SLOWSTORM

I would like to point out that Elmo goes emo every Christmas. As soon as they hit that first No-L. *Points to thread originator's avatar* Hmm. An Emo Elmo for Christmas. Might replace the old tickling ones if you did it right. I can see the add now. Elmo, in full black sits in a corner, brooding...

*scratches head* #-o what in the world are you babbling about? Thanks for pointing out to me how an effective forum works...glad to see you are engaged Mr 200 posts. Hey bright one, how about you actually read through the thread, I have and I have made multiple replies to this and the other thread in this forum about the Flood, how about you actually read them? Glad you figured out the subject is about the bible, I replied in length several times about the fallacy of the bible...not just made a flame remark or two and run off....enter the conversation/debate or shut it. Hmm... :-k Good point. I was a bit too flamey. My apologies. That "I am great, all men come sit at my feet while expound" post was just flame bait, though. =P~ I should have resisted the urge. :oops: I have been keeping up with this thread; I just don't post often. A theory is not yet proven using the scientific method. The Big Bang CAN not be proven using the Scientific Method, while Macroevolution HAS not been proven using the Scientific Method. They are both cut off at the first step, as neither has been observed.

Instead of "expounding" upon a "view," the correct actions in a forum would be reading the thread and making a contribution (preferrably useful) to the discussion at hand. Since the discussion at hand is "The Bible," use your theoretically uber-elite intellect to figure out what people expect you to post. :P On topic, though, doesn't a volcano spew more carbon in a day than all our factories do in one hour? Carbon dating only works if one is a Uniformitarianist.

Okay, letÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢s talk about the facts. That molecular hydrogen has been found to be distributed through space is a fact. That molecular hydrogen can account for the missing mass in the bullet cluster (and other galaxies) is also a fact. You could even call it Dark Matter, though it would actually be simply virtually transparent matter. Gravitational Lensing only requires gravity; gravity is a result of mass; molecular hydrogen has mass. Therefore molecular hydrogen could cause Gravitational Lensing just as easily as mystical unseen matter. Why not believe the one that actually has scientific proof? You have faith in an unseen particle, but will not open your eyes to scientific proof. :shame: Thanks for proving my point, an expert in electron spectroscopy doesn't make you an expert in astrophysics; much in the same way an aeronautical engineer isn't an expert on civil engineering. HmmÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ãâæ look up about 3 linesÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ãâæ There you go. What part of ÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ãâ¦Ã¢â¬ÅPh.D. in Physics from Laval U.ÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬ÃâÃ

I didn't take into account the data from the Bullet Cluster, because it was hardly relevant to the discussion at hand. However, I will attach an explanation at the end of this post. I referenced Paul Marmet on red shift due to Hydrogen molecules, not on dark matter. There are plenty more references I can put up, but the simple fact has been proven using the scientific method. Hydrogen molecules bend light red. Simple as that. As to his credentials, Check them out. Paul Marmet (1932-2005) B. Sc., Ph. D. (Physics), Laval University O. C. (Order of Canada) F. R. S. C. Author of more than 100 papers in the field of Electron Spectroscopy. Professor, Physics, Laval University, QuÃÆÃâÃâébec, Canada: 1962-83, Senior Research Officer, National Research Council of Canada: 1983-90, Visiting, Adjunct, Professor, University of Ottawa, 1990-99. He was the one of the most qualified people in Canada to write on this topic, a 21-year Professor in Physics who received the Order of Canada. If he doesn't understand General Relativity, who does? you? :lol: (according to this link you do not believe it, as it says "The laws of physics must be the same for all observers," and you believe in subjectivity) I submit that both my quoted authors were extensively studied in Astrophysics and Astronomy. Try reading the references from their papers. After all, the proof of the pudding is under the crust. You are incorrect. :shame: Particles go faster than light past the event horizon of a Black Hole. That aside, the Inflation Theory states that the border of the universe expanded at that rate. That would include all matter, simply in the form of particles. Allow me to explain some basic Physics. Matter is made up of molecules, which are made up of atoms, which are made up of Neutrons, Electrons, and Protons. Neutrons and Protons are made up of Quarks, while Electrons belong to a family called Leptons which also includes muons and taus. Thus Quarks and Leptons are the particles which make up matter. Quarks, Electrons, and Gluons are what comprised ÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ãâ¦Ã¢â¬ÅSpaceÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬ÃâÃ

If you mean my answer to the First Law Problem, the answer is that, short of a total rewrite of the First Law, there is no viable answer. BUT if the First Law were rewritten, it might read (in simple terms, not the equations) "The balance of matter and energy in the universe" (perhaps any system) "shall remain constant over time" Hmm. I need to work on this... :-k Edit: I think you did a great job, Ambassadar. Good narrowing-down skills :wink:

Care to offer ten examples? Should be easy if there's a "ton" Again, care to offer some proof? Both Evolutionists and Creationists claim that there had to have been two people of opposite gender in order to reproduce. Both Adam and Eve are perfectly normal names. Your "obviously" seems to be less obvious than you claim.

They aren't, the big bang is what happens just after creation and we can infer about it through things like Microwave background radiation and galactic red shifting; how do you propose we find out what happened before the big bang? Basically science follows the following quote: "Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent." - Ludwig Wittgenstein It always amazes me how people can keep old ideas alive, which have been long proven wrong. Most real scientists (and by that, I mean ones who actually know what they believe, and why) dropped the big bang theory long ago. You may ask why, and voila, the light shall be shed. First, Galactic Red Shift. We say they universe is enlarging, and we are moving away from a core. This has been reduced to mere conjucture, however, due to Molecular Hydrogen in Space. So we're unable to prove we are moving away from distant stars. :shock: As for Background Radiation, whose model does it fit, anyway? When the new data from Boomarang came in, these people kept their model, with yet more proof. However, Big Bang physicists had to develop the Inflationary Period Theory. That's all good, as theories change (that's why they're called theories, they haven't been proven using the Scientific Method) However, there are several huge problems with this model. The huge one is fairly obvious. What happens when anything goes faster than the speed of light? Yup, it goes backward in time. This easily solves the Second Law problem in relation to a winding-down of the universe, but also introduces an even larger problem. Allow me to explain. We'll follow the life of one particle of premordial material under this model. Time zero - leaves from absolute center of the universe, at immense speed. Time however long it takes to get a body length out of the mass of premordial material(infinitesimally past zero) - breaks speed of light barrier, begins to go backward in time. Due to how much faster than light the particle is travelling, we are now back at time zero, and MOVING THROUGH SPACE. At the speed theorized, the particle will never slow down, due to a lack of other particles with which to collide. Logic dictates that two particles fired in a straight line at the same speed from the same point can never collide without outside interference (collision with other particles). Possible answer - the UMB (Universal Microwave Background) existed before anything else, and always has. Ignoring problems in people's minds regarding infinite life particles, the UMB might eventually slow down the particles, BEFORE THEY WERE EMITTED. That brings us to Time immeasurably before zero - begin our reference of time. One particle is slowed enough by the UMB to collide with another, and soon they're all coming together. Masses attract, planets form, people start whining, and here we are. Okay, where is the big problem? We solved the SECOND law problem by ignoring the FIRST law problem. Every particle of that matter came into being where and when it had not been before. This makes the closed system versus open system universe debate a moot point. Closed or open system, those particles simply came into being at that time and point in space. This problem is still lacking a logical answer. There are a few more problems with this theory, as well, which may be solved in time, but until then, if this theory is correct, and the laws of thermodynamics are wrong, the origin of the universe has not happened yet. #-o So, how do we find out about what happened before the Big Bang? If this theory is correct, you're living it right now. :shock:

Which means that if people vote to ban gay marriage, they are no more forcing their views of morality on people than you do when you support different laws. Wham! Gotcha! :wink: Satenza, you walked into that one with your mouth open! Good logic, Locke.

I used to go once a year, with my mates from college. It was great fun. There was one fellow who tried to act like John Wayne by just walking up the field and shooting everything that moved. He walked into a trap zone, and about 4 guys pegged him at close range. Painful, but fun! My favorite memory was when I and some close mates rushed up the side of the field, and overran half their team, shooting them from behind. Good times. :lol:

Dude, It's all about the hair! \

Well, whether we should, or shouldn't, someone is going to have to deal with him eventually. He and Kim Jong Im have been spitting in the face of the world for quite some time now. You can only spit in the face of a giant for so long before it rolls over, and squashes you like a bug. I say better now than when Hillary is President. (If she makes the Democratic nomination, she will be.)

My argument is essentially that there is a difference between reality, and the model of reality that we create in our minds and interact with. Because of this important gap (wherein things like societal pressures, faith, drugs, etc... which define our reality, come in) there is no single universal reality. We all live in vastly different worlds, defined by an infinite multitude of factors. The existence of god depends on only one thing, faith. And because some people believe and some don't, god exists, and he doesn't exist. Aaand somebody's been smoking too much dope lately. D'oh!......P Seriously, though, the only people I've ever heard espouse that idea are those who also smoke dope. Sit down and compare notes with someone who hasn't sometime. We all live in the same reality, though some have differing perceptions of it.

hmm... In the middle of a nasty mid-life crisis, right about when I realise that this spare tire I've been wearing around my waist won't keep the Viper running. And probably having lots of kids, and married, etc. Yup, good times. :D

I think pault is trying a little reverse psychology? Convince someone it's "good", and then it won't be as much fun to be "bad?"

Carlin, the only person Satenza called narow-minded on this thread is you. Many other people claiming to be Christian have posted in this thread. Perhaps you need to backpedal, and attempt to see what he and many others have said. When someone is described as narrow-minded, that means someone considers that person incapable of seeing the world through someone else's eyes. What do I mean by this? Lean back, and consider someone you know a lot about. Take for example your best friend on Earth. You know how that person acts in many given situations, and to some extent, even how they think. From that, you can consider how they will react if, say, their dog got run over. Would your friend cry, or stoically accept it as the reality of life? If you can successfully complete this exercise in everyday events with someone you know, then try to expand it to someone you do not. What DO you know about this person? For example, an evolutionist might believe that the universe is billions of years old. Knowing that, you can build an argument which will prove to that person why you believe the universe is not billions of years old. He, in turn, if open-minded, will probably come back with an arguement as to why he believes God did not create the universe, but will listen to your arguments. This is the manner in which people are convinced, and the way a respectful, considerate Christian should approach conversation.

However, if you believe Stephen Hawking, you can see out, in a manner of speaking. Allow me to explain. What we currently see as light from the stars actually was emitted many years ago. Thus we are not actually looking at the light currently being emitted from the stars. Even the sun's light takes about 8 minutes to reach Earth. That said, the light being drawn into a black hole would be visible from atop the singularity within the event horizon. Due the the time warping (See #1) it might even be possible to see all light which had entered the black hole, simultaneously. Thus, you could see all time that had ever occurred since the beginning of the black hole, up to the current time outside the black hole. Nifty, huh? Too bad nothing that entered an event horizon could ever come out, unless capable of faster-than-light travel itself. (See #2) #1 According the the Theory of General Relativity (Chapter 13), light is bent by gravity. The stronger the gravity, the harder the bend. Now, light before bending is travelling at 186000 miles/sec, approximately. As light bends, it experiences a change in acceleration, producing a change in velocity (dv/dt). This makes the wavelengths of the light shorter, storing more energy. At some point, there is enough energy (E) stored that the accelerated light particle can overcome it's mass (m), and travel faster than the recorded speed of light. © The particle then travels faster than the light particles in the surrounding galaxy, seemingly moving backward in time. This is hypothesized to actually become a visible phonomenon to us at the event horizon. We do not see visible light exiting the black hole, because as the light wavelengths are compressed, they turn to X-rays, then sometimes to gamma rays. If light slingshots around the event horizon, and never gains enough energy to warp time, it exits at this super-charged state, largely invisible to the human eye. #2 The simple answer is that a particle must reach escape velocity to escape from the pull of a gravitic body. The escape velocity at the event horizon is the speed of light. Now imagine that instead of just a particle, a camera was inserted into the black hole. Every particle in that camera would have to have enough latent energy to move itself faster than the speed of light, away from the singularity. Even if this were possible, the camera would, if the particles remained in the same order, exit the event horizon before it was inserted, thereby adding excess matter to the universe. Not good. Which brings us to the age-old question: If a tree falls in a black hole, will it make a sound?

hmm... :lol: Have you tried NOT insulting any countries lately? Because insulting the leader of one of the most powerful nations in the world is all you've done on this thread so far, as far as I've seen. If you were a world leader, that could be easily seen as not too intelligent. :lol: Remember, if a fool calls you a fool out of love, what evil fate! If a fool calls you a fool out of hate, you're doing great!

Which offence and censorship were you talking about? I assumed you were talking about the little excerpt to sephiroth. I didn't mean you were attacking anyone personally.

You should check out Arimaa. It has a great tournament play feature. It might make the organisation easier, as you can also check on the games being played.

Yes, but Ad hominem is.

Satenza, I read your links. Imagine my surprise when I found that I know one of the quoted people! Mrs. DeSouza is the mother of one of my friends! I remember they were pretty mad about that election. I was in one of those precincts where odd things happened, too. It seems like that sort of thing has been happening for as long as I can remember, though. I remember voting absentee on that election, because I knew it was going to be rough. My sister ended up waiting in line for about 4 hours because she didn't get her absentee ballot. They were checking credentials very rigidly on the way in, and there was required to be a democratic and a republican checker(or whatever they call them) at the door of every precinct. I talked to quite a few people who the checkers sent away for not having their registration card. This sort of thing has been happening as far back as I can remember in our area, though. I guess by and large, we're just used to it. In our precinct, though, it didn't seem like African-Americans were targeted; if anything, they were given better treatment. I remember several elderly African-Americans who were let to the front of the line, because of the 2-5 hour wait. Perhaps this is why I find your claims of disenfranchisement hard to swallow. I realise now that, while these seeming disenfranchisements were normal at our precinct, others might not have been accustomed to them. This is probably the cause of the mass complaints. I, for one, agree with the complaints. We desparately need voting reform, and I was/am quite angry along with my friend that his mother was not get allowed to vote. This is not cause to hate President Bush, though, or to disparage his speech. This is cause to start election reform in Florida, so that everyone will be able to vote, and be able to vote more easily and comfortably. Elect me for Governor :thumbsup: :lol: Just kidding. I have the political backfire of a bean-filled dragon :oops: About that political partisianship, though, sephiroth, wow :shock: Somebody needs to settle down. Nobody's automatically evil for their choice of political parties. Not to mention that I've heard almost as many Republicans as Democrats saying all the things you've just quoted. So, :-$ calm down, count to ten, and re-post in such a manner that does not offend the current majority of the United States.

I doubt that I imagined the implication. You stated two facts, that Gadsden County had a higher spoil rate(I assume you meant higher that average), and that Gadsden County contained more black people(again, I assumed you meant more than average, please correct me if I'm wrong). We also know that Gadsden County has a higher than average population of rednecks, but I'm sure that did not come up. Gadsden county has a higher than average rate of people living on welfare, but that did not come up, either. You were definitely trying to say that African Americans were responsible for the hanging chads, mispunched cards, etc. About the lack of extra cards given. If you know of one poll worker who withheld a card from ANYONE when they were asked for one, you need to report that worker to the police. That is a federal crime. Please forgive me if I question deeply the information that African American poll workers (Check it out, they were) refused voting privileges to other African Americans. About the 53%, did the USCRC count names? No, they did not. They cannot, due to federal law. So how did they know how many were African American? :-k Big problem. Read your site. Interesting read. Very interesting. :-k

The recount was refused and Bush and his team saw to it that the recount never officialy happened for Florida. Thats why the media did it. They found Gore won by 662 votes, and Gore would have won Florida and taken the 25 electorial points, therefore becoming the president. As for the disenfranchised americans, votes with small marks on them and punching your ballot card twice, when it clearly shows your choice where rejected. Gadsden County in Florida which contains the higher percentage of black people had a higher spoil rate. Many voters wrote in 'Al Gore' - these votes where rejected as 'Al' counted as a stray mark.The recount for Florida was stopped by Harris who was a Bush supporter, and she did everything she could to stop it. They didn't need to go in the first place, Tony Blair could face a criminal war charge. Bush has entered Iraq - overthrown the only power that was keeping the Sunni's Shiites and Kurds from killing one another. Yes he was doing this in an illegal way, but is seemed Bush didn't even know of the situation in Iraq. Now the only solution is dividing the country into three sectors. However each group wants the prosperous oil region. They will fight and fight for it. I said it once, and will say it again. The media is NOT the legitimate power which appoints government officials. Also, the "media" of which you speak only recounted votes in heavily Democratic communities, since these were the communities where they ASSUMED people were being "disenfranchised." In reality, a recount of ALL the communities has not been done. About your "disenfranchisement" of African Americans, you make a poor case, and I, for one, resent your implication. African Americans can follow instructions as well as anyone else, and just because a particular group lives in a region does not give anyone cause to blame all problems on that group. You are presupposing that the average African American is incapable of punching a hole in paper with instructions right in front of him, while anyone else is capable of this feat. This is racism, pure and simple, and any African American should resent your implication. About your take on the war. This all seems to be your opinion except for one thing. Again it is just an implication, as you did not come out and say he is a war criminal, but Tony Blair is just as susceptible to criminal war charges as Winston Churchill was. He is the Prime Minister of England, not just a wild general doing his own thing. Any war criminal charges aimed at him would be by unlearned or greedy people, mark my words. They would be unlearned in the way of war, or they would be greedy of his governatory power. Tony Blair did what needed to be done, and did it well. Some dislike him for that. Barihawk, and sharef10, I would also like to add a +3 to your statements. We desparately need to research fuels like ethanol and natural gas. Kudos to Brazil for their fine initiative, I say. They got their whole country to switch to a cleaner, replenishable fuel. It's cheaper, too :wink:

Aaand yet another "I hate Bush because eveyone says to." How original. Of course, enough people voted for him to become president... twice... He's illegitimate because YOU say so? He cares more about his country than you ever will, as is proved by the fact that you call the product of the majority vote in this country "Illegitimate." No, Gore got the most votes overall in the 2000 election. American runs on democracy, therefore seeing as Gore won the most votes it's reasonable to assume he should have been president. For this, thousands of people threw eggs at Bush on his way to the whitehouse. Leading to the traditional drive to be sped up just to get away. The loss in Florida was down to many things such as media representation (by his cousin who was running the cover for fox) and the disenfranchising of thousands of african americans who when they complained to the senate, none of the senators would sign the protest. Since he didn't win the democratic election, as proved in a recount after the initial election infront of the sentate, it's fairly obvious to say he started his poltical reign as an illegitimate power, and is ending his reign with a war against Iraq, tearing the country into civil war as three groups fight over the land where the oil is. Kudos to Bush. Diagram From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Sta ... da_results Actually, America does not run on democracy. It is "A Democracy in a Republic," as you may recall from the Preamble to the Constitution. Overall vote is not the set guideline for election. Most electoral votes is. The people who threw eggs were disrespecting our nation, as the President of the United States is a symbol of our nation, just as much as our flag and the Declaration of Independence. He had better media coverage. You mean the heavily Democratic influenced CNN got beaten by the heavily Republican Fox? :shock: Is there supposed to be something wrong with that? The supposed "disenfranchising of thousands of African Americans" was just a bunch of hooey. Both Republican and Democrat members of the Senate realized this. Why can't you? President Bush was granted legitimacy by the Supreme court, and by the American people. It seems that every "recount" came up with a different answer after the fact, but the fact remains that the proper LEGITIMATE channels (not the New York Times, where your bar graph came from) allowed him to be sworn in as our 43rd president. These are all matters of history. If you were to ask my opinion on the war, though, I would have to tell you that war with Iraq has been coming for a while, and I think it takes a very honorable man , and a legion of other honorable men to keep going when they need to keep going.