Posted on 12/25/2008 7:55:05 PM PST by Soliton
After 10 years and many thousands of replies, I am leaving FR.
I don't really care, and I don't know why anyone else would.
I am leaving before I am banned (again). Truth doesn't seem to matter on FR. I don't know if it is donations or sympathetic opinions that do, but I have been suspended twice when I followed the rules and the people who complained to the moderators didn't, yet the moderators sided with them.
For the record, evolution is a fact and the Shroud of Turin is a fraud. I would prove it if the admin moderators would let me, but they won't. Your resident "expert", Swordmaker won't debate me because he can't.
I will work to build a forum where members have rights and truth matters.
Merry Christmas
Attacking Gravity? Lol- Since hwne is making hte claim that it can’t be detected ‘Attacking it”? Did you not see hte links above posted by Metmom? Even science hasn’t been able ot ‘detect it’ but they now htink they might be able to- Are they too ‘attacking Newton’s principles because they couldn’t previously detect it?
I think it’s a hoot that you folks again, try to make mountains out of nothing- Yep- We evil Creationists- We just ‘attack’ anyhtign and everything (A common accusation levelled towards us by those whos’e principles are being REFUTED with real science.)
speaking of not suiting their ‘jawbone migration to ear bone evolution’
“Earwax protects the ear by trapping dust particles, bacteria, fungal spores, sand, and dirt, preventing them from entering inner recesses and possibly damaging the ear. If they do gain a “foothold,” disease-causing micro-organisms (e.g., E. coli) are subject to a veritable smorgasbord of defensive compounds such as lactoferrin, beta-defensin-1, cathelicidin, beta-defensin-2, lysozyme, MUC1 and secretory component of IgA (a major class of antibody) found in the cerumen.2 These are highly complex compounds that defy a naturalistic origin explanation. But not only does earwax attract and trap debris —its bitterness also repels insects, mites, and other creatures.”
“This is also true when it comes to the auditory canal leading to the eardrum. As skin cells age, they cornify (convert to keratin) and are sloughed off. God designed the old, keratinized skin cells of the ear canal to peel off in a “c” shape —unlike the flattened skin cells on the rest of the body—so they will either literally roll out of the auditory canal (termed “epithelial migration”) aided by the movement of the jaw, or will more easily become trapped in the cerumen.”
Aint natururalism grand in how it apparently can blindly just DESIGN for all this complexity before hand while it awaits the migration of the bones in the jaw into the inner ear where it eventually got all reshaped and reconfigured into the complex hearing we now enjoy today? I know I’m thankful for that miraculous forward looking naturalistic evolution.
woops- forgot link (Evos beware- it’s one of htose icky speudoscience sites that ‘attacks’ the foundations of that marvelous forward looking, miracle working, biological impossibility overcoming, mechanism called Macroevolution- so ya may just wanna avoid it like hte plague- no science to be found anywhere here- nothign to see- move right along) http://www.icr.org/article/4312/
Where is your "feeling of weight" in free fall? Gravity is certainly there... but can you detect it in any subjective or objective way?
Prove your assertions.
Why do you think it is people get into water tanks to measure body weight, mass, etc.?
Because their scale is broke?
Ummm gravity isn’t material.
Do you think it’s bottled and sold over the counter?
Yes, your claim about metmom’s post was indeed absurd, and obviously you’re hellbent on keeping it that way too.
Displacement is denoted in measures of weight... ships are rated according to the weight of water they displace... which equals the weight of the ship at any given time. If you measure the amount of water a human body displaces when floating, you can easily calculate the weight. Fresh water weighs 8.35 lbs per US Gallon. Measure the volume of the water poured off a completely filled container after you place a human body into the the container, multiply the fractional gallon measurement by 8.35 Lbs and you will have an accurate measure of the weight of the body.
Force the body to submerge and then measure that outflow... that will give you data on the volume the body, apply known ratios and you can calculate the mass of muscle, fat, and bone. Those calculations are not as accurate as the first displacement method of finding weight... but they are sufficiently accurate for most purposes.
Please provide sources to provide evidence that gravity is material. A picture of a parcel of it would be adequate.
Displacement measures volume, not weight. A concept that is or should be taught around seventh grade. This really isn't something that can be argued. It's amusing though, to see so many freepers unable to grasp this.
As for gravity, all forces are regarded as mediated by particles. Gravity's particle is called the graviton. The exact nature of gravity has not been pinned down, but denying that it is a physical force is ludicrous.
Uh-huh, why do you think people get into tanks for measurements?
Can you send me some graviton in a bottle, I’d like to study it.
Displacement measures volume, not weight. It's rather amusing to watch you and your friends struggle with this elementary school concept.
That and arguing that gravity is an undetectable magic force.
So people get into water tanks to measure their body VOLUME?
Come on, you should be able to figure this out.
No one said gravity is a magic force but you...we’re pointing out it’s not material.
Before we go any further with the displacement thing, let me ask a simple question.
When you say “immersed” do you mean completely immersed, or floating? I’m assuming you mean completely immersed.
It makes no difference to my argument, but I’d like to avoid any obvious sources of misunderstanding.
If you measure the displacement of a floating object you can calculate the object’s weight, because it will be the same as the weight of the water displaced. Or you can measure the volume of water and apply a simple formula, because the weight per volume of water is known.
But to estimate body fat you would have to find the volume of the completely immersed body and compare it with weight. Then apply some rule of thumb formula for body weight vs volume.
But if you measure only the water displaced by a completely immersed body, you know nothing about its weight.
The Immersion TechniqueThis is the most accurate approach. It involves submerging a person in a special water tank and determining how much water they displace. This information, along with the person's weight, is used to calculate their density.
What do you suppose is meant by "how much water they displace"? Why is this quantity used "along with" weight, if the immersion measures weight?
Is it within your mental capacity to undestand that displacement provides a measurement of volume, and when put in a formula along with weight, provides density?
And density provides an estimate of body fat?
Just for the record, I wrote post 793 before doing any research. The methodology is pretty obvious, but just to be sure, I did a google search and found the reference in 794.
It remains true that measuring the amount of water displaced by a completely immersed object tells you its volume and tells you nothing about its weight.
You could, for example cast statues out of aluminum, tin and lead, from the same mold and immerse them in water. They would all displace the same amount of water, and you would learn nothing about their weight.
I see you finally looked into it.
In reality it’s another way to measure mass, via means of displacement.
The idea being body fat measurements are obtained via how much water is displaced when a body gets into the water. Apparently muscle mass is heavier and fat floats more.
I’ve seen different procedures for different purposes. Bariatrics, more precise body fat measurements for military service, etc.
So I think it depends on application, health of the individual, etc. as to whether they’re fully immersed, up to their neck, or what have you.
But yeah, it’s supposed to deliver a more accurate assessment on boady fat MASS.
For instance the military could care less about body VOLUME.
What’s that got to do with the statement that gravity is not material and is detected by it’s effect on objects around it?
Oddly enough, that was my first thought when you brought the subject up, back in post 760.
That's not what it's about at all. That's what you're making it out to be.
The claim was made that gravity is just as elusive as God. I'm rather amused that Newton's icon of scientific investigation is being attacked by creationists. It's a real hoot.
No, to that as well.
My original comment....But gravity has no substance. It cannot be directly measured or observed. It can only be detected through its influence on objects within its field.
Now if you want to call that elusive, you're certainly entitled, but I never said that. You are merely putting words in my mouth.
What do you mean by "detect"?
Read the links and learn something about science.
Gravity is a particle? Please provide evidence to support your contention.
The exact nature of gravity has not been pinned down, but denying that it is a physical force is ludicrous.
Who has denied that gravity is a physical force? Could you provide a link to that statement?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.