If God were real, you wouldn’t need a book

[IBDaMann]

^ Not a logical or meaningful response.

^ Not a logical or meaningful response. The current topic of discussion is the stupid gibberish you posted. Do you have a comment?

You just hoping that I am wrong does not make me wrong.

What you wrote was stupid. If you had just posted "bleeeva-flimpth-fliver-bleeeva-floop", would you have been wrong, or just stupid?

Time dilation and Lorentz contraction have nothing to do with organic material.

Yes, organic chemistry is affected by time dilation as well.

It is based on the spacetime properties of general relativity.

... and we're right back to you not understanding anything about what you just wrote.

 

[Cypress]

The current topic of discussion is the stupid gibberish!

You ran your mouth about time dilation like you actually understood the concept, but then you didn't even recognize the equation for time dilation, and you foolishly suggested biological matter somehow has something to do with time dilation

​

 

[Margot]

Nope. You should have checked with NIST before asking your question.


One second is defined by taking the fixed numerical value of the cesium frequency ΔνCs — the unperturbed ground‑state hyperfine transition frequency of the cesium‑133 atom — to be 9,192,631,770 when expressed in hertz (Hz), which is equal to s⁻¹.”

That is the correct answer.


Obviously, on Day 1 YHWH created cesium so we could tell time. I don't know whether cesium came before or after the refrigerator light.

Nope

 

[ZenMode]

Again , you would be dissuaded of that opinion if you successfully passed some physics, astronomy, and cosmology courses.

The mathmatical principle of general relativity existed before Einstein published it. It existed before humans existed. It existed before the solar system existed.

In other words, it's independent of the human mind.

The fact that we use a base 10 mathmatical notation by convention does not change the fact there is an underlying mathmatical principle to general relativity which could be represented in other mathmatical notations.

Of course. All of the rules of math, physics and every other science existed long before man. The fact that humans are literally made of nothing but stardust was true before man even knew what a star was.

And, again, we don't know how, when or if everything we know was intentionally brought into existence, hence the god of the gaps. We don't know, so lots of humans like to plug their deity into the equation to explain it.

You argue that it's "reason" to plug in a deity. I argue that it's human nature, as is evidenced by the fact that man has been doing it for thousands of years.

 

[Into the Night]

What history? You cannot tell me where you got your information on Aristotle. Because you are lying.

Already did. RQAA.

 

[Into the Night]

Nope

Yup. This is the standard used at the National Institute of Standards, which also operates the WWV and WWVH radio stations, marking standard frequency references tied back to the cesium clock.

GPS and other satellites are also basing their time standards on this clock.

Cell phone toweres also base their time standards on this clock.

The Network Time Protocol (NTP) traces it's standard back to this clock.

 

[Into the Night]

Of course. All of the rules of math, physics and every other science existed long before man.

Nope. Mathematics itself is invented by Man.
Every theory of science was created by Man.

The fact that humans are literally made of nothing but stardust was true before man even knew what a star was.

The Earth is not a star.

And, again, we don't know how, when or if everything we know was intentionally brought into existence,

You don't need to, other than to satisfy some curiosity.

hence the god of the gaps.

There is no 'gap'. Buzzword fallacy.

We don't know, so lots of humans like to plug their deity into the equation to explain it.

Explain what? Religion is not science.

You argue that it's "reason" to plug in a deity.

Your deity is a robot? It needs to recharge from time to time?

I argue that it's human nature, as is evidenced by the fact that man has been doing it for thousands of years.

Random words. No apparent coherency. Go learn English.

 

[Into the Night]

Even if there is a god and and if he wrote my name in the sky, that would not make me religious because I could always sweep it under the rug as a hoax, a hallucination, or a trick.

So?

 

[ZenMode]

Nope. Mathematics itself is invented by Man.
Every theory of science was created by Man.

Once again, I am forced to stop here because of your word games. I didn't say math and science existed. I specifically said the rules of math and science and physics existed.

Electrons were moving between levels, in the orbit around an atom, long before man knew that electrons existed and could explain the movement.

 

[Into the Night]

You should keep your mouth shut on topics you know nothing about.
Plato wrote the dialogue Timaeus to specifically discuss his ideas about the physical nature of the universe and the origin of the cosmos. (commence frantic Googling...now!)

Not a theory of science. Google is not God.

Thomas Jefferson was wrong about a lot of things, but we still read him.

YOU are wrong about a lot of things, but you still read them.

We didn't magically wake up in the 21st century with a complete knowledge of modern science.

Science is not an age or calendar.

People still read Aristotle because the history of science and the history of philosophy are the palette on which the human condition is painted.

None of Aristotle's theories of science survived. ALL of them were falsified. They are no longer even theories.
Science is not philosophy. Science is not paint.

 

[Into the Night]

Should we call Newton a loser because Einstein advanced beyond him? No.

Newton's theories have not been falsified by Einstein, Hugo.

 

[Into the Night]

All natural philosophy, aka ancient science

Science is not philosophy.

was speculative and based on reasoning and inference.

Science is not gambling.

That includes the pre-Socratic natural philosophers.

Science is not philosophy.

They didn't just guess. They had logical reasons for their hypotheses and deductions.

Go learn what philosophy is.

We still recognize what Aristotle, Plato, Thales, Democritus, Anaximander were doing as a natural philosophy or the ancient equivalent of science.

None of Aristotle's theories survived. They were all falsified. They are no longer even theories.
Science is not philosophy.

 

[Into the Night]

Bad meaning insufficient or inadequate. You already knew this, but still insist on playing dumb word games for some reason.

You can't blame your word games on me or anybody else, Void.

That was my point.

You aren't making a point.

Had you actually read what he said, you would have saw that he asked me to prove that miracles don't happen.

Why would I ask you to prove a negative? It's not possible.

Really... Do you try to sound as uninformed and dumb as possible?

You can't blame your problems on me or anybody else, Void.

How do you know the people that went to the moon didn't hide the fact that it's made of cheese?

Dust cloud on landing. Dust on suits (they came back almost looking like kids have been playing in the dirt!). Dust in equipment. Returned samples.
None of the returned samples spreads on a cracker very well.

 

[Into the Night]

Google is your friend.

You want to talk about a mole removal technique that doesn't work?

 

[ZenMode]

Why would I ask you to prove a negative? It's not possible.

Again, stopping right here because you are playing dumb.

You must really enjoy wasting your time responding to me, given that I probably don't read half of your posts because you inject your stupidity into them almost immediately.

 

[Into the Night]

That was the obvious insinuation by referencing Jesus.

Referencing Jesus is not a proof. Insinuation is not a proof.

I'm stopping here because, again, you insist on playing dumb and I've already tolerated your playing dumb in two other posts.

Tipping our king again, eh?

 

[Into the Night]

Right, not a thumper but a believer.

Why would an ineffective method of getting rid of moles have anything to do with Christianity?

 

[Into the Night]

I absolutely can.

Arguing both sides of a paradox is irrational. You just claimed you WANT to be irrational.

I can argue my side,

A paradox has no 'sides'. You are being irrational.

the atheist side,

You are not an atheist. An atheist has no sides.

and still talk to believers on their level.

Atheism is not a religion.

Again, as I have already told you previously, I don't have to believe the Bible to know what it says.

Yet you quote it as if believing it. You are still locked in this paradox.

When... Oh when... Are you going to stop playing dumb word games?

You can't blame your word games on me or anybody else, Void. Inversion fallacy.

 

[Into the Night]

As I said previously, there's always some spin to justify the irrational claims of the Bible.

Go learn what 'rational' and 'irrational' means. Go learn what 'spin' means. Go learn English and logic. Buzzword fallacies.

How was there light before the stars were created?

Random words. No apparent coherency.

Christians have had a long time to figure out all of their excuses and spin for the nonsense in the Bible.

Go learn what 'excuse' and 'spin' means. Your poor English is your biggest problem. Void argument fallacy.

You can try it on me, but it's not going to work.

Try what??? Void argument fallacy.

If God existed, and actually wanted people to believe in him, he wouldn't have written a book that an 8-year-old can't find flaws in.

The existence of God does not require a book.
What 'flaws'??

 

[Into the Night]

In biblical times, God made his presence known on a regular basis.

He still does.

If he actually gave a shit what we believed, he would continue to make his presence known.

He does.

Maybe one video wouldn't be enough, maybe two videos wouldn't be enough, but when things keep happening, and masses of people see it, at some point you can't deny it.

Why are you fixated on video?

However, as I mentioned, it was regular occurrence to claim any number of gods doing things on earth.

It still is.

It's easy to claim ridiculous shit when there's no expectation of proof other than spoken word.

It is not possible to prove a circular argument True or False.

Attempted negative proof fallacy. Circular argument fallacy (fundamentalism).