RE: The Erosion of Progress by Religions

RE: The Erosion of Progress by Religions (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

DomKen -> RE: The Erosion of Progress by Religions (6/2/2014 7:11:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Except one has a mountain of evidence and the other has none. Of what precise use is a mountain of evidence for something that explains nothing? The Big Bang theory explains the entire universe. What more do you want explained?

Kirata -> RE: The Erosion of Progress by Religions (6/2/2014 7:27:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen The Big Bang theory explains the entire universe. Allow me to repeat myself... quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata It may please you to believe that, but they're both just stories. One is a story about how a theoretical "singularity" was the source of the Universe, the other is a story about how a theoretical "God" was the source of the Universe, *neither of which explain anything at all about how the Universe actually came into being. The fact is, we don't know. Get used to it.* Present-day physics cannot describe what happened in the Big Bang. Quantum theory and the theory of relativity fail in this almost infinitely dense and hot primal state of the universe. Only an all-encompassing theory of quantum gravity which unifies these two fundamental pillars of physics could provide an insight into how the universe began. ~PhysOrg Get used to it. K.

HunterCA -> RE: The Erosion of Progress by Religions (6/2/2014 7:45:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: deathtothepixies quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA So, frankly, it doesn't mean a whole lot if you say either The Big Bang started life or Let There Be Light started life. Science against religion in a nutshell. It matters more than your closed mind will ever comprehend I think it's been amply demonstrated the closed mind is yours. LOL

HunterCA -> RE: The Erosion of Progress by Religions (6/2/2014 7:47:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Except one has a mountain of evidence and the other has none. Of what precise use is a mountain of evidence for something that explains nothing? The Big Bang theory explains the entire universe. What more do you want explained? Cool. I'm sure Sheldon Cooper is looking to chat with you.

HunterCA -> RE: The Erosion of Progress by Religions (6/2/2014 7:50:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: deathtothepixies quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: deathtothepixies quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA So, frankly, it doesn't mean a whole lot if you say either The Big Bang started life or Let There Be Light started life. Science against religion in a nutshell. It matters more than your closed mind will ever comprehend Yeah well, the stories have different forms, but either way something outside space and time and beyond all known laws of physics caused the universe to come into existence. Both sound kinda spooky to me. only one of the above is a story, the other is a attempt to understand and gain knowledge, one of those two possibilities leads us forward, the other leaves us stagnating. However spooky it may be to some the more curious minds will carry on exploring It may please you to believe that, but they're both just stories. One is a story about how a theoretical "singularity" was the source of the Universe, the other is a story about how a theoretical "God" was the source of the Universe, neither of which explain anything at all about how the Universe actually came into being. The fact is, we don't know. Get used to it. K. Except one has a mountain of evidence and the other has none. Are you actually not keeping an open mind in the face of overwhelming evidence? Ken, we established yesterday that you no hable science. So how would you know? Go on ken, tell me. They told you while serving you your Kool Aid didn't they!

DomKen -> RE: The Erosion of Progress by Religions (6/2/2014 8:27:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen The Big Bang theory explains the entire universe. Allow me to repeat myself... quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata It may please you to believe that, but they're both just stories. One is a story about how a theoretical "singularity" was the source of the Universe, the other is a story about how a theoretical "God" was the source of the Universe, *neither of which explain anything at all about how the Universe actually came into being. The fact is, we don't know. Get used to it.* Present-day physics cannot describe what happened in the Big Bang. Quantum theory and the theory of relativity fail in this almost infinitely dense and hot primal state of the universe. Only an all-encompassing theory of quantum gravity which unifies these two fundamental pillars of physics could provide an insight into how the universe began. ~PhysOrg Get used to it. You misunderstand as always. The Big Bang theory explains everything since expansion began. The singularity before expansion began is beyond our physics as all singularities are. There is a huge amount of evidence in support of the theory and none in support of goddidit. I'm sorry that you are so stupid.

DomKen -> RE: The Erosion of Progress by Religions (6/2/2014 8:29:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: deathtothepixies quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: deathtothepixies quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA So, frankly, it doesn't mean a whole lot if you say either The Big Bang started life or Let There Be Light started life. Science against religion in a nutshell. It matters more than your closed mind will ever comprehend Yeah well, the stories have different forms, but either way something outside space and time and beyond all known laws of physics caused the universe to come into existence. Both sound kinda spooky to me. only one of the above is a story, the other is a attempt to understand and gain knowledge, one of those two possibilities leads us forward, the other leaves us stagnating. However spooky it may be to some the more curious minds will carry on exploring It may please you to believe that, but they're both just stories. One is a story about how a theoretical "singularity" was the source of the Universe, the other is a story about how a theoretical "God" was the source of the Universe, neither of which explain anything at all about how the Universe actually came into being. The fact is, we don't know. Get used to it. K. Except one has a mountain of evidence and the other has none. Are you actually not keeping an open mind in the face of overwhelming evidence? Ken, we established yesterday that you no hable science. So how would you know? Go on ken, tell me. They told you while serving you your Kool Aid didn't they! You're the moron who decided science didn't work because you didn't understand crystal growth right? Why are you still babbling?

HunterCA -> RE: The Erosion of Progress by Religions (6/2/2014 9:05:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: deathtothepixies quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: deathtothepixies quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA So, frankly, it doesn't mean a whole lot if you say either The Big Bang started life or Let There Be Light started life. Science against religion in a nutshell. It matters more than your closed mind will ever comprehend Yeah well, the stories have different forms, but either way something outside space and time and beyond all known laws of physics caused the universe to come into existence. Both sound kinda spooky to me. only one of the above is a story, the other is a attempt to understand and gain knowledge, one of those two possibilities leads us forward, the other leaves us stagnating. However spooky it may be to some the more curious minds will carry on exploring It may please you to believe that, but they're both just stories. One is a story about how a theoretical "singularity" was the source of the Universe, the other is a story about how a theoretical "God" was the source of the Universe, neither of which explain anything at all about how the Universe actually came into being. The fact is, we don't know. Get used to it. K. Except one has a mountain of evidence and the other has none. Are you actually not keeping an open mind in the face of overwhelming evidence? Ken, we established yesterday that you no hable science. So how would you know? Go on ken, tell me. They told you while serving you your Kool Aid didn't they! You're the moron who decided science didn't work because you didn't understand crystal growth right? Why are you still babbling? My god ken. Is that what you drew from the conversation? I apologize to you. I thought I was dealing with someone who had at least average intelligence. You're still a child. I promise I won't take any more shots at you.

Kirata -> RE: The Erosion of Progress by Religions (6/2/2014 9:10:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen The Big Bang theory explains everything since expansion began. Well no, it doesn't, and a single case is sufficient to disprove your made up as usual claim: Research over the past three decades has revolutionized the field of cosmology while supporting the standard cosmological model. However, the cosmological principle of Universal homogeneity and isotropy has always been in question, since structures as large as the survey size have always been found as the survey size has increased... Here we report the discovery of a structure at least six times larger than the Sloan Great Wall... This huge structure lies ten times farther away than the Sloan Great Wall, at a distance of approximately ten billion light-years. The size of the structure defined by these GRBs is about 2000-3000 Mpc, or more than six times the size of the largest known object (SGW) in the Universe. ~Source We have no idea how something that big could have formed in the time since the Big Bang. K.

DomKen -> RE: The Erosion of Progress by Religions (6/2/2014 10:04:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen The Big Bang theory explains everything since expansion began. Well no, it doesn't, and a single case is sufficient to disprove your made up as usual claim: Research over the past three decades has revolutionized the field of cosmology while supporting the standard cosmological model. However, the cosmological principle of Universal homogeneity and isotropy has always been in question, since structures as large as the survey size have always been found as the survey size has increased... Here we report the discovery of a structure at least six times larger than the Sloan Great Wall... This huge structure lies ten times farther away than the Sloan Great Wall, at a distance of approximately ten billion light-years. The size of the structure defined by these GRBs is about 2000-3000 Mpc, or more than six times the size of the largest known object (SGW) in the Universe. ~Source We have no idea how something that big could have formed in the time since the Big Bang. LOL You are truly a fucking moron. How hard is this for you to understand. The Big Bang theory is the theoretical framework that explains the expansion that occurred after the beginning of the universe. The entire structure of the universe is explained by it as well as we have explained it. No if you are done being stupid...

DomKen -> RE: The Erosion of Progress by Religions (6/2/2014 10:06:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA My god ken. Is that what you drew from the conversation? I apologize to you. I thought I was dealing with someone who had at least average intelligence. You're still a child. I promise I won't take any more shots at you. Look you are the one who declared all of science a failure because you don't understand how crystals grow. You might want to run along now.

Kirata -> RE: The Erosion of Progress by Religions (6/2/2014 10:29:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen The Big Bang theory is the theoretical framework that explains the expansion that occurred after the beginning of the universe. The entire structure of the universe is explained by it as well as we have explained it. "As well as we have explained it." Heh. Slippery little troll, aren't you. But actually, even that's not very well... The age of the universe predicted by the theory was so wildly wrong that the first thing they had to do was invent "inflation," and not just inflation but supraluminal inflation, in order to keep it on life-support. How could such a thing be? Nobody knows. How much inflation was there? Well, of course, like Baby Bear's porridge, it was "just right." Additionally, there are reasons to question the Doppler interpretation of observed red-shifts. There's a whole catalog of objects with anomalous red-shifts that nobody can explain. Moreover, observations do not show the galaxies to be moving away from a central point of origin. Instead, there are huge structures that could not have been formed by any known means in the time since the Big Bang, and "rivers" of galaxies moving in anomalous directions. Now I realize, of course, that religious folk like yourself are compelled by their faith to dismiss inconvenient facts, and inclined to become agitated and abusive when confronted with them. But that's just tough shit for you, bozo. Get used to it. K.

DomKen -> RE: The Erosion of Progress by Religions (6/2/2014 10:41:31 PM)
So since you are too stupid to understand it, you dismiss it. I see exactly what kind of idiot you are now. Thanks for posting it so clearly. BTW for anyone interested we do know the age of the universe within a very small window considering how far back we are talking about. An error bar of 37 million years on a measurement of 13.7 billion years doesn't strike me as that terrible. The sad thing is when real scientists encounter unexplained things they try to understand them not throw up their hands and shout goddidit. Our way will find answers. They may up turn what we think we know or simply refine what we already know but eventually we will figure things out. The other way? Not so much.

Kirata -> RE: The Erosion of Progress by Religions (6/2/2014 10:46:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen So since you are too stupid to understand it, you dismiss it. When you find yourself called out over and over again for making shit up, making up more won't help you. K.

HunterCA -> RE: The Erosion of Progress by Religions (6/3/2014 6:24:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA My god ken. Is that what you drew from the conversation? I apologize to you. I thought I was dealing with someone who had at least average intelligence. You're still a child. I promise I won't take any more shots at you. Look you are the one who declared all of science a failure because you don't understand how crystals grow. You might want to run along now. Oh ken you are so fascinating. A true insight into the liberal mind. Now I remember ken that you are a good boy of very limited intelligence and that I've promised you I won't take any more shots at you because it's just not nice to do that to a literal moron. But I did say good ken I'd help you keep things straight when they got all confusing for you. Remember, I put up science I was trained in and you couldn't even google it to understand. I gave you some very good examples of why worshipping climate change is not reasonable. And you understood for a very brief time and went away in shame and didn't bother the big people talking. Now you're all confused about that and I understand. But, still dear boy, you shouldn't bother the adults talking. On the brighter side dear boy, you are such a classic example of the thought process of a liberal that all the liberals here should hold you in esteem. I'm sure they do. quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA My god ken. Is that what you drew from the conversation? I apologize to you. I thought I was dealing with someone who had at least average intelligence. You're still a child. I promise I won't take any more shots at you. Look you are the one who declared all of science a failure because you don't understand how crystals grow. You might want to run along now. quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA My god ken. Is that what you drew from the conversation? I apologize to you. I thought I was dealing with someone who had at least average intelligence. You're still a child. I promise I won't take any more shots at you. Look you are the one who declared all of science a failure because you don't understand how crystals grow. You might want to run along now. Oh ken you are so fascinating. A true insight into the liberal mind. Now I remember ken that you are a good boy of very limited intelligence and that I've promised you I won't take any more shots at you because it's just not nice to do that to a literal moron. But I did say good ken I'd help you keep things straight when they got all confusing for you. Remember, I put up science I was trained in and you couldn't even google it to understand. I gave you some very good examples of why worshipping climate change is not reasonable. And you understood for a very brief time and went away in shame and didn't bother the big people talking. Now you're all confused about that and I understand. But, still dear boy, you shouldn't bother the adults talking. On the brighter side dear boy, you are such a classic example of the thought process of a liberal that all the liberals here should hold you in esteem. I'm sure they do. I'm sure thompsonx, tweakerbel and pixie will make you the poster boy of liberal closed minded kool aid drinking. Run along now and ask them ken. I think they'll come up with a ceremony for you too.

DomKen -> RE: The Erosion of Progress by Religions (6/3/2014 6:34:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA My god ken. Is that what you drew from the conversation? I apologize to you. I thought I was dealing with someone who had at least average intelligence. You're still a child. I promise I won't take any more shots at you. Look you are the one who declared all of science a failure because you don't understand how crystals grow. You might want to run along now. Oh ken you are so fascinating. A true insight into the liberal mind. Now I remember ken that you are a good boy of very limited intelligence and that I've promised you I won't take any more shots at you because it's just not nice to do that to a literal moron. But I did say good ken I'd help you keep things straight when they got all confusing for you. Remember, I put up science I was trained in and you couldn't even google it to understand. I gave you some very good examples of why worshipping climate change is not reasonable. And you understood for a very brief time and went away in shame and didn't bother the big people talking. Now you're all confused about that and I understand. But, still dear boy, you shouldn't bother the adults talking. On the brighter side dear boy, you are such a classic example of the thought process of a liberal that all the liberals here should hold you in esteem. I'm sure they do. Moron. You demanded that I recite the entire metabolic pathway from memory. You can't. I put up the basic one and you whined. If you want the entire thing you will have to go get a textbook, I'm sure you don't actually know it. Now about why you felt it was reasonable to dismiss all of science because you failed to understand crystal growth?

DomKen -> RE: The Erosion of Progress by Religions (6/3/2014 6:41:28 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen So since you are too stupid to understand it, you dismiss it. When you find yourself called out over and over again for making shit up, making up more won't help you. You are the one who dismissed something because you didn't understand it. quote: The age of the universe predicted by the theory was so wildly wrong that the first thing they had to do was invent "inflation," and not just inflation but supraluminal inflation, in order to keep it on life-support. How could such a thing be? Nobody knows. How much inflation was there? Well, of course, like Baby Bear's porridge, it was "just right." Do you know how much evidence there is for the age of the universe and inflation including the supraluminal inflation? Clearly more than you can understand? for instance http://www.cfa.harvard.edu/news/2014-05

HunterCA -> RE: The Erosion of Progress by Religions (6/3/2014 6:45:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA My god ken. Is that what you drew from the conversation? I apologize to you. I thought I was dealing with someone who had at least average intelligence. You're still a child. I promise I won't take any more shots at you. Look you are the one who declared all of science a failure because you don't understand how crystals grow. You might want to run along now. Oh ken you are so fascinating. A true insight into the liberal mind. Now I remember ken that you are a good boy of very limited intelligence and that I've promised you I won't take any more shots at you because it's just not nice to do that to a literal moron. But I did say good ken I'd help you keep things straight when they got all confusing for you. Remember, I put up science I was trained in and you couldn't even google it to understand. I gave you some very good examples of why worshipping climate change is not reasonable. And you understood for a very brief time and went away in shame and didn't bother the big people talking. Now you're all confused about that and I understand. But, still dear boy, you shouldn't bother the adults talking. On the brighter side dear boy, you are such a classic example of the thought process of a liberal that all the liberals here should hold you in esteem. I'm sure they do. Moron. You demanded that I recite the entire metabolic pathway from memory. You can't. I put up the basic one and you whined. If you want the entire thing you will have to go get a textbook, I'm sure you don't actually know it. Now about why you felt it was reasonable to dismiss all of science because you failed to understand crystal growth? Oh good job boy. Two days ago you were just flustered about somebody asking you about your real science understanding and you quit talking....err....blustering. Now after two days of really hard thinking you've come up with a good sounding bluster that all of your little friends will giggle with you about. It is so fascinating watching a liberal mind.

HunterCA -> RE: The Erosion of Progress by Religions (6/3/2014 7:12:14 AM)
We can see from the minds of ken and a few others here that actual blind faith by liberals is more detrimental to true science than religion has ever been. One example is when the liberals demand billions of science dollars go toward Gaia worship....errr.....climate science, that other pertinent science has to go without. We've heard discussion that many priests are on the leading edge of science. And then we have ken drinking from the cup of kool aid handed out while climate science chanted in a mantra in the background. Which is real weird because the first chant used to be "global warming" and that has a much better beat to the chant. But, alas, the world had to give that up when it was discovered the globe wasn't warming.

DomKen -> RE: The Erosion of Progress by Religions (6/3/2014 7:57:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA My god ken. Is that what you drew from the conversation? I apologize to you. I thought I was dealing with someone who had at least average intelligence. You're still a child. I promise I won't take any more shots at you. Look you are the one who declared all of science a failure because you don't understand how crystals grow. You might want to run along now. Oh ken you are so fascinating. A true insight into the liberal mind. Now I remember ken that you are a good boy of very limited intelligence and that I've promised you I won't take any more shots at you because it's just not nice to do that to a literal moron. But I did say good ken I'd help you keep things straight when they got all confusing for you. Remember, I put up science I was trained in and you couldn't even google it to understand. I gave you some very good examples of why worshipping climate change is not reasonable. And you understood for a very brief time and went away in shame and didn't bother the big people talking. Now you're all confused about that and I understand. But, still dear boy, you shouldn't bother the adults talking. On the brighter side dear boy, you are such a classic example of the thought process of a liberal that all the liberals here should hold you in esteem. I'm sure they do. Moron. You demanded that I recite the entire metabolic pathway from memory. You can't. I put up the basic one and you whined. If you want the entire thing you will have to go get a textbook, I'm sure you don't actually know it. Now about why you felt it was reasonable to dismiss all of science because you failed to understand crystal growth? Oh good job boy. Two days ago you were just flustered about somebody asking you about your real science understanding and you quit talking....err....blustering. Now after two days of really hard thinking you've come up with a good sounding bluster that all of your little friends will giggle with you about. It is so fascinating watching a liberal mind. I didn't quit anything you fucking idiot. What the fuck are you going on about?

Page: << < prev 7 8 [9] 10 11 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.078125