32
   

Intelligent Design vs. Casino Universe

 
 
FBM
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Jan, 2015 01:27 am
@Herald,
Herald wrote:

parados wrote:
Boy, you really do love to throw out logical fallacies. Why are the odds 50:50? Just because there are 2 choices?
     The odds are 50:50, because the choices are two AND you cannot prove anything in favor of any of them. To both of them you don't know anything, hence you cannot change it in one way or another and the best approximation in that case id 50:50.


http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA510.html

Quote:
Index to Creationist Claims,
edited by Mark Isaak, Copyright © 2004
Previous Claim: CA500 | List of Claims | Next Claim: CA510.1
Claim CA510:

Creation and evolution are the only two models of origins.

Source:

Morris, Henry M. 1985. Scientific Creationism. Green Forest, AR: Master Books, pp. 3, 8-10.
Response:

There are many mutually exclusive models of creation. Biblical creationism alone includes geocentrism, young-earth creationism, day-age creationism, progressive creationism, intelligent design creationism, and more. And then there are hundreds of very different varieties of creation from other religions and cultures. Some of the harshest criticism of creation models comes from creationists who believe other models.

Many noncreationist alternatives to Darwinian evolution, or significant parts of it, are possible and have received serious attention in the past. These include, among others,
orthogenesis
neo-Lamarckianism
process structuralism
saltationism
(See Wilkins 1998 below for elaboration.)

Creation and evolution are not mutually exclusive. They coexist in models such as theistic evolution.
Links:

Isaak, Mark. 2000. What is creationism? http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/wic.html

Wilkins, John. 1998. So you want to be an anti-Darwinian: Varieties of opposition to Darwinism. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/anti-darwin.html
Further Reading:

Kossy, Donna. 2001. Strange Creations: Aberrant Ideas of Human Origins from Ancient Astronauts to Aquatic Apes. Los Angeles: Feral House.
Herald
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Jan, 2015 01:33 am
@FBM,
     You see, it is very dangerous to make references to things that are irrelevant to the discussion. The odds here in the assumptions are not it is either the Evolution of Creation. The odds here are Either the Universe has always existed OR It has been created at some point of time by whom/whatsoever & out of whatsoever.
     If the Universe has always existed there is no way for you favourite theory to have ever created whatsoever.
FBM
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Jan, 2015 01:37 am
@Herald,
Score remains:


Standard Model: 4

God/ILF-of-the-gaps: 0

0 Replies
 
FBM
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Jan, 2015 02:12 am


Quote:
Published on Sep 20, 2012
Professor Lawrence Krauss and Professor Michio Kaku explain the physics behind the events in the first second of The Big Bang, events which range from the first fractions of a second after creation: The Plank Era; The field symmetry breaking; formation of elementary particles; Matter-antimatter annihilation (explained by Dr. Tara Shears); Formation of atoms and the last scattering of photons which make up the Cosmic Microwave Background (Explained by Dr. David N. Spergel) to the billions of years of stellar evolution: the formation of stars and Galaxies which developed the visible universe as seen today.

Using High Energy Particle Accelerators and Observational and Theoretical Astrophysics, scientists are able to recreate the first few fractions of a second after the Big Bang, to the point of symmetry breaking, and in conjunction by using space and earth-based observatories observe the remnants of the Big Bang itself using powerful analysis of the CMB by the WMAP and Planck Spacecraft combined with the modelling of the large scale structure of the universe as done by The Sloan Digital Sky Survey..

The Initial Conditions of the Universe are still a mystery and debate has gone on recently to whether or not there were even any initial conditions at all, maybe universe can form from no initial conditions in standard space-time and that the very fabric of space, curled up in perhaps infinite dimensions creates an infinite set of paths for scalar fields to branch off of and interfere to create the flow of energy from the initial big bang.

Such a theory is predicted by M-Theory
, which gives the Multiverse picture of curved Space-Time in 11 Dimensions which, through quantum mechanics, create many scalar fields that couple at different strengths in each universe creating a different set of physical laws in each universe.
Not all universes could be suitable for life, each universe seems to have the Planck Constant encoded into it, as it is the Uncertainty Principle and the Sum over Histories that lead to the Multiverse picture in the first place, however the coupling strengths of gravity and electromagnetism are completely arbitrary in this view.

In some of these Universes, Electromagnetism could be very strongly coupled in certain schemes meaning that basic chemistry would not arise in some universes. In other Universes the Strong Nuclear force may be too weak to give sufficient binding energy to atomic nuclei, making fusion impossible. In other Universes, Gravity may be coupled far more strongly, creating a Universe of Galaxy Cluster-sized black holes. Other Universes still may be composed of nothing but vacuum energy.

Hence we must be living in a Universe suitable for life as we are here observing it, that is the nature of The Anthropic Principle which is used to answer the question, "why is the universe the way it is?" However, the true meaning of the answer comes from Theoretical Physics and M-Theory: The Universe need not be suitable for life, our one just happens to be.
Herald
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Jan, 2015 03:34 am
@FBM,
     Why are you publishing all the time references to some fables for idiots? Have you watched at all the video:
     @00:57 - In the beginning it was Nothing - no matter, no energy, no empty space, no time - so far so good.
     Then follows: 'from nowhere appears a fireball, smaller than an atom, ten trillion trillion times hotter than the core of the Sun' - here is the 'key of the tent' perhaps.
     1. 'from nowhere' - nowhere means nothing and it cannot exist - let alone something appearing from nowhere.
     2. 'appears' is a process, which presupposes Time component - when and how has the Time been launched?
     3. The smallest atom is 3.10^-11 (o.3 A), and this is smaller - O.K. Smaller than an atom - and made out of what? The highest density matter is a neutron star - made out of neutrons, but it has a radius of 12-13 km. Can you prove whether a neutron star with dimensions 3.10^-11 m can exist at all in the physical world?
     4. Now follows the best part - ten trillion trillion times hotter than the core of the Sun - how much is that?
     The Sun is 1.57.10^17 and ten trillion trillion is 10.10^12.10^12 = 10^25. So we have a Singularity of the size 3.10^-11 with a temperature of 1.57.10^42 deg.K Laughing ... made out of what? (which is the material carrier of that temperature)
     If there has been 'no energy', from where has the Singularity taken all that energy?; How much is the heat capacity of the Singularity and out of what material it is made?; How has the Big Bang succeeded to take the temperature difference (has extracted the heat energy from the Singularity by means of what?) ... by heat exchange or adiabatically ... or how exactly?
     The Nothingness could not have any temperature - it is not zero deg.K, it is without any Temperature component. How exactly has the Big Bang succeeded to calculate the expression in the physical world: 1.57.10^42 deg.K - [undefined variable] = ? (what is the physical interpretation of a 'parameter minus undefined parameter')?
FBM
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Jan, 2015 03:44 am
@Herald,
A dictionary can probably tell you the difference between "nowhere" and "nothing." And if you knew more about English idioms, you'd know that "from nowhere" and "out of nowhere" are synonyms for "suddenly," "surprisingly," "unexpectedly," etc.

And if you'd been paying attention to what you've been taught in this very thread, you would already be aware of the zero-energy universe hypothesis.

But this is just more god/ILF-of-the-gaps fallacy, anyway. What can your god/ILF-of-the-gaps hypothesis explain or predict?

The score remains 4:0. No rational person would jump in on the losing side...out of nowhere...
FBM
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Jan, 2015 04:23 am
One way to deal with the unknown is to wave your hands and make up stories about invisible, magical, all-powerful entities running everything. Another way is to focus your research on it:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/14/mysterious-molecules-galaxy-map_n_6464884.html?ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000063


Quote:
New Map Of Galaxy's 'Mysterious Molecules' May Help Solve Old Cosmic Puzzle
The Huffington Post | By Macrina Cooper-White
Email
Posted: 01/14/2015 9:10 am EST Updated: 01/14/2015 10:59 am EST


Scientists may be one step closer to solving a cosmic puzzle that's had astronomers scratching their heads for nearly a century.

It all started in 1922, when American astronomer Mary Lea Heger noticed that certain wavelengths were consistently absent in the light emitted by binary star systems in the constellations Orion and Scorpius. Since then, other scientists have identified many more of these "diffuse interstellar bands."

Subsequent research showed that something in interstellar space was absorbing the missing wavelengths before they reached Earth. Evidence pointed to various complex molecules scattered across the Milky Way, though astronomers have been unable to determine exactly what they are.

Now, two teams of scientists from Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore have created a map that shows where in our galaxy the mysterious molecules are located.

The researchers hope this map--created with the help of new data-processing techniques--will finally make it possible to analyze the composition and properties of the molecules.

"For the first time, we can see how these mysterious molecules are moving around the galaxy," Dr. Gail Zasowski, a post-doctoral researcher at the university and one of the astronomers behind the new research, said in a written statement. "This is extremely useful and brings in new connections between these molecules and the dynamics of the Milky Way."

For the research, a team led by Zasowki analyzed infrared data from more than 60,000 stars in the densest parts of our galaxy. Another team, led by graduate student Ting-Wen Lan, looked at visible light from more than half a million stars, galaxies, and quasars.

If that sounds like a lot of data to pore over, it is.

“The era of Big Data in astronomy allows us to look at the universe in new ways," Dr. Brice Ménard, a professor of physics and astronomy at the university and a member of both teams, said in the statement. "There is so much to explore with these large datasets. This is just the beginning.”

The map was unveiled in Seattle last week at the 225th meeting of the American Astronomical Society.


Researching it scores more points. It's still 4:0.
Quehoniaomath
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Jan, 2015 04:28 am
@FBM,
man o man you still believ all that crap?????

Well, it seems that if someone declares something 'official' it suddenly become 'true'

Strange, very strange indeed!
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Jan, 2015 06:34 am
@Herald,
Herald wrote:

parados wrote:
Boy, you really do love to throw out logical fallacies. Why are the odds 50:50? Just because there are 2 choices?
     The odds are 50:50, because the choices are two AND you cannot prove anything in favor of any of them. To both of them you don't know anything, hence you cannot change it in one way or another and the best approximation in that case id 50:50.

And there we have it folks. Herald proving how stupid he is.
Let's take something else that has 2 choices. If I throw a coin in the air it can land on a side or an edge. Do you think the odds are 50:50 that a coin can land on it's edge? Throw a coin in the air 50 times and tell us how many times it lands on it's edge. Two choices does NOT make something 50:50. The odds of both things happening have to be equal which means you have to present evidence that they are equal.
Herald
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Jan, 2015 07:16 am
@FBM,
FBM wrote:
A dictionary can probably tell you the difference between "nowhere" and "nothing."
     This is a general creation theory and it should not rely on definitions from a dictionary. Everything is defined in the formal model itself. O.K. Nowhere is 'no place'; 'without any direction' - so what. You think that if you replace Nothingness with Nowhere everything is hunky-dori - yes, but not.
     Now you will have to prove that Nowhere can exist ... without the Time component; that Nowhere can have heat capacity - very huge; and that the Singularity can appear/exist/come or whatever out of Nowhere.
FBM wrote:
And if you knew more about English idioms, you'd know that "from nowhere" and "out of nowhere" are synonyms for "suddenly," "surprisingly," "unexpectedly," etc.
     This is not a fable - to use metaphors and idioms. Actually I am not entirely sure any more.
     'Suddenly' - O.K., but nobody here is interested whether it is suddenly, or gradually for a period of several billion years ... and you cannot launch the Time component with an idiom ... in a physical theory. WFM
FBM wrote:
And if you'd been paying attention to what you've been taught in this very thread, you would already be aware of the zero-energy universe hypothesis.
      ... what about the law for conservation of energy. How do you conserve the zero-energy hypothesis into the energy of the newly formed Universe?
FBM wrote:
But this is just more god/ILF-of-the-gaps fallacy, anyway.
     Around people like you and the lecturers of your video references I may start believing in all Gods ever existed. Your 'theory' is falling apart like a house of cards.
FBM wrote:
What can your god/ILF-of-the-gaps hypothesis explain or predict?
     It can explain for example that the Universe has always existed and the ILF before us (that might have been long extinct by now) after exhausting the resources of their planet to ground zero started looking for a place in the Universe where to continue their species/life/intelligence/knowledge of their civillization etc. They found the Earth as appropriate for developing a biosphere, send here the cyanobacteria to fix the atmosphere of the planet and supply it with potential to maintain life, send by teleportation some of their bio-robots (the wild animals); some of their medications (the herbs); some of their vehicles - horses and camels; some of their tools to maintain bio-equilibrium (bacteria, Candida); and in the end have sent themselves - us, or what comes out as a result of the teleportation. The bio-code is most probably unversal and adjustable to the planet - if we send our biocode to Jupiter - we will be there six times heavier, but will feel comfortable again.
     We have no much time left to decode what has happened, for very soon (sooner than expected) we, the humans, may be faced here down on the Earth to the same problem.
FBM wrote:
The score remains 4:0. No rational person would jump in on the losing side...out of nowhere...
     You cannot assess yourself in that way - especially with other people's bread on the flea market. BTW in War and Peace of Lev Tolstoy there is a statement, which is exactly your case: Everybody can be modeled as a fraction - in the numerator stands what the other people think about him, and in the denominator stands what he thinks of himself. Thus for example if the other people think that you are the absolute zero in Kelvin, and you think about yourself that you are at the 4th level of understanding the Big Bang 'theory', your assessment is = 0/4 = 0.0000
Herald
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Jan, 2015 07:19 am
@parados,
parados wrote:
And there we have it folks. Herald proving how stupid he is.
Let's take something else that has 2 choices. If I throw a coin in the air it can land on a side or an edge. Do you think the odds are 50:50 that a coin can land on it's edge?
     Instead of throwing coins and dust into the eyes of the people on the blog, why don't you prove that the assumptions of the Big Bang 'theory' have 'an edge'.
FBM
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Jan, 2015 07:39 am
@Herald,
Herald wrote:

FBM wrote:
A dictionary can probably tell you the difference between "nowhere" and "nothing."
     This is a general creation theory and it should not rely on definitions from a dictionary.


Laughing Yeah, because it's so much easier to communicate when there are no clear definitions on the language used. Learn English if you're going to attempt to communicate in it.

Quote:
     Now you will have to prove that Nowhere can exist ... without the Time component; that Nowhere can have heat capacity - very huge; and that the Singularity can appear/exist/come or whatever out of Nowhere.


The Standard Model describes space-time as a continuum. You seem to have skipped over that tidbit in your eagerness to promote your g0d/ILF-of-the-gaps hypothesis. I suggest you study more.

Quote:
This is not a fable - to use metaphors and idioms. Actually I am not entirely sure any more.


Metaphors, idioms, slang, analogies, etc, are used in every language. I suggest you study your own and make some commonsense connections.

Quote:
'Suddenly' - O.K., but nobody here is interested whether it is suddenly, or gradually for a period of several billion years ... and you cannot launch the Time component with an idiom ... in a physical theory. WFM


Seriously. Think about what you just said. Laughing

Quote:
... what about the law for conservation of energy. How do you conserve the zero-energy hypothesis into the energy of the newly formed Universe?


Pay attention, please. This has been explained to you before in this very thread.

Quote:
Around people like you and the lecturers of your video references I may start believing in all Gods ever existed. Your 'theory' is falling apart like a house of cards.


Seems stronger than ever, actually. 4:0. Game clock is ticking...

Quote:
It can explain for example that the Universe has always existed and the ILF before us (that might have been long extinct by now) after exhausting the resources of their planet to ground zero started looking for a place in the Universe where to continue their species/life/intelligence/knowledge of their civillization etc. They found the Earth as appropriate for developing a biosphere, send here the cyanobacteria to fix the atmosphere of the planet and supply it with potential to maintain life, send by teleportation some of their bio-robots (the wild animals); some of their medications (the herbs); some of their vehicles - horses and camels; some of their tools to maintain bio-equilibrium (bacteria, Candida); and in the end have sent themselves - us, or what comes out as a result of the teleportation. The bio-code is most probably unversal and adjustable to the planet - if we send our biocode to Jupiter - we will be there six times heavier, but will feel comfortable again.
     We have no much time left to decode what has happened, for very soon (sooner than expected) we, the humans, may be faced here down on the Earth to the same problem.


Scientology! I knew it! http://i206.photobucket.com/albums/bb192/DinahFyre/roll.gif Now all you have to do is present some evidence. Good luck! See you on planet Kolob! http://i206.photobucket.com/albums/bb192/DinahFyre/ewacky.gif

Quote:
You cannot assess yourself in that way...[blah blah blah]


I'm not assessing myself. I'm assessing what you yourself asserted. The Standard Model can only account for 4% of the observable universe? OK, then, how much can your god/ILF-of-the-gaps account for? 0%. You refuse to even consider providing evidence for its existence, so you still got nothing. Zip. Zilch.

4:0

No rational person would choose the inferior alternative. Show some evidence, or keep losing. Got that call from the Nobel Committee yet? Wondering why? Wink
FBM
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Jan, 2015 07:50 am
0 Replies
 
Herald
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Jan, 2015 01:07 pm
@FBM,
FBM wrote:
Learn English if you're going to attempt to communicate in it.
     ... and why don't you learn math logic before start presenting yourself on the net as a top scientist of seventh star magnitude.
FBM wrote:
The Standard Model describes space-time as a continuum.
     ... and the greatest problem of some people, who are reading, referencing & using things they don't understand, but accept rather as a truth of the last resort, is that they don't know what they are doing.
FBM wrote:
Metaphors, idioms, slang, analogies, etc, are used in every language.
     ... really. Why don't you write some scientific article full of 'metaphors, idioms, slang, analogies' and submit it to some scientific magazine to see when & how they will publish it.
FBM wrote:
Seriously. Think about what you just said.
     This concept of 'suddenly' is taken out of your (let's not say out of where for now) ... and has no relation to the explanation of the Big Bang 'theory', for it is obvious that no Big Bang has ever existed ... let alone creating whatsoever. The University has most probably always (or at least back in time to where we can reach) existed - where do you see the problem of suddenly and non-suddenly here. If the Big Bang can operate at such huge scale, so suddenly, and can appear out of nowhere and can create when it finds appropriate a whole Universe without any causality this imposes infinite risk to our own existence at present. Any moment any Singularity, having temperature of 1.47.10^42 deg.K may appear out of nowhere in your laptop and create there a brand new Universe that will start expanding into you personal ignorance, which is infinite Hyperspace with infinite number of dimensions.
     You are so busy with the references that you cannot understand simple things - the Universe cannot expand just so & into Nothing; nothing can exist without a Time component; you cannot construct differential equations over variable that is defined on the one side of the equation and undefined (non-existing) on the other side; you cannot come without any causality out of nowhere, no matter whether in the form of a metaphor or not.
FBM wrote:
Pay attention, please. This has been explained to you before in this very thread.
     State it personally - without any references: How much is the Energy-Matter components of the Assumptions: [No Matter; No Energy; No Empty Space; No Time], and how much are the values of those components in the present day Universe - would you write down the equation of the Matter of the Universe (MU) = Known Matter (KM) + Dark Matter (DM); MU = KM + DM = KM + 25/4.KM = 29/4 KM
- how much is the present day energy of the Universe (EU) = KE + DE = KE + 70/4.KE = 74/4 KE
- and how exactly the Big Bang has guessed to launch the time ... by using a metaphor? Another thing that you don't want to understand is that nobody can be bullshitted to infinity.
FBM wrote:
Scientology! I knew it!
     I am not claiming that this is the case, but actually this is validly plausible hypothesis, and if you are curious to know, it is much more plausible that the provoking only laughter ridiculous explanations of launching the Time (introducing existence & causality & sequence of the events) & Temperature (taken out of the sleeve energy of the Universe and stored into a point with dimensions of 9.10^-33 cu.m and temperature of 1.47.10^42 deg.K) components by means of a ... metaphor. You should have started writing comics.
FBM
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Jan, 2015 06:39 pm
@Herald,
The way L. Ron started out writing science fiction? http://i206.photobucket.com/albums/bb192/DinahFyre/hehe.gif
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  2  
Reply Sun 18 Jan, 2015 07:08 pm
@Herald,
You are the one that said it was 50:50. It's your responsibility to present your data that supports it. Claiming I am throwing dust is only you throwing dust because you can't support your original statement. I predict that you will never present data to support your 50:50 claim. Instead you will deflect by moving to another topic.
FBM
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Jan, 2015 07:11 pm
@parados,
That's pretty much the way L. Ron Herald works, yes. A long trail of red herrings, evasions, non sequiturs, ambiguities, etc... That's a lot of work to keep a defensive wall around a piece of science fiction. Mind blowing, really. And sorta sad.
0 Replies
 
FBM
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Jan, 2015 07:18 pm
http://www.xenu.net/archive/leaflet/

Quote:
Who is Xenu?

I’m going to tell you a story. Are you sitting comfortably? Right, then I’ll begin.

Once upon a time (75 million years ago to be more precise) there was an alien galactic ruler named Xenu. Xenu was in charge of all the planets in this part of the galaxy including our own planet Earth, except in those days it was called Teegeeack.


Now Xenu had a problem. All of the 76 planets he controlled were over-populated. Each planet had on average 178 billion people. He wanted to get rid of all the overpopulation so he had a plan.

Xenu took over complete control with the help of renegades to defeat the good people and the Loyal Officers. Then with the help of psychiatrists he called in billions of people for income tax inspections where they were instead given injections of alcohol and glycol mixed to paralyse them. Then they were put into space planes that looked exactly like DC8s (except they had rocket motors instead of propellers).

These DC8 space planes then flew to planet Earth where the paralysed people were stacked around the bases of volcanoes in their hundreds of billions. When they had finished stacking them around then H-bombs were lowered into the volcanoes. Xenu then detonated all the H-bombs at the same time and everyone was killed.

The story doesn’t end there though. Since everyone has a soul (called a “thetan” in this story) then you have to trick souls into not coming back again. So while the hundreds of billions of souls were being blown around by the nuclear winds he had special electronic traps that caught all the souls in electronic beams (the electronic beams were sticky like fly-paper).

After he had captured all these souls he had them packed into boxes and taken to a few huge cinemas. There all the souls had to spend days watching special 3D motion pictures that told them what life should be like and many confusing things. In this film they were shown false pictures and told they were God, The Devil and Christ. In the story this process is called “implanting”.

When the films ended and the souls left the cinema these souls started to stick together because since they had all seen the same film they thought they were the same people. They clustered in groups of a few thousand. Now because there were only a few living bodies left they stayed as clusters and inhabited these bodies.

As for Xenu, the Loyal Officers finally overthrew him and they locked him away in a mountain on one of the planets. He is kept in by a force-field powered by an eternal battery and Xenu is still alive today.

That is the end of the story. And so today everyone is full of these clusters of souls called “body thetans”. And if we are to be a free soul then we have to remove all these “body thetans” and pay lots of money to do so. And the only reason people believe in God and Christ was because it was in the film their body thetans saw 75 million years ago.

Well what did you think of that story?

What? You thought it was a stupid story?

Well so do we. Unfortunately this stupid story is the core belief in the religion known as Scientology.* If people knew about this story then most people would never get involved in it. This story is told to you when you reach one of their secret levels called OT III. After that you are supposed to telepathically communicate with these body thetans to make them go away. You have to pay a lot of money to get to this level and do this (or you have to work very hard for the organisation on extremely low pay for many years).

We are telling you this story as a warning. If you become involved with Scientology then we would like you to do so with your eyes open and fully aware of the sort of material it contains.


Most of the Scientologists that work in their Dianetics* centres and so called “Churches” of Scientology do not know this story since they are not allowed to hear it until they reach the secret “upper” levels of Scientology. It may take them many years before they reach this level if they ever do. The ones who do know it are forced to keep it a secret and not tell it to those people who are joining Scientology.


Part of the first page of the secret OT III document in L. Ron Hubbard’s own handwriting.

www.xenu.net

Now you have read this you know their big secret. Don’t let us put you off joining though.





* Dianetics and Scientology are trademarks of the Religious Technology
Centre. This document is not connected with that organisation in any way.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  2  
Reply Sun 18 Jan, 2015 07:21 pm
@Herald,
Quote:

... and why don't you learn math logic before start presenting yourself on the net as a top scientist of seventh star magnitude


Math logic would require knowing that 2 choices doesn't equate to 50:50 unless you can show that both choices are equally likely. You shouldn't lecture others on math logic when you make such obvious errors.
0 Replies
 
FBM
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Jan, 2015 08:54 pm
@Herald,
Herald, make up your mind. Is it 50:50 or:

Herald wrote:

... my personal are 45% God or some meta-intelligence (string theory or s.th.); 30% another ILF, sending the designs on the Earth even through some form of teleportation or another form of encoded communication (it might have extinct already by the time the information has came here), and perhaps 25% of the Big Bang and the theory that we are made out of star dust (whatever this might mean) and fused with the time by the Dark Energy and Dark Matter.
...


Which breaks down into something like this:

45% goes to either:
a) God
b) meta-intelligence
c) String Theory
d) s.th. (?)

[I recommend you choose one before pursuing this 45% any further.]


30% goes to:

"another ILF, sending the designs on the Earth even through some form of teleportation or another form of encoded communication (it might have extinct already by the time the information has came here)"

[How is this distinct from the "meta-intelligence" in the 45% answers? But, hey, as long as you're not proposing anything too far-fetched. Wink]


And "perhaps" 25% goes to:

"25% of the Big Bang and the theory that we are made out of star dust (whatever this might mean) and fused with the time by the Dark Energy and Dark Matter."

Can't have it both ways. Math doesn't work like that. Not even elementary school math. Even your 45% is given 4 different options, and your 30% seems indistinguishable from one of those 4 options.
 

Related Topics

Intelligent Design - Question by giujohn
What is Intelligent Design? - Discussion by RexRed
Do *ANY* creationists understand evolution? - Discussion by rosborne979
The Bed Bug/Parasite Plant Theory - Question by TeePee38
dna worlds - Discussion by Syamsu
DD VERSUS EVOLUTION - Discussion by Setanta
The Evil of god - Discussion by giujohn
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.1 seconds on 12/23/2024 at 02:16:48