Does God need to prove He exists?
in [Physics]
|
From: Steve O on 5 Aug 2008 05:00 <hhyapster(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:1c77fdce-1f99-40f3-ae91-780fbec01fe9(a)v26g2000prm.googlegroups.com... > On Aug 4, 8:02 pm, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: >> On Aug 3, 8:56 pm, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: >> >> > rbwinn wrote: >> > > On Aug 3, 4:29 pm, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: >> > >> On Sun, 3 Aug 2008 15:24:56 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> >> > >> wrote >> > >> in alt.atheism: >> >> > >>> On Aug 3, 8:12?am, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: >> > >>>> rbwinn wrote: >> > >>>>> On Aug 2, 8:53 pm, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: >> > >>>>>> On Sat, 2 Aug 2008 00:08:55 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn >> > >>>>>> <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote >> > >>>>>> in alt.atheism: >> > >>>>>>> On Aug 1, 2:30?pm, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: >> > >>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: >> > >>>>>> ... >> > >>>>>>>>> Discuss it with John after the resurrection. >> > >>>>>>>> No proof of this alleged "resurrection", is there? >> > >>>>>>> Well, actually there is. The apostles were witnesses of the >> > >>>>>>> resurrected Christ on two separate occasions. >> > >>>>>> No evidence backs up your claim. >> > >>>>> Well, I could send you a copy of the Bible if you want one. >> > >>>> I have a Bible. ?There's no evidence in there to back up your >> > >>>> claim. >> > >>> John 20:19 Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the >> > >>> week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled >> > >>> for >> > >>> fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst, and saith unto >> > >>> them, Peace be unto you. >> > >>> John 21:9 As soon then as they were come to land, they saw a fire >> > >>> of >> > >>> coals there, and fish laid thereon, and bread. >> > >>> 10 Jesus saith unto them, Bring of the fish which ye have now >> > >>> caught. >> > >>> 11 Simon Peter went up, and drew the net to land full of great >> > >>> fishes, an hundred and fifty and three: and for all there were so >> > >>> many, yet was not the net broken. >> > >>> 12Jesus saith unto them Come and dine, And none of the disciples >> > >>> durst >> > >>> ask him , Who art thou? knowing that it was the Lord. >> > >>> 13 Jesus then cometh , and taketh bread, and giveth them, and fish >> > >>> likewise. >> > >>> 14 This is now the third time that Jesus shewed himself to his >> > >>> disciples, after that he was risen from the dead. >> > >> The Bible still is not evidence. I asked for evidence.- Hide quoted >> > >> text - >> >> > > The Bible is accepted as evidence in court. >> >> > For what kinds of cases? >> >> For any kind of case. A lawyer can request that a Bible be entered as >> evidence in any court case. Clarence Darrow had the Bible entered as >> evidence in the famous "monkey trial". >> Riobert B. Winn > > A judge must be mad or loony if he were to allow for bible as > evidence. > You mean that ancient time recording can be the evidence for modern > time crime or cases? > This would also mean America is declining, at a rate faster than I > thought. He's just being obtuse, hhyap. His original statement, " the bible has been given as evidence in court" has now changed to "the bible has been introduced in court as an exhibit in court" A subtle slide which the fool thought no one would notice. The depths this idiot is prepared to sink to in order to spread his lies are endless. -- Steve O a.a. #2240 (Apatheist Chapter) B.A.A.W.A. Convicted by Earthquack Exempt from purgatory by papal indulgence
From: Steve O on 5 Aug 2008 05:01 "DanielSan" <danielsan(a)speakeasy.net> wrote in message news:-_KdnVBfqMlXfQrVnZ2dnUVZ_jWdnZ2d(a)speakeasy.net... > rbwinn wrote: >> On Aug 4, 8:35�pm, hhyaps...(a)gmail.com wrote: >>> On Aug 4, 8:02 pm, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> On Aug 3, 8:56 pm, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: >>>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>>> On Aug 3, 4:29 pm, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: >>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Aug 2008 15:24:56 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> >>>>>>> wrote >>>>>>> in alt.atheism: >>>>>>>> On Aug 3, 8:12?am, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: >>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On Aug 2, 8:53 pm, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 2 Aug 2008 00:08:55 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn >>>>>>>>>>> <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote >>>>>>>>>>> in alt.atheism: >>>>>>>>>>>> On Aug 1, 2:30?pm, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> ... >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Discuss it with John after the resurrection. >>>>>>>>>>>>> No proof of this alleged "resurrection", is there? >>>>>>>>>>>> Well, actually there is. The apostles were witnesses of the >>>>>>>>>>>> resurrected Christ on two separate occasions. >>>>>>>>>>> No evidence backs up your claim. >>>>>>>>>> Well, I could send you a copy of the Bible if you want one. >>>>>>>>> I have a Bible. ?There's no evidence in there to back up your >>>>>>>>> claim. >>>>>>>> John 20:19 Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the >>>>>>>> week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled >>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>> fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst, and saith unto >>>>>>>> them, Peace be unto you. >>>>>>>> John 21:9 As soon then as they were come to land, they saw a fire >>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>> coals there, and fish laid thereon, and bread. >>>>>>>> 10 Jesus saith unto them, Bring of the fish which ye have now >>>>>>>> caught. >>>>>>>> 11 Simon Peter went up, and drew the net to land full of great >>>>>>>> fishes, an hundred and fifty and three: and for all there were so >>>>>>>> many, yet was not the net broken. >>>>>>>> 12Jesus saith unto them Come and dine, And none of the disciples >>>>>>>> durst >>>>>>>> ask him , Who art thou? knowing that it was the Lord. >>>>>>>> 13 Jesus then cometh , and taketh bread, and giveth them, and fish >>>>>>>> likewise. >>>>>>>> 14 This is now the third time that Jesus shewed himself to his >>>>>>>> disciples, after that he was risen from the dead. >>>>>>> The Bible still is not evidence. I asked for evidence.- Hide quoted >>>>>>> text - >>>>>> The Bible is accepted as evidence in court. >>>>> For what kinds of cases? >>>> For any kind of case. �A lawyer can request that a Bible be entered as >>>> evidence in any court case. �Clarence Darrow had the Bible entered as >>>> evidence in the famous "monkey trial". >>>> Riobert B. Winn >>> A judge must be mad or loony if he were to allow for bible as >>> evidence. >>> You mean that ancient time recording can be the evidence for modern >>> time crime or cases? >>> This would also mean America is declining, at a rate faster than I >>> thought.- Hide quoted text - >>> >> Well, it happened in 1934, or whenever it was. So we have that >> precedent in American jurisprudence. > > In only one type of trial, if it happened at all. Your credibility is nil > at this point. > I don't think it ever got that high. -- Steve O a.a. #2240 (Apatheist Chapter) B.A.A.W.A. Convicted by Earthquack Exempt from purgatory by papal indulgence
From: Alex W. on 5 Aug 2008 06:19 "rbwinn" <rbwinn3(a)juno.com> wrote in message news:e06f2bf0-ce6a-4204-a17a-1951086c8324(a)y38g2000hsy.googlegroups.com... The last time I was in court. I attempted to introduce the Constitution of the United States as evidence. ============= "attempted" ..... ROFL
From: rbwinn on 5 Aug 2008 09:25 On Aug 4, 9:03�pm, hhyaps...(a)gmail.com wrote: > On Aug 5, 6:53 am, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Aug 3, 11:28 pm, hhyaps...(a)gmail.com wrote: > > > > On Aug 3, 2:21 pm, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > > > > > On Aug 2, 9:38 pm, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > > > > On Sat, 2 Aug 2008 00:14:24 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote > > > > > in alt.atheism: > > > > > > >On Aug 1, 3:35?pm, Matthew Johnson <matthew_mem...(a)newsguy.org> wrote: > > > > > >> In article <e41a1737-acad-4cdc-ae31-4f6523f32...(a)p25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>, > > > > > >> rbwinn says... > > > > > > >> >So what exactly is it > > > > > >> >that you are trying to do? > > > > > >> >Robert B. Winn > > > > > > >> I could ask you the same question, Robert. All you are doing is rattling cages. > > > > > >> You aren't actually accomplishing anything else. > > > > > > >> Worse yet, you are still crossposting. You posted this to all of the following > > > > > >> groups, whether you know it or not: > > > > > >> sci.physics,cam.misc,alt.sci.physics,alt.atheism. > > > > > > >> Crossposting is always irritating, so it is almost never the right thing to do. > > > > > >> It certainly isn't right here. Pick one group and stick with it. Pick one where > > > > > >> it is on topic. > > > > > > >> Finally, make sure you know how to use your news client. Do you know how to coax > > > > > >> it to display all the groups it is about to post to? Do you know how to turn OFF > > > > > >> crossposting? > > > > > > >Well, scientists were all done talking to me about the theory of > > > > > >relativity two years ago when I finally figured out how the Galilean > > > > > >transformation equations describe relativity of time If any > > > > > >scientists decide they want to talk to me, I would certainly rather > > > > > >talk to them than these atheists. > > > > > > You already demonstrated to us how confused you are in that area. > > > > > Please, don't bring it up again. Didn't you learn anything from those > > > > > who critiqued your 'work'?- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > x'=x-vt > > > > y'=y > > > > z'=z > > > > t'=t > > > > > w=velocity of light > > > > x=wt > > > > x'=wn' > > > > > x'=x-vt > > > > wn' = wt -vt > > > > n'=t(1-v/w) > > > > > w = x/t = x'/n' = (x-vt)/(t-vt/w) = (x-vt)/(t-vx/w^2) > > > > = (x-vt)gamma/(t-vx/c^2)gamma > > > > = x'Lorentz/t'Lorentz > > > > > Robert B. Winn > > > > What are these nonsense? > > > If you want to put forward any formula, be very clear about every step > > > and what do they mean. > > > There is no head and no tail to the above, and certainly nothing in > > > between. > > > Do you see any physicist respond to you?- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > Anyone who took physics in high school should be able to follow these > > equations. > > Robert B. Winn > > Yes, unless the equations do not make sense. > �I am telling you that your equation did not have any meaning and was > insufficiently represented. > Where did you take them from? > You being a high school standard has no capability or ability to make > up a physics formula of any useful form, except to show your stupidity > or insanity.- Hide quoted text - > These equations are in any high school physics text. x'=x-vt y'=y z'=z t'=t They are called the Galilean transformation equations and were used to describe transmission of light until the Michelson-Morley experiment proved that ether did not exist. Then Einstein and Lorentz substituted the Lorentz equations, which require a distance contraction and are therefore obviously wrong. x'=(x-vt)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2) y'=y z'=z t'=(t-vx/c^2)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2) However, they do sow the speed of light to be c in both frames of reference, which is what the Michelson-Morley experiment requires. To do the same thing with the Galilean transformation equations, you have to use velocity of light instead of speed of light. w=velocity of light x=wt x'=wn' x'=x-vt wn'=wt-vt n'=t(1-v/w) n' is time on a cesium clock in the moving frame of reference. So tell me, hhyaps, do you know more now than you did before I explained it to you? Robert B. Winn
From: rbwinn on 5 Aug 2008 09:30
On Aug 4, 9:22�pm, hhyaps...(a)gmail.com wrote: > On Aug 5, 11:08 am, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Aug 4, 5:34 pm, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > > On Mon, 4 Aug 2008 05:02:25 -0700 (PDT), in alt.atheism > > > rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in > > > <df36fbb3-4bc6-4217-93a7-eb8537d50...(a)s50g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>: > > > > >On Aug 3, 8:56?pm, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: > > > >> rbwinn wrote: > > > >> > On Aug 3, 4:29 pm, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > >> >> On Sun, 3 Aug 2008 15:24:56 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote > > > >> >> in alt.atheism: > > > > >> >>> On Aug 3, 8:12?am, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: > > > >> >>>> rbwinn wrote: > > > >> >>>>> On Aug 2, 8:53 pm, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > >> >>>>>> On Sat, 2 Aug 2008 00:08:55 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote > > > >> >>>>>> in alt.atheism: > > > >> >>>>>>> On Aug 1, 2:30?pm, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: > > > >> >>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: > > > >> >>>>>> ... > > > >> >>>>>>>>> Discuss it with John after the resurrection. > > > >> >>>>>>>> No proof of this alleged "resurrection", is there? > > > >> >>>>>>> Well, actually there is. The apostles were witnesses of the > > > >> >>>>>>> resurrected Christ on two separate occasions. > > > >> >>>>>> No evidence backs up your claim. > > > >> >>>>> Well, I could send you a copy of the Bible if you want one. > > > >> >>>> I have a Bible. ?There's no evidence in there to back up your claim. > > > >> >>> John 20:19 Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the > > > >> >>> week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled for > > > >> >>> fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst, and saith unto > > > >> >>> them, Peace be unto you. > > > >> >>> John 21:9 As soon then as they were come to land, they saw a fire of > > > >> >>> coals there, and fish laid thereon, and bread. > > > >> >>> 10 Jesus saith unto them, Bring of the fish which ye have now > > > >> >>> caught. > > > >> >>> 11 Simon Peter went up, and drew the net to land full of great > > > >> >>> fishes, an hundred and fifty and three: and for all there were so > > > >> >>> many, yet was not the net broken. > > > >> >>> 12Jesus saith unto them Come and dine, And none of the disciples durst > > > >> >>> ask him , Who art thou? knowing that it was the Lord. > > > >> >>> 13 Jesus then cometh , and taketh bread, and giveth them, and fish > > > >> >>> likewise. > > > >> >>> 14 This is now the third time that Jesus shewed himself to his > > > >> >>> disciples, after that he was risen from the dead. > > > >> >> The Bible still is not evidence. I asked for evidence.- Hide quoted text - > > > > >> > The Bible is accepted as evidence in court. ? > > > > >> For what kinds of cases? > > > > >For any kind of case. A lawyer can request that a Bible be entered as > > > >evidence in any court case. Clarence Darrow had the Bible entered as > > > >evidence in the famous "monkey trial". > > > > When did you last check the rules of evidence?- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > The last time I was in court. �I attempted to introduce the > > Constitution of the United States as evidence. > > Robert B. Winn > > Yes, the constitution was written in modern time and is not a story. > The bible was written more than 2000 years ago and was a collection of > tales meant to con the young into sleep. > You do not know the significance of a constitution and a fictional > story book.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - I said I attempted to enter the Constitution as evidence. Judges in America today do not allow the Constitution in their police state courts. Robert B. Winn |