Does God need to prove He exists?
in [Physics]
|
From: rbwinn on 7 Jul 2008 08:01 On Jul 6, 8:14�pm, Enkidu <fox_rgf...(a)trashmail.net> wrote: > rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in news:6ccd4537-241a-4536-af04- > b31a6faec...(a)x35g2000hsb.googlegroups.com: > > > Well, why don't you go ahead and believe what you want to believe, and > > I will believe what I believe. �Does that seem unfair to you? > > Robert B. Winn > > If you were honest, you'd leave alt.atheism. But you won't. > > -- > Enkidu AA#2165 � > EAC Chaplain and ordained minister, > ULC, Modesto, CA > > It has been said that man is a rational animal. All my life I have been > searching for evidence which could support this. > � � � � � -- Bertrand Russell Just take sci.physics.relativity out of the header, and you will never see me again. Robert B. Winn
From: rbwinn on 7 Jul 2008 08:02 On Jul 6, 8:16 pm, hhyaps...(a)gmail.com wrote: > On Jul 5, 8:30 pm, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jul 4, 7:29�pm, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > > On Fri, 4 Jul 2008 19:26:01 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote > > > in alt.atheism: > > > > >On Jul 4, 8:42?am, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > >> On Fri, 4 Jul 2008 08:28:00 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote > > > >> in alt.atheism: > > > > >> >On Jul 4, 3:03?am, The Natural Philosopher <a...(a)b.c> wrote: > > > >> >> Alex W. wrote: > > > >> >> > "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message > > > >> >> >news:9fadb87c-6364-49eb-9ca6-c8fd555f6cd3(a)a70g2000hsh.googlegroups.com... > > > >> >> > On Jul 3, 6:05?am, "Alex W." <ing...(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > > > >> >> >> "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message > > > > >> >> >>news:f807e4d0-b40f-4cb8-bb4c-12f00021898d(a)34g2000hsh.googlegroups.com... > > > > >> >> >> Well, the scriptures say that the wicked would be more miserable in > > > >> >> >> the presence of God than with the devils in hell. > > > > >> >> >> =========== > > > > >> >> >> In other words, since we are all sinful by definition, the smart choice is > > > >> >> >> to aim for hell in the first place. ?Nice morality .... > > > > >> >> > No, the smart choice is to repent of sins. ?However, atheists claim > > > >> >> > that nothing they do is sin, so they are not going to repent. > > > > >> >> Which to me indicates you have no idea what sin, or repentance, is. > > > > >> >> > ========== > > > > >> >> > Sin is a social construct. ?It exists irrespective of the god(s) worshipped > > > >> >> > ... or not, as the case may be.- Hide quoted text - > > > > >> >> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > >> >> - Show quoted text - > > > > >> >Sin is wilful disobedience of God. ?Repentance is confessing and > > > >> >forsaking sin. > > > > >> As far as we can tell, God is a human invention. God never told us to do > > > >> anything. Sin, therefore, is also a human invention.- Hide quoted text - > > > > >> - Show quoted text - > > > > >So once an atheist enters into sin, there is no turning back from > > > >it. � I guess that was why Josef Stalin killed 12 million people. > > > > God is still a human invention. Clearly the fear of God does not stop > > > you from lying in almost every post. > > > > I will not respond to you for a while, you have become far too nasty in > > > your discussions here.- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > I think that is wonderful. > > Robert B. Winn > > Yes, Free Lunch may be feeling just as tired as I do. > You don't have a sane mind and cannot argue logically and reasonably.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - I am not arguing, hyhaps. As far as I am concerned, you are free to believe whatever you want to believe. Robert B. Winn
From: rbwinn on 7 Jul 2008 08:08 On Jul 6, 8:21 pm, "Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)" <alwh...(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote: > On Jul 6, 11:54 am, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jul 5, 2:31 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > > > > rbwinn wrote: > > > > On Jul 5, 2:42 am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > > > >> rbwinn wrote: > > > >>> On Jul 4, 3:22 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > > > >>>> rbwinn wrote: > > > >>>>> On Jul 3, 11:28 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > > > >>>>>> rbwinn wrote: > > > >>>>>>> On Jul 3, 1:55 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > > > >>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: > > > >>>>>>>>> On Jul 2, 8:35 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > > > >>>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: > > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 2, 2:03 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 1, 11:59 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 1, 1:04 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 1, 12:20 am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 30, 1:19�pm, Enkidu <fox_rgf...(a)trashmail.net> wrote: > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in news:22183802-cf28-4305-af11- > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 7d254b106...(a)d1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com: > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You are the one being deliberately obtuse. � The existence of the > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tunnel validates many other things said in the Bible about the > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Assyrian invasion of Judea. > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "The Hobbit" talks of ale, axes, and forests which we know exist. Does that > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> validate Orcs, Elves, Dwarves, trolls, magic rings, walking trees and Tom > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bombadil? > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enkidu AA#2165 � > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> EAC Chaplain and ordained minister, > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ULC, Modesto, CA > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Doesn't anything socialistic make you want to throw up? Like great public > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> schools, or health insurance for all? > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> � � �-Kurt Vonnegut > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why don't you decide for yourself?  You were the one who thought of > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it. > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why don't you try to defend your assertions? How can we know we can > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trust what you say?- Hide quoted text - > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It does not matter to me what you trust.  You decide what you are > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> going to trust. > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If you can't provide any sensible reason to believe your fanciful > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> claims, then I guess we're done.- Hide quoted text - > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Fanciful claims?  I said that the Jews dug a tunnel as a conduit for > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> water between Gihon spring and the pool of Siloam.  Why do you think > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that is a fanciful claim? > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is not a fanciful claim. You and I both know that I'm referring to > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> your supernatural claims. Those would be the ones you're completely > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> unable to support with any evidence.- Hide quoted text - > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> I have not made any claims to atheists except that the Jews dug a > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> tunnel to be used as a conduit for water, and the Assyrians built a > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> ramp out of dirt to get over the city wall at Lachish.  To an atheist > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> these might seem like supernatural claims because there were actually > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> people working to accomplish both of these tasks instead of just > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> giving orders, criticism, etc., the way atheists do.  Since atheists > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> have been unable to visualize these two events, there is no reason to > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> proceed on to anything more complex. > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Then we're in total agreement. A tunnel was dug a long time ago and it > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> got mentioned in some ancient writings, providing absolutlely no support > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> for any supernatural claims. > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> So why all the posts?- Hide quoted text - > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - > > > >>>>>>>>>>> You do not seem to be visualizing it very well.  The Assyrians came > > > >>>>>>>>>>> into Judea with an army of hundreds of thousands on their way home > > > >>>>>>>>>>> after taking a big chunk of Egypt.  Judea was a little dot in the > > > >>>>>>>>>>> middle of the Assyrian kingdom, which extended from the Caspian Sea to > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Egypt.  So why was there still a Kingdom of Judea when King > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Sennacherib got back to his capitol city of Ninevah?  Sennacherib > > > >>>>>>>>>>> himself says there was on the column he had erected in Ninevah. > > > >>>>>>>>>> Or so the story goes.- Hide quoted text - > > > >>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - > > > >>>>>>>>> What do you mean so the story goes?  The column erected by Sennacherib > > > >>>>>>>>> in Ninevah is still there today.  He plainly says on it that Hezekiah > > > >>>>>>>>> paid tribute to him, and he was such a nice guy that he just went home > > > >>>>>>>>> after he got the money. > > > >>>>>>>> Great. Sennacherib went home and left Jerusalem unsacked. That doesn't > > > >>>>>>>> mean that it was due to the angel of the lord slaughtering 185,000 > > > >>>>>>>> troops in a night. > > > >>>>>>>> Why do you favour the oddly magical Biblical account over Sennacherib's?- Hide quoted text - > > > >>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - > > > >>>>>>> 186,000 troops.  Chaldean historians of the same time said that the > > > >>>>>>> Assyrian army died of plague while besieging Jerusalem, and > > > >>>>>>> Sennacherib fled in great fear back to his own city of Ninevah. > > > >>>>>>> Sennacherib made no mention of losing his army on the column he > > > >>>>>>> erected.  He seems to have pretended to his fellow Assyrians that the > > > >>>>>>> army was still somewhere doing something, but his own two sons > > > >>>>>>> murdered him, probably because they were upset about him losing the > > > >>>>>>> army. > > > >>>>>> So where are God's footprints in all of this? Arguments for both sides > > > >>>>>> can be made without invoking magic.- Hide quoted text - > > > >>>>>> - Show quoted text - > > > >>>>> Well, from a military standpoint, the Jews had no chance whatsoever > > > >>>>> against the Assyrians.  But when it was all over, it was the Assyrian > > > >>>>> king who lost everything, including his own life.  So I would say, let > > > >>>>> atheists of today explain it their way, and let Christians explain it > > > >>>>> their way.  The Jews explained it by saying that an angel of the Lord > > > >>>>> killed 186,000 Assyrian troops.  That is a matter of record.  It is > > > >>>>> recorded in three different books of the Old Testament. > > > >>>> The Old Testament isn't particularly compelling evidence, it suggests > > > >>>> that there was a global flood and special creation over the course of > > > >>>> six days. It might be a "matter of record" on some things, but it is > > > >>>> definitely not on others.- Hide quoted text - > > > >>>> - Show quoted text - > > > >>> Well, I am sure the Jews feel bad that you do not like the Old > > > >>> Testament, but it says what it says.  It says in three different > > > >>> books that an angel of the Lord went through the camp of the Assyrians > > > >>> and slew 186,000 soldiers. > > > >> It also says that the universe was created a handful of thousands of > > > >> years ago. The Bible is not reliable.- Hide quoted text - > > > > >> - Show quoted text - > > > > > Well, as I said before, you atheists believe in relativity of time > > > > unless you are talking about the earth.  Then you insist on absolute > > > > time. > > > > Instead you make some ridiculous claims about the relativity of time > > > completely without evidential basis, or... any rational support at all. > > > The Earth is older than 6500 thousand years old. Much older. I'll go > > > with the many independent lines of verification on that one.- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > Well, that is fine, but why is relativity of time something that > > exists except when talking about the earth? > > Robert B. Winn > > It's not.  All time is relative to a frame of reference, but the > effects of time dilation are very well understood and calculable. > Meaning we can correct for dilation due to the earth's movement, if we > wanted partial second accuracy.  To have significant effects on time, > like you are inferring, objects need to move at speeds close to the > speed of light relative to each other. > > Al- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - The planet Mercury was the first thing used as a proof of the theorry of relativity, and its velocity is 30 miles per second. At the velocity of the planet Mercury, my own equations agree with the Lorentz equations to about six decimal places.The Galilean transformation equations with absolute time agree to just one or two. Where the Lorentz equations fall apart is their need for a distance contraction, which then causes the moving object to disappear at the speed of light. Robert B. Winn
From: rbwinn on 7 Jul 2008 08:32 On Jul 6, 9:15 pm, "Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)" <alwh...(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote: > On Jul 7, 1:13 pm, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jul 6, 7:18 pm, "Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)" > > > <alwh...(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote: > > > On Jul 5, 1:07 am, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > > > > > On Jul 3, 11:58 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > > > > > > rbwinn wrote: > > > > > > On Jul 3, 2:35 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > > > > > >> rbwinn wrote: > > > > > >>> On Jul 2, 6:11 pm, "Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)" > > > > > >>> <alwh...(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote: > > > > > >>>> On Jul 3, 9:59 am, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > > > > > >>>>> On Jul 2, 1:28 pm, "Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)" > > > > > >>>>> <alwh...(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote: > > > > > >>>>>> On Jul 2, 11:30 pm, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > > > > > >>>>>>> On Jul 2, 12:13 am, "Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)" > > > > > >>>>>>> <alwh...(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote: > > > > > >>>>>>>> On Jul 2, 3:34 pm, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > > > > > >>>>>>>>> On Jul 1, 6:43 pm, "Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)" > > > > > >>>>>>>>> <alwh...(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote: > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> On Jul 2, 11:27 am, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 1, 1:14 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 1, 12:34 am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 30, 12:25 am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 28, 6:06�pm, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 28 Jun 2008 17:26:59 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote in alt.atheism: > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 28, 12:50?pm, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 28 Jun 2008 12:11:54 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote in alt.atheism: > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 28, 7:17?am, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 28 Jun 2008 07:05:42 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote in alt.atheism: > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 28, 12:26?am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 27, 6:42?pm, BuddyThunder <nos....(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jack wrote: > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am upset by *people* who > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> believe that the Bible is anything more than mythology and try ?to impose > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> beliefs on me ?using the Bible as evidence. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How can someone impose a belief on you? ?Just believe whatever you want to > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> believe. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The wrong part is when people attempt to use the myth to formulate > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> public policy or indoctrinate children or inform foreign policy. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Well, actually they use fables. ?The apostles Paul said they would be > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> turned to fables in the last days. ?A fable is a story about animals > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> like the story about monkeys turning into humans. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Wow, you're ignorant about evolution. Colour me surprised. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In what way am I ignorant about evolution? > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Monkeys and humans do share a common ancestor. Your denial of the fact > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> does not change that fact.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Charles Darwin was not my ancestor. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So? > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Evolution happens. Learn to deal with reality.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I never have believed in evolution. �I think it is a fable, just as > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Paul said it was. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Paul knew nothing about it. You mock the Bible with such silly > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> interpretations of it.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I just believe what Paul said.  You seem a little upset that I do not > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> believe your fable. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can you please identify what he said about it? Please?- Hide quoted text - > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2 Tim 4:3  For the time will come when they will not endure sound > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> teachers, having itching ears; > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4  And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> turned unto fables. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I can't see any mention of evolution. I can't even see any description > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> of the theory, or even a theistic strawman description. Can you help me > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> out? You made a claim that seems difficult to substantiate.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Well, I think we are getting into subject matter that is too difficult > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> for you.  Maybe we should go back to Hezekiah's tunnel. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not struggling, maybe you could point out the verse where evolution > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> is singled out. Maybe he's talking about the germ theory of disease. I'm > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> sure you believe that demons are behind illness, rather than pathogens.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Well, Paul said that in the last days, men would be turned to fables > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> to explain things.  So today we see science explaining most things by > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> fables. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Robert B. Winn > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Please explain how "evolution" counts as a fable?  And we'll show you > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> how you understanding of evolution is horribly wrong. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Al- Hide quoted text - > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Well, as Paul pointed out, in the last days men would be unable to > > > > > >>>>>>>>> endure sound doctrine and would devise a fable to try to explain the > > > > > >>>>>>>>> existence of mankind without a God. > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Robert B. Winn > > > > > >>>>>>>> That doesn't relate evolution to a fable. > > > > > >>>>>>>> Do you ever answer a question that isn't just from your own > > > > > >>>>>>>> imagination? > > > > > >>>>>>>> Al- Hide quoted text - > > > > > >>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - > > > > > >>>>>>> It happened just the way Paul said it would. > > > > > >>>>>>> Robert B. Winn > > > > > >>>>>> If you want to converse with the voices in your head, could you just > > > > > >>>>>> leave out alt.atheism in your replies?  Your posts are clearly not > > > > > >>>>>> related to anything you're clicking reply on. > > > > > >>>>>> Al- Hide quoted text - > > > > > >>>>>> - Show quoted text - > > > > > >>>>> As I understand it I have given a response to one of your posts that > > > > > >>>>> does not comform to atheistic rules. > > > > > >>>>> Robert B. Winn > > > > > >>>> Those would be those rules about not lying blatantly? > > > > > >>>> They're more like guidelines, and more Human than specifically > > > > > >>>> atheist. > > > > > >>> Well, Al, I always try to tell the truth.  Sometimes I am given > > > > > >>> information by atheists that turns out to be false, such as a large > > > > > >>> portion of what I was taught in school. > > > > > >> I'd love some examples of these "atheistic lies". You won't provide any > > > > > >> though, right?- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > Well, we could start with Albert Einstein's description of > > > > > > transmission of light, which is not a lie, but turns out to be false. > > > > > > It requires a bona fide miracle to work.  This is one miracle that > > > > > > atheists never criticize. > > > > > > Can we get a real physicist with a loony filter here to translate?- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > The Lorentz equations are > > > > >               x'=(x-vt)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2) > > > >               y'=y > > > >               z'=z > > > >               t'=(t-vx/c^2)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2) > > > > > These equations require that a moving object contract in length in the > > > > direction of movement.  When the object reaches the speed of light its > > > > length is 0. > > > > Robert B. Winn > > > > An object can't reach the speed of light.  Get over it. > > > > Al- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > So what about photons?  The Lorentz equations have them as little flat > > disks with circumference but no length. > > Robert B. Winn > > And? > > Al- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Photons were invented by Einstein. He did not visualize them that way, but that is how the Lorentz equations have them. Robert B. Winn
From: rbwinn on 7 Jul 2008 08:36
On Jul 6, 9:26 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > rbwinn wrote: > > On Jul 6, 4:45 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > >> rbwinn wrote: > >>> On Jul 6, 1:53 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > >>>> rbwinn wrote: > >>>>> On Jul 6, 12:44 am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > >>>>>> rbwinn wrote: > >>>>>>> On Jul 5, 2:31 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > >>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: > >>>>>>>>> On Jul 5, 2:42 am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 4, 3:22 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 3, 11:28 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 3, 1:55 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 2, 8:35 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 2, 2:03 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 1, 11:59 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 1, 1:04 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 1, 12:20 am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 30, 1:19�pm, Enkidu <fox_rgf....(a)trashmail.net> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in news:22183802-cf28-4305-af11- > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 7d254b106...(a)d1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You are the one being deliberately obtuse. � The existence of the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tunnel validates many other things said in the Bible about the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Assyrian invasion of Judea. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "The Hobbit" talks of ale, axes, and forests which we know exist. Does that > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> validate Orcs, Elves, Dwarves, trolls, magic rings, walking trees and Tom > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bombadil? > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enkidu AA#2165 � > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> EAC Chaplain and ordained minister, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ULC, Modesto, CA > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Doesn't anything socialistic make you want to throw up? Like great public > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> schools, or health insurance for all? > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> � � �-Kurt Vonnegut > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why don't you decide for yourself?  You were the one who thought of > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why don't you try to defend your assertions? How can we know we can > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trust what you say?- Hide quoted text - > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It does not matter to me what you trust.  You decide what you are > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> going to trust. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If you can't provide any sensible reason to believe your fanciful > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> claims, then I guess we're done.- Hide quoted text - > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Fanciful claims?  I said that the Jews dug a tunnel as a conduit for > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> water between Gihon spring and the pool of Siloam..  Why do you think > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that is a fanciful claim? > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is not a fanciful claim. You and I both know that I'm referring to > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> your supernatural claims. Those would be the ones you're completely > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> unable to support with any evidence.- Hide quoted text - > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I have not made any claims to atheists except that the Jews dug a > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tunnel to be used as a conduit for water, and the Assyrians built a > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ramp out of dirt to get over the city wall at Lachish.  To an atheist > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> these might seem like supernatural claims because there were actually > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people working to accomplish both of these tasks instead of just > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> giving orders, criticism, etc., the way atheists do..  Since atheists > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have been unable to visualize these two events, there is no reason to > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> proceed on to anything more complex. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then we're in total agreement. A tunnel was dug a long time ago and it > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> got mentioned in some ancient writings, providing absolutlely no support > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for any supernatural claims. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So why all the posts?- Hide quoted text - > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You do not seem to be visualizing it very well.  The Assyrians came > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> into Judea with an army of hundreds of thousands on their way home > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after taking a big chunk of Egypt.  Judea was a little dot in the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> middle of the Assyrian kingdom, which extended from the Caspian Sea to > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Egypt.  So why was there still a Kingdom of Judea when King > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sennacherib got back to his capitol city of Ninevah?  Sennacherib > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> himself says there was on the column he had erected in Ninevah. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Or so the story goes.- Hide quoted text - > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you mean so the story goes?  The column erected by Sennacherib > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in Ninevah is still there today.  He plainly says on it that Hezekiah > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> paid tribute to him, and he was such a nice guy that he just went home > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after he got the money. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Great. Sennacherib went home and left Jerusalem unsacked.. That doesn't > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mean that it was due to the angel of the lord slaughtering 185,000 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> troops in a night. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why do you favour the oddly magical Biblical account over Sennacherib's?- Hide quoted text - > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 186,000 troops.  Chaldean historians of the same time said that the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Assyrian army died of plague while besieging Jerusalem, and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sennacherib fled in great fear back to his own city of Ninevah. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sennacherib made no mention of losing his army on the column he > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> erected.  He seems to have pretended to his fellow Assyrians that the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> army was still somewhere doing something, but his own two sons > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> murdered him, probably because they were upset about him losing the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> army. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> So where are God's footprints in all of this? Arguments for both sides > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> can be made without invoking magic.- Hide quoted text - > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Well, from a military standpoint, the Jews had no chance whatsoever > >>>>>>>>>>>>> against the Assyrians.  But when it was all over, it was the Assyrian > >>>>>>>>>>>>> king who lost everything, including his own life.  So I would say, let > >>>>>>>>>>>>> atheists of today explain it their way, and let Christians explain it > >>>>>>>>>>>>> their way.  The Jews explained it by saying that an angel of the Lord > >>>>>>>>>>>>> killed 186,000 Assyrian troops.  That is a matter of record.  It is > >>>>>>>>>>>>> recorded in three different books of the Old Testament. > >>>>>>>>>>>> The Old Testament isn't particularly compelling evidence, it suggests > >>>>>>>>>>>> that there was a global flood and special creation over the course of > >>>>>>>>>>>> six days. It might be a "matter of record" on some things, but it is > >>>>>>>>>>>> definitely not on others.- Hide quoted text - > >>>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - > >>>>>>>>>>> Well, I am sure the Jews feel bad that you do not like the Old > >>>>>>>>>>> Testament, but it says what it says.  It says in three different > >>>>>>>>>>> books that an angel of the Lord went through the camp of the Assyrians > >>>>>>>>>>> and slew 186,000 soldiers. > >>>>>>>>>> It also says that the universe was created a handful of thousands of > >>>>>>>>>> years ago. The Bible is not reliable.- Hide quoted text - > >>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - > >>>>>>>>> Well, as I said before, you atheists believe in relativity of time > >>>>>>>>> unless you are talking about the earth.  Then you insist on absolute > >>>>>>>>> time. > >>>>>>>> Instead you make some ridiculous claims about the relativity of time > >>>>>>>> completely without evidential basis, or... any rational support at all. > >>>>>>>> The Earth is older than 6500 thousand years old. Much older. I'll go > >>>>>>>> with the many independent lines of verification on that one.- Hide quoted text - > >>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - > >>>>>>> Well, that is fine, but why is relativity of time something that > >>>>>>> exists except when talking about the earth? > >>>>>> Because Earth isn't travelling at near light speed. I'm no physicist but...- Hide quoted text - > >>>>>> - Show quoted text - > >>>>> So what makes you believe that motion is the only factor that would > >>>>> affect time? > >>>> Gee, I dunno. Until you back up your notions, it's hard to know what > >>>> you're on about. > >>>> What makes you think that you know better than every mainstream > >>>> peer-reviewed physicist on the planet?- Hide quoted text - > >>>> - Show quoted text - > >>> Every mainstream peer reviewed physicist on the planet uses the > >>> Lorentz equation.  There is no way that the Lorentz equations could be > >>> more than a close approximation. > >> I don't have the grounding in physics to sensibly contend the point. I > >> will delegate anything beyond my high-school physics to mainstream > >> scientific consensus. You seem to be at odds with them, if you believe > >> you really have a breakthrough for physics, you should publish so we may > >> all benefit from the new knowledge.- Hide quoted text - > > >> - Show quoted text - > > > It cannot be done.  I talk to scientists in sci.physics.relativity.. > > That is all I am ever going to do. > > Then you'll forgive me for backing the mainstream. Hate to be a sheep, > just gotta go where the evidence points. Well, as the scientists of Galileo's day said, the safe way to go is to say that the sun orbits the earth because that is what the majority of scientists say. I can certainly forgive you for believing that. Robert B. Winn |