Battle Talk ~ Battle Royale VII

[Flipper]

PureX:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by novice Matter and energy ALWAYS (without exception) conform to natural laws.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That's the straw man, right there. First of all we don't know that "natural laws" don't change. Secondly, we don't know that matter and energy always conform to these natural laws, and third, we have very little actually knowledge of natural law, and we may NEVER have full knowledge of them. So basically, almost anything is still possible regarding "natural law".

Yup. Furthermore, if you subscribe to the classical theory of general relativity, then at singularities (as postulated at the heart of a black hole, or even at the beginning of the universe itself - not so fashionable any more, this latter one), then most of the laws of physics break down.

But you don't have to go to such extremes to violate natural law as we have codified it.

Newton's laws are excellent until you reach ultra-high velocities, then they break down and the laws of General Relativity are more applicable.

And, if singularities really exist, then Einstein's laws break down too, leaving us with, possibly, the laws of Quantum Gravity, the result of the marriage between relativity and quantum mechanics. Oddly enough, these laws may govern the property of "Quantum foam", that speculative material that may lie beyond the Planck length, filling the smallest possible space.

Additionally, all physical laws were disrupted from 10^-10 to 10^-40 seconds during the Big Bang as the four universal forces unified. Before 10^-40, Quantum Gravity once again rules.

It seems then, that "natural laws" were made to be broken.

 

[Flipper]

Freak:

I define absolute as the dictionary defines it.

Go on. Humor me and post it. Or would you like me to find one?

 

[Flipper]

pab123:

Bob is winning this debate by a long shot...
GO BOB!!!!

Have you been on the Bob Enyart show? Your style seems very familiar. Mind you, it's like pretty much all of his guests. If ever I want to listen to fawning servility and fanboy slavishness, I turn the dial of my radio to 670 AM and catch Bob's show.

 

[One Eyed Jack]

Originally posted by Flipper
Newton's laws are excellent until you reach ultra-high velocities, then they break down and the laws of General Relativity are more applicable.

I think you mean special relativity, which has to do with velocity. General relativity has to do with gravity.

 

[Flipper]

Freak wrote:

Now does objective reality include good & evil?

Good question.

I would tend to think, on the whole, not because I don't think conceptualization is part of objective reality although the manifestations of that thinking may well be.

However, conceptualization can only occur (as far as we know) in beings that are part of this objective reality so in that sense it is a part of it.

I'm sorry but I don't admire your foolishness.

If there is a heaven, you are certainly bound for it, because of your embodiment of a Christian virtue.

'I tell you the truth, unless you change and become like little children
you can never enter the kingdom of heaven."

Your tenacious repetition, weak grasp of argumentation, and your inability to grasp abstract points makes me think of what it must be like to argue with a three-year-old.

Bearing this in mind, your previous question was probably a cute little fluke, like the quotes you find in those utterly irritating "The Things They Say" columns one might see in a doctor's waiting room magazine.

 

[Flipper]

OEJ:

*blush*

You are, of course, correct. I should proof-read.

 

[PureX]

Originally posted by Hank
Not if it’s cyclic like everything else. If there is enough matter in the universe to stop the expansion, then everything is sucked back in to a big bang and starts over again.

I heard on the news a few weeks back that it has been decided that there is NOT enough matter for a "big crunch".

 

[novice]

Originally posted by Hank
Not if it’s cyclic like everything else. If there is enough matter in the universe to stop the expansion, then everything is sucked back in to a big bang and starts over again.

You don't believe in perpetual motion machines do you?

 

[Rusty]

PAB 123

PAB 123

Yo, PAB 123

Just wanted to say that your last post was EXCELLENT! I couldn’t done as well if I’d taken several days to write it.

 

[PureX]

Originally posted by Freak ...does objective reality include good & evil?

No. They are assessments of reality, not reality itself. They would be a subjective reality, rather than objective reality.

 

[Freak]

Originally posted by Flipper

If there is a heaven, you are certainly bound for it,

FYI--God's Word has already assured me of that but thanks for the info.

'I tell you the truth, unless you change and become like little children
you can never enter the kingdom of heaven."

It's funny watching atheists quote from God's Word. You really like His Word, huh?

My tenacious repetition, my weak grasp of argumentation, and my inability to grasp abstract points makes me think of what it must be like to argue with a three-year-old.

:kookoo: No wonder God's Word refers to people like you as fools.

 

[Freak]

Originally posted by PureX
No. They are assessments of reality, not reality itself. They would be a subjective reality, rather than objective reality.

Where did moral attributes originate from?

 

[Freak]

Originally posted by Flipper
Freak:

Go on. Humor me and post it. Or would you like me to find one?

Absolute: Perfect in quality or nature; complete

 

[Hank]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The vast majority of chronological indicators show a

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The vast majority of chronological indicators show a

Originally posted by One Eyed Jack
Large-scale evolution occurring over geologic time that results in the formation of new taxonomic groups



Is that a satisfactory answer?

Well it’s not what the dictionary I was looking at says but at least we have some kind of definition.

Sure -- for those that are actually related.

I think you are saying that if you believe they are related, then you would accept the comparison. But if you don’t believe they are related, you won’t accept it as a way of determining the relationship. Is that about right.

I don't know. I imagine it would be pretty small.

Well if we can’t tie down some kind of reference to something tangible then it will be impossible to discuss the subject with any degree of intelligence.

We're not talking about unicorns.

You’re really not interested in a rational conversation are you?

I'm sure Noah was smart enough to make sure they didn't all get eaten at once. Plus most all carnivores will eat fish (which weren't wiped out in the flood), and it stands to reason that Noah would set up camp near a water-supply, such as a river or something.

You’re saying he went fishing for all the carnivores until the other animals were able to reproduce enough to replenish their stock? Do you have any idea the ratio of prey to predator it takes to support carnivore population? And do you really expect to carry on a conversation with statements like that? What a joke and a waste of time.

No, that's not what I'm saying. I'm not sure how they got here. How do you think they got here?

You said they walked. How else did they get there?

Because that's way longer than it would have taken most animals to get here. Seven miles a year? Give me a break.

And give me a break. How far can a sloth go in a day? Did he have a map? Did he just think, “hey I’ll take a trip to South America. So Noah if you’ll point me in the right direction, I’ll just head out.” How ludicrous can you be?

You're wrong, Hank. There used to be all kinds of marsupials in the Americas, but most of them are gone now. Check the fossil record if you don't believe me.

And they all made that long trip across 12,000 miles just 4000 years ago and then conveniently died out soon afterwards?

Some way besides swimming.

And the way was?

Possibly, but it depends on what you mean by 'right after.' Are you talking about the next day, or a few hundred years later?

I was thinking at least a 1000 years. But you pick a time and I’ll use your number for the debate.

I just told you there was probably some variation before the flood, and then you turn around and ask me why there wasn't any. Why don't you pay attention to what I say?

I did pay attention.

My quote” 3. Only one cat-kind of animal was created and never changed over the first 2000 years. Noah took a pair of those and after the flood evolution took over and all the cat-kinds evolved.”

Your answer: Number 3 is close to what I believe may have happened, but I wouldn't say that no variation occured before the flood.

At the very least you implied that there was very little variation before the flood. So I’ll rephrase my question. Why was there so much more variation after the flood than before.

It fits what we observe. Why do you believe it? Or do you not believe that the Earth revolves around the sun?

No it doesn't. We don’t observe the earth revolving around the sun. We observe the sun moving through the sky and it appears the sun is rotating around the earth. So what makes you believe the earth revolves around the sun?

 

[quip]

Originally posted by Scrimshaw
The Christian God has never been defined as having an origin or beginning. The Christian God has always been defined as ETERNAL............

Scrimshaw,

Ahhh.....Of course the eternal God, how sublimely convenient!

Defined hmmmm....let's look at another definition of God.

Of course you realize your "eternal god" is also "described" as being the initial creator and subsequent first cause of our universe. To support this 'first cause-designer' argument, it is logically declared that: Every existent thing must have a first cause, yet if this is the case, God (in order to exist)must have a first cause (even if this cause is God himself), therefor God cannot be eternal, sorry, can't (logically) have it both ways.

 

[PureX]

Originally posted by Freak
Where did moral attributes originate from?

Self-preservation, I would imagine. Which is written into our genetic code. But what we decide is "good" for us is still a subjective decision, by definition.

 

[quip]

Originally posted by Freak
Yes.



Easy--do you believe "chair" can be anything else but "chair"???

From it's structural sequence as I typed it.

Okay Freak --I give up -- You win!!

Your unquenchable ignorance is exasperating. You are simply a waste of time and space.

Keep up the good fight and have a great day.

 

[Freak]

Originally posted by PureX
Self-preservation, I would imagine.

So, one day someone discovered there were moral attributes like goodness or justice?

 

[quip]

Originally posted by Charismata

1)God is eternal. He has no beginning and no end.
2)God created the universe out of nothing by supernatural means.
3)God established the natural laws to govern the natural world.
4)God is not contained nor limited by creation but can operate within His creation.

There is no logical contradiction in those assertions.

Good argument Chrismata!! :thumb:

But I ask how does something come from nothing? For something to exist it therefore must be subject to a law that states it must have a cause. Seem God has violated his own law!! (#3)

I know! I know! Your first reaction is to this is to state God is not subject to his own law.

The problem here is that supernatural assertions intentionally defy the laws of logic, yet you use the laws of logic to argue your case! (God may be above such laws -- but you, my friend, are not!}

In other words, the 'first-cause' type arguments use logic when they benefits the argument and rail against it when they don't. This is irrational and an overall contradiction!

The argument against the 'first-cause' argument is not laughable-- on the contrary -- it is logically sound even in the face of critique.

 

[Freak]

Originally posted by quip
Okay Freak --I give up -- You win!!

Ok.

My unquenchable ignorance is exasperating.

We know.

Keep up the good fight and have a great day.

Ok. You too.