Creation

[Bonam]

Wow! I thought the correction will be about space, time and matter. What's the three classical states?

Anyway The Bible isn't an in-depth science book!

Indeed. In fact, the bible makes no attempt to have a "trinity of trinities" in that opening sentence. It says nothing about solids, liquids, and gases, nor anything about length, width, and height. Those are purely the interjections of some dude who knows nothing about science trying to make the bible seem somehow more mystical to other uneducated people.

The whole "only god could write a book like this" thing is also laughable. What is the statement based on? That the sentence contains a reference to a specific time (in the beginning), an archaic term for space (the heavens) and a reference to something that is made up of matter (the Earth). I wonder if I could write a sentence like that?

Last night (time), there were stars (matter) in the sky (space).

Oh my god, a trinity of trinities! I wrote that sentence so I must be god! In fact, mine contains only 8 words instead of 10 and still expresses these nested trinities. Clearly, I am even more clever than the god you worship. All kneel before the might and power of Bonam, Lord of Space and Time.

Edited April 4, 2011 by Bonam

[betsy]

Last night (time), there were stars (matter) in the sky (space).

Oh my god, a trinity of trinities! I wrote that sentence so I must be god! In fact, mine contains only 8 words instead of 10 and still expresses these nested trinities. Clearly, I am even more clever than the god you worship. All kneel before the might and power of Bonam, Lord of Space and Time.

Nope. You're a copycat. Living in the present time. Have gone to scool....took science class. Got taught about Einstein....furthermore you're an atheist, and must've devoured hundreds of books on cosmology, physics, biology etc., anything that explains about the universe.

Besides....your submission above won't get you published. Not in non-fiction....or fiction genre. So there goes your aspiration to be a god.

Edited April 4, 2011 by betsy

[Bonam]

Living in the present time. Have gone to scool....took science class. Got taught about Einstein....furthermore you're an atheist, and must've devoured hundreds of books on cosmology, physics, biology etc., anything that explains about the universe.

Guilty as charged.

Inspite of that....your submission above won't get you published. Not in non-fiction....or fiction genre. So there goes your aspiration to be a god. But I can defnitely groan....egad!

It's all about faith. You just don't understand. Bonam works in mysterious ways. You don't need to doubt it or analyze it, just open your mind, read my words, and let the salvation flow through you. Oh, and donate generously to the Church of Bonam, lest you be accursed to the Seventh Plane of Torment for all eternity.

[ToadBrother]

Wow! I thought the correction will be about space, time and matter.

What's the three classical states? Solid, liquid, gas.

Rather than reading all those Creationist pamphlets you put stock in, maybe you should open a physics book written, in, oh, the last 40 years. Hell, we live in the Internet age. Wikipedia should at least be able to give general information on the states of matter.

Anyway The Bible isn't an in-depth science book! It was giving the basics. In the first 10 words of The Bible.

It doesn't even give the basics. It's not in any way shape or form a science book, and the first ten words, hell the first hundred words, have nothing to do with science. All you've done with your exercise is underline your own ignorance and demonstrate so amply why trying to push Genesis as a scientific treatise, even a general one, is an absurd exercise.

[ToadBrother]

Speaking of Genesis! This reminds me about Adam's rib. Another interesting info....

Do you know that the rib is the only bone that can regenerate? So God must really know what He was doing when He took one from Adam.

Why would it be necessary? He's God. If he wanted Adam to grow three heads and a third testicle he could have done it. You make your creator deity seem so small and pointless.

[ToadBrother]

Nope. You're a copycat. Living in the present time. Have gone to scool....took science class. Got taught about Einstein....furthermore you're an atheist, and must've devoured hundreds of books on cosmology, physics, biology etc., anything that explains about the universe.

Besides....your submission above won't get you published. Not in non-fiction....or fiction genre. So there goes your aspiration to be a god.

Are you saying your faith leaves you know time for education? Is ignorance not only bliss, but a necessity?

[betsy]

Rather than reading all those Creationist pamphlets you put stock in, maybe you should open a physics book written, in, oh, the last 40 years. Hell, we live in the Internet age. Wikipedia should at least be able to give general information on the states of matter.

It doesn't even give the basics. It's not in any way shape or form a science book, and the first ten words, hell the first hundred words, have nothing to do with science.

You always give your "authoritative" opinion and yet when asked to explain or support your position....you disappear for a while, and then come back when you feel it's safe enough to get into the foray. You've done that tactic in several threads.

I ask you again: explain how Space, Time and Matter doesn't have anything to do with the basics.

All you've done with your exercise is underline your own ignorance and demonstrate so amply why trying to push Genesis as a scientific treatise, even a general one, is an absurd exercise.

You're good at bashing. That's your "reason."

That's how you defend your position. So typical.

So very Dawkins-flockesque.

Simple. Support your claim. Cite. EXPLAIN.

Edited April 4, 2011 by betsy

[betsy]

Are you saying your faith leaves you know time for education? Is ignorance not only bliss, but a necessity?

EHHH? What are you saying here? Is this a coded question or what???

When you guys get stumped, you get all flustered and babbly and rant-ive and sputtery and bash-ive and....ha-ha-ha....and sense flies out the window!

So typical. So very Dawkins-flockesque.

[betsy]

Guilty as charged.

It's all about faith. You just don't understand. Bonam works in mysterious ways. You don't need to doubt it or analyze it, just open your mind, read my words, and let the salvation flow through you. Oh, and donate generously to the Church of Bonam, lest you be accursed to the Seventh Plane of Torment for all eternity.

But I don't have faith in you. And in your religion. And in your fanatical close-minded, terrified, paralyzed demi-gods.

Your demi-gods are just johnny-come-lately with their understanding of the universe. The time, space and matter science discovered is right there on the first 10 words of Genesis....in its right context!

Oh Bonam....

Edited April 5, 2011 by betsy

[GostHacked]

You always give your "authoritative" opinion and yet when asked to explain or support your position....you disappear for a while, and then come back when you feel it's safe enough to get into the foray. You've done that tactic in several threads.

Well at least he does eventually respond. You've just gone on to ignore others who have been challenging you can calling you out on your contradictions.

I ask you again: explain how Space, Time and Matter doesn't have anything to do with the basics.

Time, space and matter, ARE The basics.

You're good at bashing. That's your "reason."

That's how you defend your position. So typical.

So very Dawkins-flockesque.

Simple. Support your claim. Cite. EXPLAIN.

There is no amount of citing or evidence that will convince you, so why would you even bother to ask or try?

Edited April 4, 2011 by GostHacked

[ToadBrother]

You always give your "authoritative" opinion and yet when asked to explain or support your position....you disappear for a while, and then come back when you feel it's safe enough to get into the foray. You've done that tactic in several threads.

I ask you again: explain how Space, Time and Matter doesn't have anything to do with the basics.

Of course they have to do with the basics, but this absurd article you quoted doesn't get the basics of any of them.

You're good at bashing. That's your "reason."

That's how you defend your position. So typical.

So very Dawkins-flockesque.

Simple. Support your claim. Cite. EXPLAIN.

I have said repeatedly Betsy that I'm not a fan of Dawkins. Why you choose to continue misrepresenting my views is quite beyond me, other than it reflects very badly on you. Deal with what I say, Betsy, not with what you wish I'd say.

[ToadBrother]

EHHH? What are you saying here? Is this a coded question or what???

When you guys get stumped, you get all flustered and babbly and rant-ive and sputtery and bash-ive and....ha-ha-ha....and sense flies out the window!

So typical. So very Dawkins-flockesque.

We demonstrated that the underlying premise of your article is bunk. There are many states of matter and time is a co-oridinate in space-time. I see you're now in "Ignore what they said and taunt them for what I wish they'd say."

[betsy]

Of course they have to do with the basics, but this absurd article you quoted doesn't get the basics of any of them.

So you claim. EXPLAIN what you mean that this article doesn't get the basics?

I have said repeatedly Betsy that I'm not a fan of Dawkins. Why you choose to continue misrepresenting my views is quite beyond me, other than it reflects very badly on you. Deal with what I say, Betsy, not with what you wish I'd say.

Whether you're a fan of Dawkins or not doesn't matter. Obviously, you believe in his doctrine.

Betsy

Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence my foot! What's good for the goose is good for the gander. Since there are no extraordinary evidence that things such as telekinesis are not possible (simply because we don't fully understand the capacity of the brain)....it is therefore irresponsible (to say the least) of Dawkins to dismiss it as not true! That's why he no longer have any credibility as a scientist! He's nothing more than an evangelist that he ridicules! He's just full of bull!

I'll wager you've never read more than ten words by Dawkins that weren't filtered through your Creationist sources.

At any rate, there's no evidence for telekinesis... full stop.

Edited: Removed statement which I consider in poor taste and disrespectful. Sorry.

Edited April 5, 2011 by betsy

[betsy]

We demonstrated that the underlying premise of your article is bunk. There are many states of matter and time is a co-oridinate in space-time.

You only thought and wished you debunked it. I answered Bonam.

The most obvious example (but certainly not the only one) is trying to present "matter = solid/liquid/gas" as some kind of "trinity". For one, there are many other states of matter besides those three:

* 1 The three classical states

o 1.1 Solid

o 1.2 Liquid

o 1.3 Gas

* 2 Non classical states

o 2.1 Glass

o 2.2 Crystals with some degree of disorder

o 2.3 Liquid crystal states

o 2.4 Magnetically ordered

* 3 Low-temperature states

o 3.1 Superfluids

o 3.2 Bose-Einstein condensates

o 3.3 Fermionic condensates

o 3.4 Rydberg molecules

o 3.5 Quantum Hall states

o 3.6 Strange matter

* 4 High-energy states

o 4.1 Plasma (ionized gas)

o 4.2 Quark-gluon plasma

* 5 Very high energy states

* 6 Other proposed states

o 6.1 Degenerate matter

o 6.2 Supersolid

o 6.3 String-net liquid

o 6.4 Superglass

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_matter

Wow! I thought the correction will be about space, time and matter.

What's the three classical states? Solid, liquid, gas.

Anyway The Bible isn't an in-depth science book! It was giving the basics. In the first 10 words of The Bible.

Like I said: I thought the correction will be about space, time and matter.

It was giving the basics!

I see you're now in "Ignore what they said and taunt them for what I wish they'd say."

You ignored what I said and bashed me for stating a simple fact that you cannot refute.

Look in the mirror!

As for the taunting - which is really just teasing on my part - well, what's good for the goose is good for the gander. I try not to get to the New Atheists' mean-spirited way of discussing, which is actually more bashing than discussing. I'm so used to children throwing fits.

Edited April 5, 2011 by betsy

[ToadBrother]

Like I said: I thought the correction will be about space, time and matter.

It was giving the basics!

Except its not the basics, it's an incomplete list of the states of matter. You got caught trying to put some bullcrap numerological article on us, only to find out the underlying premise is nonsense. But, instead of admitting that the author of the article is an ignorant idiot, you now suddenly try to save face by changing the claims being made.

[ToadBrother]

Whether you're a fan of Dawkins or not doesn't matter. Obviously, you believe in his doctrine.

It isn't Dawkins' doctrine, Betsy. There have been atheists long before Dawkins came around, so quit being absurd.

[betsy]

Except its not the basics, it's an incomplete list of the states of matter. You got caught trying to put some bullcrap numerological article on us, only to find out the underlying premise is nonsense. But, instead of admitting that the author of the article is an ignorant idiot, you now suddenly try to save face by changing the claims being made.

Of course it is the basics! Go back to your science books - or google. I think there's even one that's titled: The Science of Space, Time and Matter.

Anyway, you're starting to hyperventilate.....spiralling down to pure ranting.

So typical of the New Atheism flock. So very Dawkins' flock-esque.

What Dawkins didn't tell you guys, it's hard to maneuver in a little, dark box.

If you really wanna know....you gotta be prepared to knock down walls....think and look outside that box.

If you wanna see some light, at least open a window.

Edited April 5, 2011 by betsy

[Black Dog]

Betsy is the internet's answer to that wild-eyed dude who stands on the street corner and hands out Jack Chick tracts.

The easiest way to be left alone is to just take one, nod and smile, and move along quickly.

-k

Re-quoted for truth.

[Oleg Bach]

where there is water there is life...venus had liquid water as did mars, so likely life at one time as well...I believe there are a couple of moons of Jupiter that are suspected of having liquid water(oceans)if it's warm enough for water than life is very likely, actually it would be a surprise if there was none found...

The water of life - so biblical. I have water in my drains and it has tons of life - all sorts of bacteria. Human beings are so deperate to find life else where that they will gladly settle for a microbe. What is this facination and fixation on the need to find life of anysort out there in space? You would think that the citizens of earth would still be in a state of wonder for what they have at home. BUT noooooo - earth is not good enough...talk about an ungrateful bunch of jerks...Small wonder nature which is the hand of God has started to increase the degree and frequency of killing humans...we probably deserve it.. If you are grateful for what you have you get more - If you are ungrateful and appreciate nothing you get more of the same - Nothing!

[ToadBrother]

Of course it is the basics! Go back to your science books - or google. I think there's even one that's titled: The Science of Space, Time and Matter.

No it's not the basics. There are several states of matter, the "classical" states are simply an incomplete list. And if you want to look at the fundamentals of the universe; they are energy and matter (the division between the two, particularly at the subatomic level, is very fuzzy indeed), and the fundamental interactions (gravity, electromagnetism, strong interaction and weak interaction), time-space, and some assorted constants.

I challenge you to even open a science textbook.

Anyway, you're starting to hyperventilate.....spiralling down to pure ranting.

So typical of the New Atheism flock. So very Dawkins' flock-esque.

How am I ranting? I'm correcting some false statements made by you.

What Dawkins didn't tell you guys, it's hard to maneuver in a little, dark box.

I will repeat myself, Betsy, and if you ever again try to attach me to Richard Dawkins I will have to state that you're bearing false witness, a violation of a key tent of your religion. I arrived at my atheism with no help from Richard Dawkins, is that clear, Betsy? Or are you just an immoral individual who debates in this dishonorable and disreputable fashion?

If you really wanna know....you gotta be prepared to knock down walls....think and look outside that box.

If you wanna see some light, at least open a window.

If you want to know something, you have to first actually study it, instead of buying into the lies of Creationists.

Edited April 5, 2011 by ToadBrother

[GostHacked]

Even creationists can be immoral. Like the good ol Reverend Kent Hovind.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_Hovind

Kent E. Hovind (born January 15, 1953) is an American Young Earth creationist and conspiracy theorist famous for his creation science seminars that aim to convince listeners to reject theories of evolution, geophysics, and cosmology in favor of the Genesis creation narrative as found in the Bible. Hovind's views are contradicted by scientific evidence and research.[2][3] Some of his ideas have also been criticized by Young Earth creationist organizations like Answers in Genesis.

Hovind established the Creation Science Evangelism ministry in 1989 and frequently argued for Young Earth creationism and made other controversial remarks in his talks at private schools and churches, at debates, and on radio and television broadcasts. Since January 2007, Hovind has been serving a ten-year prison sentence after being convicted of 58 federal counts, including twelve tax offenses, one count of obstructing federal agents, and forty-five counts of structuring cash transactions. He is currently incarcerated at the Federal Correctional Institution, Jesup.

[scouterjim]

As the title declares, this topic refuses to go away.

Creationism is a good bedtime story, but is completely irrational. The whole "the earth is 6,000 years old" routine is ridiculous. Science continues to prove otherwise.

[Black Dog]

Creationism is a good bedtime story, but is completely irrational. The whole "the earth is 6,000 years old" routine is ridiculous. Science continues to prove otherwise.

Yeah the topic only refuses to go away because of bitter enders like betsy. But, in time, even they will move on and creationism will be regarded in much the same way as the geocentric solar system.

[Oleg Bach]

Let there be light - from all light (energy) comes matter into being...wonder how they knew that 5000 years ago?

[ToadBrother]

Let there be light - from all light (energy) comes matter into being...wonder how they knew that 5000 years ago?

Ah yes, if you simplify physics beyond all reason, you can forcefit it into some ancient myth.

Reality, of course, is much more complex.