Evolution Disclaimer Supported

The Advocate (Baton Rouge) ^ | 12/11/02 | WILL SENTELL

[Tribune7]

Ever hear of Ragnorak?

No. On the other hand I have heard of Ragnarok, and yes the Vikings did have a belief that world as we know it was going to end.

Remember what's being discussed. I found the Bible to mesh remarkably well with what we know scientifically about the universe. Much better than what I had expected when I read it.

If the Bible had predicted that this world would last forever, and the Sun would never die, and matter would never devolve to disorder, that would be a pretty good strike against it.

[gore3000]

Wrong again (as usual)

Nope, I am absolutely correct in my remarks on Post# 1309. I quoted physicist's own words:

Physicist deserves no apologies. As I said if he is a physicist he should not have made the following statement denying gravity:

Uh, huh. And what makes YOU think that the force that keeps the moon in its orbit is the same thing as the force that keeps your keyster in its chair?

1235 posted on 12/28/2002 8:11 PM PST by Physicist

He is either not a physicist or he is totally dishonest. Such a person does not deserve any apology.

If anyone has to apologize to the readers of this forum it is him. He has either misrepresented himself as a physicist or has lied to the readers of this forum.

BTW - you are guilty of the same crime in your Post #1270 where you said that:

Gravity is a proven fact, and not just on earth. We found Pluto because we saw the effects of its gravity, we were able to land on the moon thanks to gravity. Your denying that gravity even exists shows your total disregard for both science and honest discussion.-me-

Really? Can you explain the difference between pure Newtonian physics and General Relativity? Why do you think its called Gravitational Theory?

My reply in post 1276 shows why you owe the same apology as physicist. Your statement was clearly ignorant or dishonest for someone who claims to be a radio astronomer:

For a supposed astronomer you do not even know your terms. It is called the LAW OF UNIVERSAL GRAVITATION it is far more than a theory. As I told physicist, by denying something which you know to be true you are being dishonest. If you are a radio astronomer you know that gravity has been observed. If you do not know it, then you are not a radio astronomer, so either way you are being dishonest.

You and your friends are trying to create confusion in order to try to dismiss my posts as nonsense. Specifically that gravity has been observed and evolution never has been observed. I ask all those who do not believe that gravity has been observed or do not believe that it is observable to go on top of a 20 story building and jump. This will have two benefits: one it will prove to you that there are indeed universal scientific laws, and two, it will rid the world of a few people lacking in common sense (and perhaps win you a posthmous Darwin Award!). Gravity is observed everyday by everyone. Evolution has NEVER been observed.

BTW - it is interesting that evolutionists when shown that some scientific statement is true, try to challenge the truth of a scientific theory instead of prove their own evolutionary theory. It shows clearly to me that evolutionists are quite aware that evolution is not a fact, but just rhetorical nonsense.

[Tribune7]

But there is a difference between an observation and an explanation.

That's a good point that dovetails with why I believe the Bible was written by God, not man. If it was a work of man there would be a whole lot of explanations and just about all of them would be wrong.

[gore3000]

I was keeping a special watch for the parts that I been led to believe were now laughable in their descriptions of nature due to scientific advances.

One of the interesting things that has happened in recent years is the verification of Genesis by science. The first words in the Bible are "In the beginning ws the Word". Science has verified the "In the beginning" part with the Big Bang theory. Now I am sure that many have thought that when the Bible said "the Word" they thought it was a metaphor or some indirect allusion to God. However, the discovery of DNA has verified that in the beginning was "the Word", that it was meant literally. It is the information in DNA that is the source of life, it is the particular arrangement of the codes that makes life possible.

[gore3000]

"For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians [believers!] who have been sitting there for centuries."

Great post! I will laugh about the above. How true!

[gore3000]

That YOU do not know has little relevance for this discussion.

Evolution is about biology, not geology. That you and your friends want to discuss geology instead of the subject of this thread shows quite well that all of you are very much aware that evolution does not have a scientific leg to stand on. It shows quite well that you and the other evolutionists here know quite well that evolution is false so you have chosen to essentially spam the thread with irrelevant information in order to distract from the emptiness of your theory.

[newguy357]

I sincerely apologize for my rudeness and foolish words, Physicist. And to everyone else as well. I read your post again and don't know why I lashed out the way I did. Although, I do have a tendency to attack when I see someone attempt to raise pseudo-sciences, like biology or psychology, to the level of real science, like physics. Physicist, your experience speaks for itself. I thank each of you for responding calmly to my inappropriate post.

Physicist wrote:
"And what makes YOU think that the force that keeps the moon in its orbit is the same thing as the force that keeps your keyster in its chair?"

The fact that placing an arbitrary mass next to another arbitrary mass results in a predictable perturbation. This is done in student labs everyday, where students are asked to measure the "gravitational constant" G by the use of a torsion balance.

Universal gravitation has overwhelming experimental evidence. It can be observed in the present at any time we wish. The same cannot be said of evolution. If for no other reason, its time scale is too large. Meaningful predictions cannot be verified.

[newguy357]

Doctor Stochastic wrote:
"You really need to take a few physics classes. Perhaps then you would learn the credentials of people you insult. Your post is not only shows ignorance but insulting too."

Although I do not yet have the experience of Physicist, you seem to be making a similar mistake to mine, if on a smaller magnitude. He compared the validity of evolutionary biology to that of universal gravitation--a comparison I have seen all too often made by anonymous internet pseudo-intellectuals without any respectable training. My accusations were baseless and foolish, and I apologize. I have taken more than a few physics classes, but apparently you believe that if I take a few more I will be able to know others' credentials through epiphany. I hope you are right.

[newguy357]

VadeRetro wrote:
"Pretty breathtaking, newguy! You're taking Physics in ... what? High school? "

See my reply to Doctor Stochastic, please.

VadeRetro continued:
"A start like that, you might want to try again with a new screenname."

Because I've upset you? I didn't want to make the same mistake again, so I checked your freeper page. I hope that by the time I'm 50-something I have more to do than waste words on college punks. Find a woman. Or something.

[Aracelis]

They are just backscratching. They have absolutely no purpose and are read by hardly anyone. People only subscribe to them because they are supposed to, but they do not read them.

Utter bilge. You have just proven to me that you neither have an advanced degree, nor have made it through your sophmore year as an undergraduate.

[Aracelis]

I sincerely apologize for my rudeness and foolish words, Physicist.

A gracious and humble apology. Kudos! Now, if only someone else on this thread would learn from your example...

[newguy357]

Crap, I regretted that the minute I posted it.

My apologies to you as well. I was upset because I knew you were probably right.

Watch out for newguy358

[Alamo-Girl]

Welcome to Free Republic, newguy357!

I'm very pleased to meet you and am much impressed with your attitude. Hugs!

[RadioAstronomer]

For a supposed astronomer you do not even know your terms. It is called the LAW OF UNIVERSAL GRAVITATION it is far more than a theory. As I told physicist, by denying something which you know to be true you are being dishonest. If you are a radio astronomer you know that gravity has been observed.

Are you going to completely ignore my post #1303 which points out your error?

Or are you going to completely ignore it like your error about circles and ellipses.

[Alamo-Girl]

Jeepers! I've been gone for Christmas and was very surprised - and pleased - to see this thread is still so active.

It is troubling though that the dialogue took a personal turn. I know both RadioAstronomer and Physicist to be exactly who they purport to be and would have been quick to make that statement.

As to PatrickHenry's challenge to gore3000 about how old is the earth, I'd like to submit my observation that young and old are not necessarily mutually exclusive. For lurkers: my views.

Tribune7 and gore3000 - I really like your point that the Bible is unique in specifying there was a beginning and there will be an end. I also find the statement in Psalms very interesting in light of current discoveries:

By the word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth. - Psalms 33:6

Physics News 4/27/2000

The 36-member, international "Boomerang" (Balloon Observations of Millimetric Extragalactic Radiation and Geomagnetics) collaboration, led by Andrew Lange of Caltech and Paolo de Bernardis of the University of Rome, confirms that a plot of CMB strength peaks at a multipole value of about 197 (corresponding to CMB patches about one degree in angular spread), very close to what theorists had predicted for a cosmology in which the universe's overall curvature is zero and the existence of cold dark matter is invoked.

The shape of the observed pattern of temperature variations suggests that a disturbance very like a sound wave moving through air passed through the high- density primordial fluid and that the CMB map can be can be thought of as a sort of sonogram of the infant universe. (de Bernardis et al., Nature, 27 April 2000.)

Big Bang Evidence Found – 5/2/2001

"The early universe is full of sound waves compressing and rarefying matter and light, much like sound waves compress and rarefy air inside a flute or trumpet," explained Paolo deBernardis of the University of Rome La Sapienza, one of the members of the Balloon Observations of Millimetric Extragalactic Radiation and Geophysics (BOOMERanG) team. "For the first time the new data show clearly the harmonics of these waves."

Harmonics in the Early Universe – 6/5/2001

The MAXIMA, BOOMERANG, and DASI collaborations, which measure minute variations in the CMB, recently reported new results at the American Physical Society meeting in Washington, D.C. All three agree remarkably about what the "harmonic proportions" of the cosmos imply: not only is the universe flat, but its structure is definitely due to inflation, not to topological defects in the early universe.

The results were presented as plots of slight temperature variations in the CMB that graph sound waves in the dense early universe. These high-resolution "power spectra" show not only a strong primary resonance but are consistent with two additional harmonics, or peaks.

Cosmological Patterns and Galaxy Biasing (pdf)

[RadioAstronomer]

Very nicely put! Welcome to FR. :-)

It takes guts to apologize that way.

[RadioAstronomer]

Hi! :-) Thanks for the links!

[Alamo-Girl]

Good evening, my friend! I trust you are having a wonderful Christmas to New Year holiday.

If you get a chance, I'd much appreciate any comments you might have on those articles!

[higgmeister]

"I don't believe I evolved from some primate," said Jim Stafford, a board member from Monroe. Stafford said evolution should be offered as a theory, not fact.

That is the funniest thing I've heard in a while!

OTOH, with a brain like that maybe his mother wasn't human after all!

[B. Rabbit]

because I have thoroughly disproven your atheistic/materialistic, pseudo-scientific evolutionary nonsense.

You say it again. You truly are a simple, simple man. You calim to have "thoroughly disproven" evolution. You are a nut-case...