Prev: Scientists present first bread-and-butter results_from_LHC_collisions
Next: Who is really the 'personality' that calls himself 'Inertial'??!!
From: Michael Young on 12 Jun 2010 20:37
On Jun 12, 2:32�pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:

> I have a better question than Hawking.
> Where does order in the universe come from before man?

No point in answering this question because you asked it and had it
answered before, and rhyme nor reason seems to enter your thoughts
when people respond to it.

> Does that question make you doubt atheism?
>
> Mitch Raemsch

Nope.

From: BURT on 12 Jun 2010 20:50
On Jun 12, 5:37�pm, Michael Young <youngms...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 12, 2:32 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > I have a better question than Hawking.
> > Where does order in the universe come from before man?
>
> No point in answering this question because you asked it and had it
> answered before, and rhyme nor reason seems to enter your thoughts
> when people respond to it.
>
> > Does that question make you doubt atheism?
>
> > Mitch Raemsch
>
> Nope.

I am sorry but that won't work. You never offered an answer to where
the order in the universe before man comes from?
You just say that you did when you didn't.

If you say it was the Big Bang itself then I ask you how can a lump of
matter create anything? How does that lump do it?

Mitch Raemsch

From: Michael Young on 12 Jun 2010 21:45
On Jun 12, 8:50�pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:

> I am sorry but that won't work. You never offered an answer to where
> the order in the universe before man comes from?
> You just say that you did when you didn't.

No I didn't. I said other people did, and they did. You already asked
this question, and this question was already answered. I know because
I read it, and you should know because you wrote it. I don't know if
it was in this thread but where it is doesn't really matter; what does
matter is that you're asking an answered question twice, which means
to me that you ignored all the answers given the first time. No matter
what anyone says, you're going to reject it if it's not in line with
you think. It's just driving a car off a cliff.

So no, I'm not going to answer the question, not because I actually
lack an answer, but because it won't get us anywhere.

> If you say it was the Big Bang itself then I ask you how can a lump of
> matter create anything? How does that lump do it?

Phrasing a question about the Big Bang in the form of "how does a lump
of matter create stuff" shows, to me, that you think it's totally
stupid, and any explanation given will likely be dismissed by you as
stupid. I'm speculating here, so I could be wrong. But when you ask a
question in a manner that tries making the subject sound ridiculous,
it kills any motive for me to answer it because I feel like I'd be
throwing out an explanation to no avail, and it would just be a waste
of time.

Essentially what I'm saying here is you're really just looking for a
fight. If you *really* cared about how the Big Bang works, you could
easily look it up, as it's an extremely common topic. But, you're
BURT, and you want to entertain yourself, or so I believe.

From: BURT on 12 Jun 2010 22:05
On Jun 12, 6:45�pm, Michael Young <youngms...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 12, 8:50�pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > I am sorry but that won't work. You never offered an answer to where
> > the order in the universe before man comes from?
> > You just say that you did when you didn't.
>
> No I didn't. I said other people did, and they did. You already asked
> this question, and this question was already answered. I know because
> I read it, and you should know because you wrote it. I don't know if
> it was in this thread but where it is doesn't really matter; what does
> matter is that you're asking an answered question twice, which means
> to me that you ignored all the answers given the first time. No matter
> what anyone says, you're going to reject it if it's not in line with
> you think. It's just driving a car off a cliff.
>
> So no, I'm not going to answer the question, not because I actually
> lack an answer, but because it won't get us anywhere.
>
> > If you say it was the Big Bang itself then I ask you how can a lump of
> > matter create anything? How does that lump do it?
>
> Phrasing a question about the Big Bang in the form of "how does a lump
> of matter create stuff" shows, to me, that you think it's totally
> stupid, and any explanation given will likely be dismissed by you as
> stupid. I'm speculating here, so I could be wrong. But when you ask a
> question in a manner that tries making the subject sound ridiculous,
> it kills any motive for me to answer it because I feel like I'd be
> throwing out an explanation to no avail, and it would just be a waste
> of time.
>
> Essentially what I'm saying here is you're really just looking for a
> fight. If you *really* cared about how the Big Bang works, you could
> easily look it up, as it's an extremely common topic. But, you're
> BURT, and you want to entertain yourself, or so I believe.

Just show where order comes from?

Mitch Raemsch

From: Burkhard on 13 Jun 2010 05:44
On 13 June, 03:05, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Jun 12, 6:45 pm, Michael Young <youngms...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jun 12, 8:50 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > I am sorry but that won't work. You never offered an answer to where
> > > the order in the universe before man comes from?
> > > You just say that you did when you didn't.
>
> > No I didn't. I said other people did, and they did. You already asked
> > this question, and this question was already answered. I know because
> > I read it, and you should know because you wrote it. I don't know if
> > it was in this thread but where it is doesn't really matter; what does
> > matter is that you're asking an answered question twice, which means
> > to me that you ignored all the answers given the first time. No matter
> > what anyone says, you're going to reject it if it's not in line with
> > you think. It's just driving a car off a cliff.
>
> > So no, I'm not going to answer the question, not because I actually
> > lack an answer, but because it won't get us anywhere.
>
> > > If you say it was the Big Bang itself then I ask you how can a lump of
> > > matter create anything? How does that lump do it?
>
> > Phrasing a question about the Big Bang in the form of "how does a lump
> > of matter create stuff" shows, to me, that you think it's totally
> > stupid, and any explanation given will likely be dismissed by you as
> > stupid. I'm speculating here, so I could be wrong. But when you ask a
> > question in a manner that tries making the subject sound ridiculous,
> > it kills any motive for me to answer it because I feel like I'd be
> > throwing out an explanation to no avail, and it would just be a waste
> > of time.
>
> > Essentially what I'm saying here is you're really just looking for a
> > fight. If you *really* cared about how the Big Bang works, you could
> > easily look it up, as it's an extremely common topic. But, you're
> > BURT, and you want to entertain yourself, or so I believe.
>
> Just show where order comes from?
>
> Mitch Raemsch

It is a way of observing the world and understanding it that has
evolutionary advantages and is hence hard-wired in our brain. Order is
in the eye of the beholder.

First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Prev: Scientists present first bread-and-butter results_from_LHC_collisions
Next: Who is really the 'personality' that calls himself 'Inertial'??!!