Intelligent Design vs. Casino Universe

@cicerone imposter,

Quote:

Do you understand logic?

Well, well, another Ad Hominem! What is troubling you girlie?

1 Reply

@Quehoniaomath,

Study that word; your education is lacking on most fronts.

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

You have never shown reason, only ignorant opinions without any basis in fact.

...and why don't you present your reason with the mind-blowing facts? As in a beginning you may tell us what has been there in the Singularity at one Planck time and how has it appeared there in the first place ... without the Time component being launched at time zero?
Your Singularity, the way your fellow-atheists are explaining it, would hardly bear few photons (fit as a size within it). Now you can explain what should have been the speed of that photons ... and where they have developed it, in order to 'acquire' temperature of 'ten trillion trillion times hotter than the core of the Sun' (1.57.10^32 by some estimates); what is the state of the matter beyond plasma (10^7 K solar core); and how exactly few photons?! have become ('out of nowhere' as the 'theory' is explaining to us) the material carrier of 'infinite gravitation'?

1 Reply

@Herald,

Infinite means there is no evidence of photons existing in the singularity. That is your made up argument that you want others to defend as if it was theirs. You seem to do that a lot. Make up stuff and then demand that others defend what you made up.

1 Reply

@Herald,

Repeating your made up argument that there are photons in a singularity doesn't make it an argument that anyone else needs to defend since it is still your made up argument.

0 Replies

@rosborne979,

rosborne979 wrote:

FBM wrote:
Reversing the sense of cause and effect in this statement, as Metaxas does in cosmology, is like saying that it’s a miracle that everyone’s legs are exactly long enough to reach the ground.

That example is a nice counterpoint to the argument that the Universe was "tweaked" to support life and/or humans. The whole point of evolution, even in a grand sense, is that it adapts to fit available conditions, not the other way around.

Yeah, one of my favorite parts of that was "life is tuned to the universe rather than the other way around." Makes perfect sense, but of course, IDers aren't strong on common sense.

0 Replies

@Herald,

Herald wrote:

Quote:
There's nothing worse than arguing with someone who simply refuses to listen to reason.
... and what is your 'reason', if it is not some secret. You don't present any 'reasons' - you are just making spam on the blog by some irrelevant references and by copy-pasting various things from the net, said in connection with something else.

4:0.

http://i206.photobucket.com/albums/bb192/DinahFyre/goodmorning.gif

http://i206.photobucket.com/albums/bb192/DinahFyre/download-1.jpg

0 Replies

@parados,

parados wrote:

Infinite means there is no evidence of photons existing in the singularity.

... and it also may mean bullshitting the population to infinity. Can you tell us which exactly has been the material carrier of the 'infinite temperature' and also of the 'infinite gravitation' of the Singularity (that will fit there at one Planck time) ... and how exactly has the Singularity acquired 'infinite pressure' when it has been surrounded by Nothing - can you tell us, the simple mortal, how can Nothing surrounding whatsoever create 'infinite pressure' ... and what is that infinite pressure supposed to mean as a physical interpretation, in the first place?

parados wrote:

That is your made up argument that you want others to defend as if it was theirs.

No at all (you are not watching obviously the videos of your fellow-proselytes) - all these are original claims of the Big Bang 'theory' - nothing could be further than the original.
Do you think that I am at such a level to construct something (taken from the other side of the mouth) like: 'ten trillion trillion times hotter than the Sun'. Why the Sun, why not the hottest star, why not 'ten trillion trillion times hotter than the googolplex' ... for example? ... and how exactly the Big Bang 'theory' has hit the significant digits of the temperature of the Singularity to coincide with that of the core of the Sun ... we are not going to comment any further the ten-trillion-trillion-times pathetic 'evidence'?

2 Replies

@Herald,

Why not? What's the basis for your opinion besides it residing in that dark place up your ass?

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

... only ignorant opinions without any basis in fact.

     After such a claim you will have to prove that the following questions: Which particles (that fit in the size of the Singularity) are the material carrier of the 'ten trillion trillion hotter than the core of the Sun' temperature of the Singularity? Which particles are the material carrier of the 'infinite gravitation' that the Singularity is claiming to have acquired in the first Planck times after the Big Bang ... if not 'before!!!'? How can Nothing surrounding whatsoever create 'infinite pressure' on that Something (the Singularity in this case)? ... are 'ignorant opinions'.
     1. You will have to prove that a Question can be an Opinion.
     2. As you don't argue the validity of the Questions, you obviously accept that they are valid ... as questions. Now, can you tell us how exactly can a 'valid question' become an 'ignorant opinion'? How can the semantics and intentions of the one side of the math logic formula be absolutely orthogonal to the semantics on the other side. How does that happen?
     3. The questions that are inconvenient usually expose the ignorance of the opponent, evident from his absolute inability to answer elementary questions to defend his favorite 'theory', as a result whereof he starts looking for compensatory techniques - like side attacks, aggression, and ad homs of any kind - it is that simple and it is that evident.

2 Replies

@Herald,

After such a claim you will have to prove that [sic] the following questions: Which particles are the material carrier of your "personal 45%/50:50 god/ILF-of-the-gaps"?

Let's turn the tables a bit. This time, I'll be the one who won't say a single thing in support of my hypothesis and instead demand that you explain every aspect and every event related to yours all the way back to the beginning of time. Then I'll distort whatever you say to make it look like there's a gap in your knowledge that somehow makes my silent, undescribed claim as strong as yours. Laughing

4:0

2 Replies

@FBM,

That's the ticket; a troll without any basis for his belief only seeks attention from others. A human brain living in limbo on a planet that provides all the opportunity to seek knowledge.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

He said he thought Scientology was "validly plausible."

http://i206.photobucket.com/albums/bb192/DinahFyre/ddpan.gif

I don't think we need to expect much in the way of reasoning from him.

1 Reply

@Herald,

Give us your math that shows it wasn't infinite.

I'll bite. Which video specifically presented science claiming photons existed in the singularity. I won't hold by breath waiting for you to present it.

1 Reply

@FBM,

FBM wrote:

After such a claim you will have to prove that [sic] the following questions: Which particles are the material carrier of your "personal 45%/50:50 god/ILF-of-the-gaps"?

     The things are far too not the way your are trying to present them. You are trying to present yourself as a mega genius of seventh star magnitude, but cannot write a few words without having the appropriate (irrelevant) references for them.
     You may think that you know everything, but you cannot explain how the two and a half gravitons fitting into your favorite Singularity can create infinite gravitation - 'ten trillion trillion times the gravitation' of Sagittarius A*, for example - 4.1 MN x M(.)?
     If you are curious to know this 'ten trillion trillion times something huge enough to make an impression' is not even an approximation of the infinite gravitation/ temperature/pressure etc. the Big Bang 'theory' is claiming to have disposed with. This ''ten trillion trillion times something huge' is a visualization for retards to get some idea of the fame and glory of the Big Bang 'theory'. Where have you proved that infinite gravitation/ temperature/pressure can exist in the physical world? Where have you proved that the infinity of the math equations from the theoretical physics have any physical interpretation in the real world at all? The only infinite parameter with the Big Bang 'theory' beyond any doubt, however remains the infinite stupidity of its apologists.

2 Replies

@FBM,

FBM wrote:

He said he thought Scientology was "validly plausible."

This was only part of the sentence and has as an intention to misrepresent the things - why don't you cite the quotes as they have been said?

0 Replies

@parados,

parados wrote:

Give us your math that shows it wasn't infinite.

With the greatest pleasure - when you explain what does matter with infinite temperature is supposed to mean and how two gravitons and a half can have infinite gravitation - ten trillion trillion times the gravity of Sagittarius A* - if we use the presentation skills of your fellow-BigBang-mambo-jumboists.

1 Reply

@Herald,

A very simple question was asked. It has nothing to do with "his" intelligence.
Your diversion tactics are juvenile.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

A very simple question was asked.

Why don't you answer it - what is the physical interpretation of a matter at infinite temperature ... and can the infinite temperature exist in the real world in the first place? Infinite temperature means infinite velocity of the particles - can the particles have speed greater than the speed of light in vacuum, for example?

1 Reply

@Herald,

He asked you. Are such simple concepts difficult for your level of comprehension?

1 Reply

Intelligent Design vs. Casino Universe

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know