Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
"you're talking a lot, but you're not saying anything" David Burnie /the talking heads.speaking of agendas....!Lawrence has an atheistic agenda, so I take everything he says with a grain of salt. I really do appreciate you not using assumptive language and admitting it is a belief of science. There is absolutely no scientific evidence for dark matter or dark energy other than the fact that the observation of the behavior of celestial bodies does not fit the current gravitational model. Therefore, dark matter and dark energy provide a possible solution for the movement of the galaxies, but it is just a possible explanation, not science. In fact, there isn't a single viable expeiriment that has validated this theory although billions of dollars are being spent in an attempt to. As it stands right, they might as well be talking about God, and thus, all the materialists should be applying all the same arguments they do against God to Dark Matter and Dark Energy... oh and Darth Vader.
You guys know I love sarcasm and irony, so I just have to say it. So you're asking me to believe in an invisible force that no one can prove exists and we can't prove doesn't exist?
What Higgs result means for dark matter conspiracy - physics-math - 21 December 2011 - New Scientist
Speaking of much verbage but no substance!!
you may love them, but your arrogance precludes you from solving them!
I love these types of problems!!! I like the explanation that involves a whole other antimatter universe in which an antimatter Daws101 is arguing with an antimatter Youwerecreated on an antimatter internet.
you may love them, but your arrogance precludes you from solving them!
I love these types of problems!!! I like the explanation that involves a whole other antimatter universe in which an antimatter Daws101 is arguing with an antimatter Youwerecreated on an antimatter internet.
The positively charged antimatter sub-atomic particle called the "positron" does exist. It's been created and it's effects have been observed (for a very short period of time) thanks to some of the particle accelerators on the earth. It's like an electron, only it has a positive charge. I doubt there are any antimatter sources anywhere near enough to us, or massive enough, to be seen with the human eye, though
Does antimatter exist? - Yahoo! Answers
also, you've just demonstrated a logical fallacy. in the antimatter universe YOU & YWC would be arguing AGAINST CREATIONISM & I would be arguing for it.
"you're talking a lot, but you're not saying anything" David Burnie /the talking heads.speaking of agendas....!
Speaking of much verbage but no substance!!
"you're talking a lot, but you're not saying anything" David Burnie /the talking heads.Speaking of much verbage but no substance!!
You may ask yourself, well, how did I get here?
You may ask yourself, am I right, am I wrong? And when its all over...
You may say to yourself, My God, what have I done???
We must use the present to figure out what happened in the distant past because it is...
Same as it ever was, same as it ever was, same as it ever was.
I actually liked that song. The keys to that song is "watching these day's go by"
that's letting the days go by...and it's not about what you wish it was about!"you're talking a lot, but you're not saying anything" David Burnie /the talking heads.
You may ask yourself, well, how did I get here?
You may ask yourself, am I right, am I wrong? And when its all over...
You may say to yourself, My God, what have I done???
We must use the present to figure out what happened in the distant past because it is...
Same as it ever was, same as it ever was, same as it ever was.
These something from nothing views without purpose and intent are hilarious.
three logical fallacies in a row!you may love them, but your arrogance precludes you from solving them!I love these types of problems!!! I like the explanation that involves a whole other antimatter universe in which an antimatter Daws101 is arguing with an antimatter Youwerecreated on an antimatter internet.
The positively charged antimatter sub-atomic particle called the "positron" does exist. It's been created and it's effects have been observed (for a very short period of time) thanks to some of the particle accelerators on the earth. It's like an electron, only it has a positive charge. I doubt there are any antimatter sources anywhere near enough to us, or massive enough, to be seen with the human eye, though
Does antimatter exist? - Yahoo! Answers
also, you've just demonstrated a logical fallacy. in the antimatter universe YOU & YWC would be arguing AGAINST CREATIONISM & I would be arguing for it.
There you go again, thinking Darwinists have the monopoly on science. I will repeat it ad naseum... we are where we are in science today because of logical thinking Creationists like Newton and others.
Hey, and just because we were made of antimatter, doesn't mean we would have lost all of our common sense and you would have gained some.
These something from nothing views without purpose and intent are hilarious.
But something from nothing with purpose and intent is completely reasonable?
so Walt Disney is god?These something from nothing views without purpose and intent are hilarious.
But something from nothing with purpose and intent is completely reasonable?
Can't believe you missed the obvious point Montrovant. The only way something comes from nothing are magical moments. Then add in intent and design it makes all the sense in the world.
three logical fallacies in a row!you may love them, but your arrogance precludes you from solving them!
The positively charged antimatter sub-atomic particle called the "positron" does exist. It's been created and it's effects have been observed (for a very short period of time) thanks to some of the particle accelerators on the earth. It's like an electron, only it has a positive charge. I doubt there are any antimatter sources anywhere near enough to us, or massive enough, to be seen with the human eye, though
Does antimatter exist? - Yahoo! Answers
also, you've just demonstrated a logical fallacy. in the antimatter universe YOU & YWC would be arguing AGAINST CREATIONISM & I would be arguing for it.
There you go again, thinking Darwinists have the monopoly on science. I will repeat it ad naseum... we are where we are in science today because of logical thinking Creationists like Newton and others.
Hey, and just because we were made of antimatter, doesn't mean we would have lost all of our common sense and you would have gained some.
1. Newton ( 25 December 1642 20 March 1727) was not a creationist, the pseudo science of CREATIONISM HAD NOT EVEN BEEN INVENTED YET .
In its modern form, creationism sprung up around the same time as evolution, as a response to defend against what was seen as a threat to their faith.
The people who developed both are either not known in the first case, or many and varied in the second.
Read more: Who invented creationism
he was a man of his time ..eveyone was indoctrinated in religion.(by default everyone believed in creation.)
your blatant intentional misrepresentation of history is not only a logical fallacy, it's arguing from ignorance and appealing to a non existent authority .
Charles Darwin (12 February 1809 19 April 1882) to was the first to formulate a scientific argument for the theory of evolution by means of natural selection. Evolution by natural selection is a process that is inferred from three facts about populations: 1) more offspring are produced than can possibly survive, 2) traits vary among individuals, leading to differential rates of survival and reproduction, and 3) trait differences are heritable.[3] Thus, when members of a population die they are replaced by the progeny of parents that were better adapted to survive and reproduce in the environment in which natural selection took place. This process creates and preserves traits that are seemingly fitted for the functional roles they perform.[4] Natural selection is the only known cause of adaptation, but not the only known cause of evolution. Other, nonadaptive causes of evolution include mutation and genetic drift.[5]
but NOT THE FIRST TO PROPOSE THE IDEA OF EVOLUTION: The proposal that one type of animal could descend from an animal of another type goes back to some of the first pre-Socratic Greek philosophers, such as Anaximander and Empedocles.[10][11] In contrast to these materialistic views, Aristotle understood all natural things, not only living things, as being imperfect actualisations of different fixed natural possibilities, known as "forms", "ideas", or (in Latin translations) "species".[12][13] This was part of his teleological understanding of nature in which all things have an intended role to play in a divine cosmic order. Variations of this idea became the standard understanding of the Middle Ages, and were integrated into Christian learning, but Aristotle did not demand that real types of animals corresponded one-for-one with exact metaphysical forms, and specifically gave examples of how new types of living things could come to be.[14]
Evolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
as to your profound ignorance about anti matter if this anti matter universe did exist
(you do know what anti means?--one that is opposed)
your laughable "common sense" would be reversed or opposite of what it is now, you would have no choice in the matter. or anti matter!
so Walt Disney is god?But something from nothing with purpose and intent is completely reasonable?
Can't believe you missed the obvious point Montrovant. The only way something comes from nothing are magical moments. Then add in intent and design it makes all the sense in the world.
try actually comprehending what you read :"he was a man of his time ..eveyone was indoctrinated in religion.(by default everyone believed in creation.)three logical fallacies in a row!There you go again, thinking Darwinists have the monopoly on science. I will repeat it ad naseum... we are where we are in science today because of logical thinking Creationists like Newton and others.
Hey, and just because we were made of antimatter, doesn't mean we would have lost all of our common sense and you would have gained some.
1. Newton ( 25 December 1642 20 March 1727) was not a creationist, the pseudo science of CREATIONISM HAD NOT EVEN BEEN INVENTED YET .
In its modern form, creationism sprung up around the same time as evolution, as a response to defend against what was seen as a threat to their faith.
The people who developed both are either not known in the first case, or many and varied in the second.
Read more: Who invented creationism
he was a man of his time ..eveyone was indoctrinated in religion.(by default everyone believed in creation.)
your blatant intentional misrepresentation of history is not only a logical fallacy, it's arguing from ignorance and appealing to a non existent authority .
Charles Darwin (12 February 1809 19 April 1882) to was the first to formulate a scientific argument for the theory of evolution by means of natural selection. Evolution by natural selection is a process that is inferred from three facts about populations: 1) more offspring are produced than can possibly survive, 2) traits vary among individuals, leading to differential rates of survival and reproduction, and 3) trait differences are heritable.[3] Thus, when members of a population die they are replaced by the progeny of parents that were better adapted to survive and reproduce in the environment in which natural selection took place. This process creates and preserves traits that are seemingly fitted for the functional roles they perform.[4] Natural selection is the only known cause of adaptation, but not the only known cause of evolution. Other, nonadaptive causes of evolution include mutation and genetic drift.[5]
but NOT THE FIRST TO PROPOSE THE IDEA OF EVOLUTION: The proposal that one type of animal could descend from an animal of another type goes back to some of the first pre-Socratic Greek philosophers, such as Anaximander and Empedocles.[10][11] In contrast to these materialistic views, Aristotle understood all natural things, not only living things, as being imperfect actualisations of different fixed natural possibilities, known as "forms", "ideas", or (in Latin translations) "species".[12][13] This was part of his teleological understanding of nature in which all things have an intended role to play in a divine cosmic order. Variations of this idea became the standard understanding of the Middle Ages, and were integrated into Christian learning, but Aristotle did not demand that real types of animals corresponded one-for-one with exact metaphysical forms, and specifically gave examples of how new types of living things could come to be.[14]
Evolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
as to your profound ignorance about anti matter if this anti matter universe did exist
(you do know what anti means?--one that is opposed)
your laughable "common sense" would be reversed or opposite of what it is now, you would have no choice in the matter. or anti matter!
Newton definitely believed in a creator. Anyone who believes in a creator believes in creation no ?
Don't start with genetics when you have no clue of what you are talking about.
If you do know what you are talking about please point out one trait in humans and prove it came about through mutation and the trait did not exist in the genepool already ? ok pumpkin.
being that I hold a degree in technical theatre (the equivalent to a mechanical engineering degree) would have to say yes..so Walt Disney is god?Can't believe you missed the obvious point Montrovant. The only way something comes from nothing are magical moments. Then add in intent and design it makes all the sense in the world.
No but he had intelligence that lead to design. So you gonna use the same argument for engineers as well ?
The real question is where did the intelligence come from ?
try actually comprehending what you read :"he was a man of his time ..eveyone was indoctrinated in religion.(by default everyone believed in creation.)three logical fallacies in a row!
1. Newton ( 25 December 1642 20 March 1727) was not a creationist, the pseudo science of CREATIONISM HAD NOT EVEN BEEN INVENTED YET .
In its modern form, creationism sprung up around the same time as evolution, as a response to defend against what was seen as a threat to their faith.
The people who developed both are either not known in the first case, or many and varied in the second.
Read more: Who invented creationism
he was a man of his time ..eveyone was indoctrinated in religion.(by default everyone believed in creation.)
your blatant intentional misrepresentation of history is not only a logical fallacy, it's arguing from ignorance and appealing to a non existent authority .
Charles Darwin (12 February 1809 19 April 1882) to was the first to formulate a scientific argument for the theory of evolution by means of natural selection. Evolution by natural selection is a process that is inferred from three facts about populations: 1) more offspring are produced than can possibly survive, 2) traits vary among individuals, leading to differential rates of survival and reproduction, and 3) trait differences are heritable.[3] Thus, when members of a population die they are replaced by the progeny of parents that were better adapted to survive and reproduce in the environment in which natural selection took place. This process creates and preserves traits that are seemingly fitted for the functional roles they perform.[4] Natural selection is the only known cause of adaptation, but not the only known cause of evolution. Other, nonadaptive causes of evolution include mutation and genetic drift.[5]
but NOT THE FIRST TO PROPOSE THE IDEA OF EVOLUTION: The proposal that one type of animal could descend from an animal of another type goes back to some of the first pre-Socratic Greek philosophers, such as Anaximander and Empedocles.[10][11] In contrast to these materialistic views, Aristotle understood all natural things, not only living things, as being imperfect actualisations of different fixed natural possibilities, known as "forms", "ideas", or (in Latin translations) "species".[12][13] This was part of his teleological understanding of nature in which all things have an intended role to play in a divine cosmic order. Variations of this idea became the standard understanding of the Middle Ages, and were integrated into Christian learning, but Aristotle did not demand that real types of animals corresponded one-for-one with exact metaphysical forms, and specifically gave examples of how new types of living things could come to be.[14]
Evolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
as to your profound ignorance about anti matter if this anti matter universe did exist
(you do know what anti means?--one that is opposed)
your laughable "common sense" would be reversed or opposite of what it is now, you would have no choice in the matter. or anti matter!
Newton definitely believed in a creator. Anyone who believes in a creator believes in creation no ?
Don't start with genetics when you have no clue of what you are talking about.
If you do know what you are talking about please point out one trait in humans and prove it came about through mutation and the trait did not exist in the genepool already ? ok pumpkin.
your blatant intentional misrepresentation of history is not only a logical fallacy, it's arguing from ignorance and appealing to a non existent authority ."
in other: WORDS NEWTON HAD NO CHOICE OTHER THAN TO BELIEVE IN CREATION AS IT WAS AGAINST THE LAW AT THE TIME. YOU ASS CLOWN.
IF NEWTON HAD THE SAME ACCESS TO THE SAME INFO THAT DARWIN HAD AND NOT HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT BEING HUNG FOR HERESY MY GUESS IS HIS BELIEF WOULD BE DIFFERENT...
also NEWTON was a practitioner of the" black arts" not good advertising for your fairy tale.
btw it's you who has no clue....
being that I hold a degree in technical theatre (the equivalent to a mechanical engineering degree) would have to say yes..so Walt Disney is god?
No but he had intelligence that lead to design. So you gonna use the same argument for engineers as well ?
The real question is where did the intelligence come from ?
define intelligence.
