Before it begin - The Jesus Tomb March 4th

Message
Author
Smitty911
Posts: 0
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2021 10:41 pm

#111 Post by Smitty911 »

QUOTE (Mjollnir @ Mar 10 2007, 06:55 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
2. I would love to see that equation. Seriously. biggrin.gif


3. Not entirely true, as we live in this one. If you were an interdimensional traveler, maybe...


4. Actually, we do. The math says that they are layered on top of one another, like membranes. That is part of what all those extra dimensions are for.


5.-7.Can't argue with any of that, as it's a matter of faith. Rock samples from both earth and the moon do pretty much tell us for certain how the moon was formed, though.


8. Well, that's a statement of opinion, I suppose, but that's cool.

Great discussion, Smitty, you are a gentleman and a scholar. cool.gif

Marc


2. Bad joke will remove from joke list. Here is the rub, you don't really know who I am. I could say I was the President. I've made enough spelling error, logical fallacies, an bad jokes that it could go either way. You could do a I.P. look up, nope, I could have bounced the trace route or Spoofed the the DNS, etc. So you have to take it on "Faith" that I am who and what I say I am.

So when they mathematically prove something it could be anything and unless people have the education level to review the math (maybe .005% of the total scientific populace) what have you got. MAGIC - Enough letters here, some more letters there, these cancel, those multiply, end of the day, you have to have "Faith".

3. We live in this one and we "Know" this one exist. These other theoretical universes are inaccessible to us and therefore there's no possible way to provide any evidence that this might be true. It is purely a concept, an idea, without scientific proof.

But with enough math they might exist, and they explain some of the holes we have in our understanding. They could of course be wrong. Where and what you place your "Faith" in might actually be the point of all of this.

4. Some Monks 1200 years ago, by a careful study of the Book of Genesis concluded that there are as many as 10 dimensions. This would also explain Angles, Heaven, Demons, etc. But as you know with out proof of there existence we are left with, you guessed it. "Faith".

5.-7. Faith is where we get the actual material to start the party with. With no scientific explanation it points to the supernatural event.

We have some evidence that the moon was formed early in the creation cycle of Earth. I have read that while the parts where starting to form a large chunk of matter hit the earth and drew off some additional material, got trapped by gravity and slowly formed. Was that your thinking also? Because it would also agree with the Biblical account written almost 6,000 years ago by a Jewish man in the Desert. I wonder where he got that information? smile.gif

SO we both agree that Natural laws exist that effect the outcome of the material in the universe. We don't actually know all of the Laws at this point. We don't know where the material came from. We don't know how those laws where created. It is more likely that the universe would naturally created a NON-LIVING universe than one with life in it. "Natural necessity" falls apart when you study it as it is a strong radical claim that requires strong proof. There are other models of the universe that are different from outs, so it must be possible for the universe to be different. Even if the laws of nature are necessary, we would still have to have the initial conditions put in at the beginning on which these laws can operate. wacko.gif

8. How long do you think the earth would have taken to form and cool down so that life could have started? After that time do you still "believe" that is enough time to have the complexity of life that is currently recorded in fossils and the one living among us?

We are creatures of "Faith" our lives rest on having "Faith" in those around us and those that have left us. I have "Faith" that the driver will stop for a red light. "Faith" in the drive though that my order is correct. (Not so much anymore biggrin.gif ) "Faith" that something started this party and there is a purpose. "Faith" in the Bible that the message is "True" and we can trust it. "I" have "Faith" that is supported with evidence enough for me.

When we take the Mathematical improbability of the universe being created, the improbability of the start of Life, the improbability of existence, we are left with a Supernatural explanation. Science can only take us to the point of possible explanation, God supplies the rest.

Thanks of the compliment - I have proof from other in this post that disagree with you.LOL

I enjoy you input and research.

Smitty

sillysspeed
Posts: 0
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2021 10:41 pm

#112 Post by sillysspeed »

I believe in the big bang theory!!!










In the beginning God spoke and BANG it happened!!! biggrin.gif

Great pictures by the way... God is truely awesome!!!

Smitty911
Posts: 0
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2021 10:41 pm

#113 Post by Smitty911 »

All,

One interesting point that I was made aware of.

1. People cannot argue that the Bible has more copies than any other Ancient Document.
2. People cannot argue that the Bible is 100& accurate in regards to Historicial events
3. People cannot argue that it explains Mans relationship with God.
4. People cannot argue the improbability of the Creation of the Universe.
5. People cannot argue the improbability of the Creation of Life on Earth.
6. People cannot argue the improbability of Evolution, based on Natural Selection.

But the Bible is GUILTY until proven innocent.

Plato lived 427-347 B.C. Earliest records of Plato 900 A.D. 1200 yrs between His life and document 7 TOTAL copies, yet they are accepted, hand down as Platos

Caesar Lived 100-44 B.C. Earliest records of Caeser 900 A.D. between His life and document 1000 10 TOTAL copies, yet they are accepted, hand down as Caeser

Homer (Iliad) Lived 900 B.C. Earliest records of Caeser 400 B.C.Homer (Iliad) 500 yrs between His life and document 643 TOTAL copies 95% accuracy between copies.

New Testament (Written by Apostles) 1st Cent. A.D. Earliest records of New Testament (50-100 A.D. 2nd Cent. A.D. (c. 130 A.D. f.) less than 100 years between Their life and document 5600 TOTAL Copies 99.5% Accuracy between 5600 copies.

IF we reject the Bible cause it is inaccurate than we should also reject any and all ancient manuscripts because NONE of them have even 1/4 (25%) of the supporting information.

How much "PROOF" will it take?

Smitty

cannondale27
Posts: 0
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2021 10:41 pm

#114 Post by cannondale27 »

Its not a right or wrong thing Smitty.Different cultures,times and humans in general cannot write without being biased and unaccurate.How can anyone make a accurate report about EVERYTHING when you dont know everything?Cripes people back then thought earth was flat and sun revolved around us.Look what we know now and we still dont know jack.

Mjollnir
Posts: 0
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2021 10:41 pm

#115 Post by Mjollnir »

QUOTE (Smitty911 @ Mar 11 2007, 02:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
2. Bad joke will remove from joke list. Here is the rub, you don't really know who I am. I could say I was the President. I've made enough spelling error, logical fallacies, an bad jokes that it could go either way.


Taking into account your spelling error[s], logical fallacies, and bad jokes, it is clear that you are far too intelligent to be the president.

QUOTE (Smitty911 @ Mar 11 2007, 02:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
3. We live in this one and we "Know" this one exist. These other theoretical universes are inaccessible to us and therefore there's no possible way to provide any evidence that this might be true. It is purely a concept, an idea, without scientific proof.


Hmm, that sounds familiar. blink.gif wink.gif biggrin.gif

QUOTE (Smitty911 @ Mar 11 2007, 02:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
We have some evidence that the moon was formed early in the creation cycle of Earth. I have read that while the parts where starting to form a large chunk of matter hit the earth and drew off some additional material, got trapped by gravity and slowly formed. Was that your thinking also? Because it would also agree with the Biblical account written almost 6,000 years ago by a Jewish man in the Desert. I wonder where he got that information? smile.gif


Dunno, sounds about right to me, other than the timeline.

QUOTE (Smitty911 @ Mar 11 2007, 02:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
8. How long do you think the earth would have taken to form and cool down so that life could have started? After that time do you still "believe" that is enough time to have the complexity of life that is currently recorded in fossils and the one living among us?


Long enough, and absolutely.

QUOTE (Smitty911 @ Mar 11 2007, 02:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
When we take the Mathematical improbability of the universe being created, the improbability of the start of Life, the improbability of existence, we are left with a Supernatural explanation. Science can only take us to the point of possible explanation, God supplies the rest.


One might also argue that religion can only take us to the "point of possible explanation". biggrin.gif

Good discussion, but I think we've started going in circles...

Marc

Smitty911
Posts: 0
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2021 10:41 pm

#116 Post by Smitty911 »

QUOTE (cannondale27 @ Mar 13 2007, 11:08 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Its not a right or wrong thing Smitty.Different cultures,times and humans in general cannot write without being biased and unaccurate.How can anyone make a accurate report about EVERYTHING when you dont know everything?Cripes people back then thought earth was flat and sun revolved around us.Look what we know now and we still dont know jack.



'27,

It is about Right and Wrong, 100%.

Can you give me an example of being Bias has changed the Truth? The examples below cannot be refuted they are Facts, regardless of the Culture, Times or Humans. Here they are again.

1. People cannot argue that the New Testiment Bible has more copies than any other Ancient Document. 5600 copies vs 643 (the next highest count of ancient manuscript (Homer (Iliad) )
2. People cannot argue that the Bible is 100% accurate in regards to Historicial events. There are a couple the have not been verified, but the ones that are mentioned have been verified by Secular and Nonsecular research. There are alot of hundreds of them as well not one or two. Down to the cost of a slave 4,500 years ago.
3. People cannot argue that it explains Mans relationship with God. That it "How to have a relationship with God" auther GOD
4. People cannot argue the improbability of the Creation of the Universe. Staticians have calculated the odds at greater than 10x10^50, after the 50 power they claim it as a mathmaticialy impossible.
5. People cannot argue the improbability of the Creation of Life on Earth. Taken from the prebiological production of cytochrome had about a 1 in 10^36 chance of happening on earth. That is just one protein and it hasn't been made randomly in a lab yet. With people trying to make it.
6. People cannot argue the improbability of Evolution, based on Natural Selection.
Taken from the CARM.ORG Amazing numbers
"When one considers that a structure as "simple" as the wing on a fruit fly involves 30-40 genes, it is mathematically absurd to think that random genetic mutations can account for the vast diversity of life on earth. Even Julian Huxley, a staunch evolutionist who made assumptions very favorable to the theory, computed the odds against the evolution of a horse to be 1 in 10^300,000. Pitman, 68. That exceeds the 10^50 power probability, by a mere 299,950 times.


You don't have to know everything to record what you have seen. Other people can and will fill in the details. When Police question people they want the to talk, talk as much as possible, because in the detail you find the truth. Just like a jury, they here the aguments and decide the outcome. Anyone remember the O.J. trial? Lots of science to proof him guilty, But people didn't want to belive the proof. Same as this.

Gotta run,

Later

Smitty



QUOTE (Mjollnir @ Mar 13 2007, 11:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Taking into account your spelling error[s], logical fallacies, and bad jokes, it is clear that you are far too intelligent to be the president.
Hmm, that sounds familiar. blink.gif wink.gif biggrin.gif
Dunno, sounds about right to me, other than the timeline.
Long enough, and absolutely.
One might also argue that religion can only take us to the "point of possible explanation". biggrin.gif

Good discussion, but I think we've started going in circles...

Marc


Mjollnir,

I'll stay out of politics, if my platform was "Personal Accountability" I would never get elected. LOL

Agreed your P.O.V. is different than mine, But we can't both have the Truth if the Truth can be only one.

Support of the timeline? Outside of Radiometric dating what have we got?

So you believe that the complexity on Earth could form in such a small time span? Does anyother Leading Scientist agree?

Agreed, but the preponderance of the evidence should sway people one way or another. Remember O.J. they looked at the evidence and based on One Data Point (the Glove) they let a guilty man go free.

Funny thing about cicles, they can be square. LOL I had a Evolutionist claim to be able to do it. He even posted the formula, but I forgot where I saw it. Darn, I could have had you check his math.

Later

Smitty

Mjollnir
Posts: 0
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2021 10:41 pm

#117 Post by Mjollnir »

Mod, please delete, multiple post.

Mjollnir
Posts: 0
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2021 10:41 pm

#118 Post by Mjollnir »

QUOTE (Smitty911 @ Mar 13 2007, 05:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I'll stay out of politics, if my platform was "Personal Accountability" I would never get elected. LOL


Hey, I voted for the guy. Too bad he turned out to be a big liberal. blink.gif

QUOTE (Smitty911 @ Mar 13 2007, 05:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Agreed your P.O.V. is different than mine, But we can't both have the Truth if the Truth can be only one.


I guess it's a big "T" vs. a little "t", so maybe we can both have it. We'll call your version Truth, and science's version truth.

QUOTE (Smitty911 @ Mar 13 2007, 05:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Support of the timeline? Outside of Radiometric dating what have we got?


What else do we (I) need? (That's a rhetorical question.) Radiometric dating is extremely reliable. There is also fossil records, geological strata, etc. I also did some research as to the missing transitory fossils you mentioned, and found that many exist. Hmm.

Of course, there is also evidence that Native Americans have been on this continent for 30,000 years. That's some disparity between the biblical timeline.

QUOTE (Smitty911 @ Mar 13 2007, 05:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
So you believe that the complexity on Earth could form in such a small time span? Does anyother Leading Scientist agree?


I did not research this, but I will hazard a guess and say yes, many leading scientists agree. I also appreciate you calling me a leading scientist, but that's not actually true, I'm just good at googling. I'm a Googler.

QUOTE (Smitty911 @ Mar 13 2007, 05:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Agreed, but the preponderance of the evidence should sway people one way or another. Remember O.J. they looked at the evidence and based on One Data Point (the Glove) they let a guilty man go free.


Agreed, the preponderance of evidence should sway people, but some are swayed by faith, not evidence. Alternatively stated, they are swayed by evidence provided by faith.

OJ was found innocent by a jury of his peers. That's how our system works. Flawed, perhaps, but that's how it works. "Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer," in the famous words of William Blackstone.

QUOTE (Smitty911 @ Mar 13 2007, 05:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Funny thing about cicles, they can be square. LOL I had a Evolutionist claim to be able to do it. He even posted the formula, but I forgot where I saw it. Darn, I could have had you check his math.


Mmm, I love Red Herring. Breaded and fried is my favorite. Especially good with petitio principii on the side. Delish. (Read this as: " I love to be patronized.")

Marc

J. Delaney
Posts: 0
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2021 10:41 pm

#119 Post by J. Delaney »

An acquaintance of mine was studying to be a paleontologist and was taking 400 level classes. But the one thing that made him drop out of the program was the radiometric dating. The professor told the class that you test multiple samples and choose the one that best fits your hypothesis.

Mjollnir
Posts: 0
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2021 10:41 pm

#120 Post by Mjollnir »

QUOTE (J. Delaney @ Mar 13 2007, 10:41 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
An acquaintance of mine was studying to be a paleontologist and was taking 400 level classes. But the one thing that made him drop out of the program was the radiometric dating. The professor told the class that you test multiple samples and choose the one that best fits your hypothesis.


Well, I can't really argue with a anecdotal story about a friend of a friend's teacher. Discounting Radiometric dating, which is well accepted in the scientific community anyway, we always have:

* Fission tract dating
* Optically stimulated phosphorescence
* Phototransferred thermoluminescence
* Electron spin resonance
* Amino acid recemization
* Obsidian hydration
* Fluorine, uranium & nitrogen (FUN) content of bone

Marc

Post Reply