can be run in reverse and yet not reflect >> reality. Relativity equations don't prohibit time travel, for example, >> but there's other models that show time travel is probably unlikely. >> >> 5: This actually eliminates any need for your god since it gives a valid >> answer to "what caused the big bang to 'bang'?" Are you REALLY so sure >> you want to eliminate the last gap your "god of the gaps" existed in? > > People in this newsgroup seemed to believe that time and physics did not > exist prior to the Big Bang. They implied that anyone that believed that > did not know anything about science. I googled "What Happened Before the > Big Bang" and found out that several different experts believed that time > and physics did exist prior to the Big Bang. So? There's probably nothing that you'd find 100% agreement on in ANY discussion if you involve enough people. Now how about actually addressing the points made for a change? Quote
Guest Mike Posted June 13, 2007 Posted June 13, 2007 Jason wrote: > In article <1181604561.388652.148620@z28g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, Martin > Phipps <martinphipps2@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> On Jun 12, 1:57 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> >>> Please explain what the researchers mean when they discuss "another >>> universe with space-time geometry similar to our own...." Did this >>> universe exist prior the Big Bang and would it have been possible to >>> measure time in that universe? >> We've been through this, Jason. I long ago said "It is reasonable to >> suppose that something happened before the big bang that led to the >> big bang". Just because it is reasonable to suppose, though, doesn't >> mean it is true: all the evidence suggests that the universe began >> with the big bang. If anything happened "before" then, yes, we would >> be talking about another universe. Why do you keep bringing this up >> as though it were new information? >> >> Martin > > Martin, > I was trying to resolve conflicting information. You told me long ago that > a universe may have existed prior to the Big Bang and other people told me > that time and physics did not exist prior to the Big Bang. That was a > conflict that I was trying to resolve. It appears that some experts (such > as the ones that I mentioned) do believe that another universe existed > prior to the Big Bang. However, the consensus is that time and physics did > not exist prior to the Big Bang. Do I now have it right? Jason, what were you before you were a fertilized egg? The question is meaningless. Can you go further back in YOUR existence to a time before that? Of course not. Does that mean OTHER people didn't exist before then? Of course not. What was the universe before it existed? The question is meaningless. Does that mean other universes didn't/don't exist? Not necessarily. Does that mean that something in this universe travel back in time (or even measure time) before time in this universe existed? Of course not. But of course, you'll ignore all this. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.