Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
Evolution & Creationism / Re: What am I missing here?
« Last post by wright on Today at 11:50:45 AM »
Thanks for the responses. I'm struggling with the concept that something can come from nothing. I'm actually struggling even with the concept of 'nothing'.

Mind you, I struggle just as much with trying to comprehend 'eternal God'.

Another way to think of it, if I'm grokking[1] the no-boundary theory correctly, is that there has never been "nothing" in the way we commonly use that concept. The universe has always been existence; there has always been "something", even if in a very different state than our current cosmological era.
 1. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/grokking
2
So you're claiming you broke the first law of thermodynamics? I'll believe it when I see it. Let me examine your equipment, and then we'll talk.
3
Chatter / Re: A message to the Moderators back in 2011
« Last post by Mr. Blackwell on Yesterday at 11:24:13 PM »
"yoda"?

Interesting. That name does not show up on the members list. Were you banned? I ask because I remember Vynn, He was banned and his name doesn't show up on the members list either.
4
Chatter / Re: Are we really that different?
« Last post by Mr. Blackwell on Yesterday at 08:33:57 PM »
Mr B.

I think you are unnecessarily creating a false equivalency. I made sure to use the word ignorant, which is very likely how future people might indeed look at what we understood in 2018. No arguments about that - I call it progress. And ignorance is not a bad thing unless it is purposeful. What we have in the world today are modern people still using those extremely ignorant ideas and knowledge as if they are somehow still important, or up for debate. The divine nature of words from the Bible is the problem. And this is indeed purposeful ignorance by modern humans.

That's kind of what I was thinking when I said that the Bible isn't the problem. To put it more succinctly, the problem is that some people still take it literally when it says that we shouldn't suffer witches to live. I mean, I can't prove it but I'm pretty certain that a vast majority of Christians wear poly cotton blends. I still feel confident that most Christians do not literally take an eye for an eye. But I know that there are plenty of religious men and women who still believe that the man is in charge at all times and in all things by divine right. However, I think that is a reflection of how men think in general whether they be religious or not. Might makes right exists with or without religion.

Quote
If you made a great case that those from 2,000-3,500 years ago were as "literate" and intelligent as was possible for humanity, it still does not in any way mean that modern knowledge is just as bad.

Sorry. I wasn't trying to imply that modern knowledge is just as bad. I was trying to illustrate how far we have come both technologically and morally, despite how some people are still stuck in the bronze age.

Quote
Maybe your case is better made by leaving the Bible out of it?

Can't do that. The Bible is pervasive and has had a huge impact on human development for good and bad. It's a part of our history and I would no more deny that than deny that I am an alcoholic. Can't just sweep uncomfortable facts under the rug and pretend they don't exist.

Quote
I mean, isn't it more likely that the Bible is one-of-a-kind, and will never happen again?

Hard to say. Joseph Smith and L. Ron Hubbard might give future generations a run for their money in a couple thousand years. Who knows what might pop up and take hold. 

Quote
So in that case, it creates a situation where using it as a measure of human ignorance is rather pointless. It is more likely that a day will come when the Bible is forgotten and ignored as our collective knowledge increases. Gods always disappear.

And new ones always seem to replace them.

5
Chatter / Re: Are we really that different?
« Last post by jetson on Yesterday at 08:04:16 PM »
Mr B.

I think you are unnecessarily creating a false equivalency. I made sure to use the word ignorant, which is very likely how future people might indeed look at what we understood in 2018. No arguments about that - I call it progress. And ignorance is not a bad thing unless it is purposeful. What we have in the world today are modern people still using those extremely ignorant ideas and knowledge as if they are somehow still important, or up for debate. The divine nature of words from the Bible is the problem. And this is indeed purposeful ignorance by modern humans.

If you made a great case that those from 2,000-3,500 years ago were as "literate" and intelligent as was possible for humanity, it still does not in any way mean that modern knowledge is just as bad. Maybe your case is better made by leaving the Bible out of it? I mean, isn't it more likely that the Bible is one-of-a-kind, and will never happen again? So in that case, it creates a situation where using it as a measure of human ignorance is rather pointless. It is more likely that a day will come when the Bible is forgotten and ignored as our collective knowledge increases. Gods always disappear.

Thoughts?
6


I am in the top 1% in all tests, worldwide.  Mathematically, only about 1/1,000,000 can do what I can do. 

You are on a game show, and there are three boxes: A,B and C. In one box is a prize, and there is nothing in the other two. On this game show, the host knows where the prize is, and he always waits for you to choose your box. Then, before revealing what is in your box, he lifts up one of the remaining two boxes which does NOT have the prize. The host then gives you the opportunity to choose again if you wish, or stick with your original choice.

Are your odds of winning the prize increased by choosing again, or does it make no difference if you stay with your original choice?
7
Fantastic solution. However, I think you also need to consider:

* The montomagnetic spectrometer. As we learned in the 1960's fresian dairy cow disaster, that MUSN'T be underestimated.

* non-voice activated robot runners (goes without saying)

* The limpdik theory (not a hard concept at all)

Best,

Good.  Then you are considering things that I am not.  Now consider what we both know, and make it work.

All I know is, I have endless examples of ac generators that take x volts, y amps and produce x*a volts and y*a amps, and since amps is a mere draw, you figure it out.

I'm a mathematician and inventor.

I'm leaving the hard part to you.

Let's keep discussing.  You all fail at concept.  I'm telling you that you only need to succeed once.

everyone said the stuff I did do on computers was impossible.  I tried and failed at anything a lot, and a lot, a lot.

I only needed it to work 1 single time.

Then I found a bunch of other ways it can work.

Good. Let's continue.
8
Do this not, and you are an idiot.

Well, put me down as an idiot. I have no idea what you just said or how to apply it to my life. I am not proud about this, it's just a fact.

It's actually quite OK that you don't understand what I said.  You aren't an idiot.  You just don't have the knowledge.

I am in the top 1% in all tests, worldwide.  Mathematically, only about 1/1,000,000 can do what I can do.  From what I do on a computer, I am the only one in the world that can do what I can.

That doesn't make me a genius or you an idiot.  It just makes us unique.

I want everyone to understand this point here.
9
Fantastic solution. However, I think you also need to consider:

* The montomagnetic spectrometer. As we learned in the 1960's fresian dairy cow disaster, that MUSN'T be underestimated.

* non-voice activated robot runners (goes without saying)

* The limpdik theory (not a hard concept at all)

Best,
10
Do this not, and you are an idiot.

Well, put me down as an idiot. I have no idea what you just said or how to apply it to my life. I am not proud about this, it's just a fact.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10