Evolution Disclaimer Supported

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

[VadeRetro]

At least now we can say what we want about "medved," secure in the knowledge that "titanmike" will have no basis for objecting to the Admin moderator.

[Tribune7]

The passages giving permission to own slaves, and permission to beat them to the point where they cannot move for two days, are obsolete. Even worse, there is no way that such behavior could be moral at any time or in any context.

And why do you think this?

[VadeRetro]

Anticipating a nitpick, some snake species do "live" birth by incubating the egg batch inside their bodies. AFAIK that's an independent development from the mammalian invention of live birth.

[Tribune7]

Any theory which proposes random or stochastic methods as the source of anything is ipso facto unscientific.

Good post

[Junior]

Ten years ago Holden was the only person on the internet talking about anything like that but the idea appears to have attained critical mass as of late.

Sorry, Ted. Multiple personalities does not equate to "critical mass."

[usastandsunited]

Moreover, few things are more pointless than adopting the (manifestly anti-intellectual) position, "the universe cannot be understood by humans" to a physicist..


Bingo. There's your problem. If you could maybe find a tiny bit of crack to open that mind of yours to the possibility that you don't have the answer for everything maybe you could experience a whole new universe out there. In short, your full of yourself. To that, your are correct, it is pointless.


Ultimately, what you're saying is that anything goes, nothing is knowable, nothing can be proven, and words don't mean things.

Once again you miss the point. Your arguments state anything goes. Your arguments state what can't be proven and what is not knowable is "null". Your arguments state words or writings mean nothing, only physical evidence.

[PatrickHenry]

Multiple personalities does not equate to "critical mass."

In some cases, "critical mass" means it's time to flush out the septic tank.

[Fester Chugabrew]

"I suspect that a majority of educated Americans now believe that evolution is an ideology."

The entire public school system was established via ideologies incubatory to evolutionst assumptions. No surprise to find evolutionism and its rotten fruit so deeply entrenched there. Nice to see creationists finally plucking whiskers off the beards of these evolutionist "know-it-alls."

[Alamo-Girl]

To sum this up for lurkers:

Post 1766 by usastandsunited asked Physicist whether he ever "wondered what came before the big bang".

The post by Physicist at post 1797 shows why time is not considered, i.e. space/time does not exist before the Big Bang.

The discussion proceeded away from the discussion of null to a discussion of science v. religion. I hope it'll get back on the subject of null!

To sum it up, time is part of the creation and not something in which the Creator exists.

Because science limits itself to the material, it goes no further than inception (i.e. Big Bang or multi-universe theory.) Religion on the other hand, has no such limitation.

Here's more on Teleology.

[usastandsunited]

Why do you think slavery is wrong?


I think slavery is wrong because I firmly believe humans are all equal.
After studying a bit of the Big Bang evolutionist theory, I not seeing that is the case with that belief ? I put the question mark there, because at this point, I'm asking, not making accusations.
I wonder what the Big Bang evolutionists think about owning pets. I mean, what gives humans the authority to own pets? Who set the rules that we are better than other animals ? If anybody has a link where I can find some of these answers, please post.

[BMCDA]

If you could maybe find a tiny bit of crack to open that mind of yours to the possibility that you don't have the answer for everything maybe you could experience a whole new universe out there.

Where did he say that he has the answer for everything?
Methinks you read too much into what others write.

[f.Christian]

tm...

The evolutionists are going to lose in America and they may end up having to find some other place to peddle their wares. Perhaps Haiti...


1877 posted on 01/01/2003 7:14 AM PST by titanmike


fC...

yeah...doc henry---retroll!

[Tribune7]

I think slavery is wrong because I firmly believe humans are all equal.

Why do you believe that?

[VadeRetro]

Sorry, Ted. Multiple personalities does not equate to "critical mass."

I don't know. The Democrats have been doing pretty well with "Vote early and often!"

[VadeRetro]

I'll bite. Is null a number? Can null be used to describe how much energy is in the universe? If the answer to both questions is "no," then null should not have been introduced by usastands in the manner it was, as it's irrelevant.

If the answer to both question is "yes," then either null = zero or it doesn't. I don't see how it helps you. The energy content of the universe calculates to about zero, so the actual net "free lunch" of the universe is about zero, however counterintuitive that may be.

[js1138]

Why do you think slavery is wrong?

Because I would not like to be a slave. This is a sentiment found in nearly every culture.

[gore3000]

The website I cited is a Creationist website that agrees with the definition of evolution I posted:

Not only are you a liar, you are a shameless liar. With the post showing that the site calls the definition you gave MISLEADING (which you dishonestly did not post) and with the article named THE EVOLUTION SHELL GAME you dare to say that the site supports your definition? You have no shame. The post showing your dishonesty is: Post# 1817

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you for your post!

You asked "Is null a number? Can null be used to describe how much energy is in the universe?"

That is close to the question at hand. Zero, null, Ayn Sof, void, empty, vacuum appear to be used to mean the same thing - but are they?

Zero is unique as a number. It is infinitely nothing. You can't divide by it. Multiply anything by it and the result is swallowed up as nothing. Add it to anything and you can't see the result. It has a rather mystical quality in mathematics.

Null is zero on steriods. You can have a result mathematically or by programming which is zero, but null is truly empty. For instance, a field of data may be zero or null. If zero, the value of it is the mystical number zero. But if null, it isn't there.

Vacuum no longer truly means empty, or null, and can only approach zero. This is due to particles coming into and out of existence within a vacuum (a subject related to the Fermilab search for other dimensions.)

Ayn Sof is an ancient Hebrew description of God, the Creator. Roughly, the phrase means null and yet infinite.

It seems to me that some astro-physicists have seized on the vacuum observation to leap away from the obvious meaning of null by proposing multiple universes from multiple quantum fluctuations. This is quite problematic because it would require the alternate universes to have some of the same physical laws as this one.

Curiously, the necessity of and properties of zero and null in our thinking parallels closely to our understanding of God at Creation, i.e. Ayn Sof.

If you'd like any links to support the above statements, please let me know and I'll dig them out.

[VadeRetro]

OK, I get the difference between a data field being specified as zero and simply omitted. Would you say that this equates to the difference between "The energy of the universe is zero" and "'The energy of the universe' does not exist?" (The latter would presumably be true because the universe does not exist.)

[Alamo-Girl]

Yes! One minor clarification - a field which is null is not simply omitted. The field always exists, and thus the possibility of a value - but in the null instance, a value for the field (including zero) it does not exist.