In the beginning, God SEPARATED the Heaven and the Earth.....

@The Anointed,

Galactic clusters tend to hold onto the gas in their systems, unlike galaxies, where the gas is forced out through supernova explosions. In other words, Galactic clusters are closed systems.

0 Replies

@The Anointed,

so you admit that galaxis are NOT closed systems?? . Now you just wanna move the argument to clusters where we watch nucleosynthesis going on from our spctral analyses. .Its all a (f))=t/dt

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Referring to your post before you decided to edit it, "You can say whatever you like old mate, but as usual you're wrong."

"A" Galaxy is not a Galactic cluster, which is a closed system. Check out the science old mate.

Why don't you swap sides and come over to the winning circle, you old poor loser?

3 Replies

@The Anointed,

Im suitably impressed but still dont know where its going .I read halliwell a while back when a student mae mention and was suitably impressed then by the math.
Im still at the SO WHAT? point. here' does this all lead to a conclusion that the Uni and erth were DESIGNED?
Youre just humming around and practicing diversionary recitation, why?

1 Reply

@The Anointed,

I knew that galaxies were NOT cloed systems. I was wrong about galaxy cluters but yoiu were also incorrect hen you first stated that galaxies were closed systems and there not . SO

"Winning side"????

Youve not stepped one to into the area e started upon, youve just used diversionary tacctic to try to impress by obcurant irrelevance.

The hell of this is that I dont know of ONE ral "Creation SCientist" who is out there trying his or her own rsearch to evidence design.
teve Austen used to make great discusions about polonium bi refringence being a sign of a young arth and design. Then h got m of his points handed back to him by a coupl of Calgary Grad Students who evidenced a large DESERT DEPOSIT in the middles of Austens "Evidence of a orldwide Flood"

Ill admit I was rong about closed system status for galaxy clusters and you amit you were wrong when you said that GALAXIES were closed systems. (You didnt edit so I can always go back)

Youve avoided all point including the meanest discussion re the mutant covid as an example of and end member modification (like genetic drift) No designers needed, just some idiot anti vaxxers and very poor people unable to get vaccine.

Ill keep talking evolution and origins of life and , I suppose, youll be quoting all about cosmology . Im way closer to the relevant research an you know it.

1 Reply

@The Anointed,

The Anointed wrote:

Referring to your post before you decided to edit it, "You can say whatever you like old mate, but as usual you're wrong."

"A" Galaxy is not a Galactic cluster, which is a closed system. Check out the science old mate.

Why don't you swap sides and come over to the winning circle, you old poor loser?

This thread was “created” in October of 2009.

In your post of July 17, 2021, You wrote, “I don't know why I bother to respond to a thread that was created some 22 years ago…”

Why should we assume you are any better at cosmology than you are at math?

1 Reply

@farmerman,

So you must remain in your "SO WHAT POINT " of ignorance, not knowing why, when, or what is going around you.

Just as the first space ship evolved from the wheel, the second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth and seventh were created by intelligent design, each generation being more advanced than the previous.

I meant to hit the edit button, but hit the reply instead.

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

God is perfect man is not
Man made piss, by God made pot.

I sometimes make minor mistakes like everyone else, you included.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

You knew that galaxies were NOT "CLOED" systems did you?

The word Galaxies is plural. A cluster of 'GALAXIES' is a closed system.

YEP! "Winning Side," why be a loser for the rest of your life?

0 Replies

@The Anointed,

The Anointed wrote:

God is perfect man is not
Man made piss, by God made pot.

I sometimes make minor mistakes like everyone else, you included.

So you are saying that there is no reason for any of us to assume you are any better at cosmology than you are at math.

Actually, I suspected that...and I also suspect that most people reading your posts think that also.

So...okay!

3 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

When Annointed was a kid he paid for dog ****.

It’s one of his favourite anecdotes.

That’s the level we’re talking about.

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

And I’m fairly certain none of the piss pots on the planet were made by God.

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

The definition of an agnostic is "One who is uncertain or uncommitted on any particular question at issue. Like a reed blowing in the wind, this way then that way.

You don't know one way or the other and are unconcerned as to whether a God who spatially separated the singularity of Origin ever existed.

1 Reply

@The Anointed,

The Anointed wrote:

The definition of an agnostic is "One who is uncertain or uncommitted on any particular question at issue. Like a reed blowing in the wind, this way then that way.

You don't know one way or the other and are unconcerned as to whether a God who spatially separated the singularity of Origin ever existed.

You are speaking about the origins of what we humans call "the universe"...about when it happened and how it happened.

You were not even able to get the origins of this thread correct.

Since you had so much to work with about the latter and got it wrong, I am suggesting that your guesses about the former should not be given any credence.

3 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

This person’s idea of wisdom is telling an anecdote where he does something so indescribably stupid that nothing he says has any meaning.

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

I’ve managed to get him to ignore me, so it can be done.

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Read the original post in this particular thread.

Prof Van Wolde, 54, who will present a thesis on the subject at Radboud University in The Netherlands where she studies, said she had re-analysed the original Hebrew text and placed it in the context of the Bible as a whole, and in the context of other creation stories from ancient Mesopotamia.

She said she eventually concluded the Hebrew verb "bara", which is used in the first sentence of the book of Genesis, does not mean "to create" but to "SPATIALLY SEPARATE."

The first sentence should now read "in the beginning God separated the Heaven and the Earth"

But I suppose, as you are an agnostic, you are not particularly concerned or committed to any subject on this forum, so like your biblical ignorant atheist mates, you wouldn't have a clue.

1 Reply

@The Anointed,

The Anointed wrote:

Read the original post in this particular thread.

Prof Van Wolde, 54, who will present a thesis on the subject at Radboud University in The Netherlands where she studies, said she had re-analysed the original Hebrew text and placed it in the context of the Bible as a whole, and in the context of other creation stories from ancient Mesopotamia.

She said she eventually concluded the Hebrew verb "bara", which is used in the first sentence of the book of Genesis, does not mean "to create" but to "SPATIALLY SEPARATE."

The first sentence should now read "in the beginning God separated the Heaven and the Earth"

But I suppose, as you are an agnostic, you are not particularly concerned or committed to any subject on this forum, so like your biblical ignorant atheist mates, you wouldn't have a clue.

If you and this Van Wolde person want to guess that a god exists...and that the god separated Heaven and Earth...you are free to make that guess.

But what does that have to do with THE FACT that you are speaking about the origins of what we humans call "the universe"...about when it happened and how it happened, yet you were not even able to get the origins of this thread correct?

Anyone listening to your blind guesses about how "the universe" came into existence is listening to static.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Jeez, I see the mods have closed several sites where the anointed one had been babbling .
I merely wish to say that he is unable to name any place where my evidence presented was incorrect or :Dog ****" (which I understand he was once a collector of). He was mwrely able to call out names and , by not tagging any actual information to his irrelevant screed, he has been only engaged in some of his usual diversionary tactics.

I still love the "Eternal energy" moniker, hes gone O Henry on us and made up a neat (but fact free), almost Biblical sounding title for Dark Energy (or dark gravity as dr tyson is fond to emit).

Id still like anointed one to come back amd actually argue about his evidence for a Genesis style origin of this plant and specially life.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

Jeez, I see the mods have closed several sites where the anointed one had been babbling .
I merely wish to say that he is unable to name any place where my evidence presented was incorrect or :Dog ****" (which I understand he was once a collector of). He was mwrely able to call out names and , by not tagging any actual information to his irrelevant screed, he has been only engaged in some of his usual diversionary tactics.

I still love the "Eternal energy" moniker, hes gone O Henry on us and made up a neat (but fact free), almost Biblical sounding title for Dark Energy (or dark gravity as dr tyson is fond to emit).

Id still like anointed one to come back amd actually argue about his evidence for a Genesis style origin of this plant and specially life.

He is a piece of work, FM.

I especially got a kick out of the thing he was having with Izzy...about Gabriel not being mentioned in Genesis.

Izzy was making a joke about Peter Gabriel in Genesis before Phil Collins came along. But noooo.

And his denigration of you on this kind of stuff is laughable. You can run laps around him in this area...and he is out of his depth.

In a sense, this is just banter back and forth fun...but the point I was making still holds. Even if one were to concede or stipulate to the notion of a need for a "creator" (or First Cause)...how on Earth can one work logically to a god of the sort supposed in the Bible. That god is more fanciful than the many gods of the Egyptians, Greeks, Romans, Norse, etc.

1 Reply

In the beginning, God SEPARATED the Heaven and the Earth.....

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know