- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (t8 @ Mar. 11 2010,13:58) Quote (Stu @ Oct. 18 2009,21:15) Money is a concept, not a material thing.
Paper money.If you tell me how nothing can make something, then we will apply it to making paper money (pref $100 bills) out of nothing. We will also need to patent the method and charge a licencing fee to all who make something out of nothing using the same method.
The paper (or plastic as we have) is not money. It says “this note is legal tender for twenty dollars” it does not say “this not IS twenty dollars. The twenty dollars itself is only an abstract concept.This is basic stuff t8. Did you pay attention at school?
Stuart
Quote (t8 @ Mar. 11 2010,13:19) Quote (Stu @ Mar. 09 2010,16:53) the Moon cannot be described as a lesser version of the sun,
It can in the sense that the sun is the source of light and the moon reflects that light. So from our perspective, we have a light in the day and a lesser light some nights.
That is complete nonsense t8. Look at what your dedication to your god delusion makes you do: post piffle.Greater light that is a light, lesser light that isn't a light. As in you could light your cigarette with one and not with the other; or if you just had the sun you would have light and if you just had the moon you would have none.
Stuart
Quote (Stu @ Mar. 09 2010,11:53) Quote (seekingtruth @ Mar. 09 2010,04:56) Stu,
I'm sure your asking, knowing that we will respond with the moon so you can then smugly point out that the moon is not a source of light but only reflects the sun. I would like to point out that the majority of the light from a flashlight is also reflected light but we refer to it as light.Wm
Sorry if I misjudged you but it is obvious you take pleasure in trashing our belief.
Not sure what the flashlight has to do with it, and the Moon cannot be described as a lesser version of the sun, because the Moon is not luminous at all, as can be seen from the fact that it had phases during which some parts of it cannot be seen, even though it is spherical.But fair enough. It just goes to show that the Judeo-christian scripture is a reflection of the ideas of its time.
Stuart
Obviously I need not of been concerned about misjudging you.My point was that light from the perspective of providing illumination, it matters not whether it is from the source directly, or a reflection of the source, it is light on the receiving end, only lessened by the degree of the reflectivity of the reflector.
If your interest was in facts, and not just in twisting everything said.. But hey where is the fun in that huh?
Let me ask, why so much bitterness, what compels you to want to trash others beliefs? We are at the very least are instructed by scriptures to correct what we feel is an error, your motive seems only to be the enjoyment of the superior self importance gained when belittling others.
Once again I apologize if I've misjudged you.
Wm
Quote (Stu @ Mar. 09 2010,11:59) Quote (seekingtruth @ Mar. 09 2010,05:12) Stu,
As to the sun coming along on the 4th day some believe that refers to the clearing of the sky so it became visible from earth, but it was there from day one. Others believe that the light (possibly the Son not the sun) referred to on day 1 could sustain the plant life much as referred to in Revelation where it says we will have no need of the sun. The sun heats and illuminates as must the presence of God since a water planet with no sun is an ice planet and He parted the waters prior to day 4 also.My opinion – Wm
On earth there is no light without the sun. So this other light must be some other divine magical source of light. I'm not sure why you feel the need to try and explain it with science, or by inventing new scripture.Of course there is so much else wrong with it that you cannot take it as any more than ancient mythology.
Stuart
I believe in science as a method, but I don't agree all the conclusions reached using unscientific principles that provide us with modern mythology.As to “making up scriptures”:
Revelation 21:23
The city does not need the sun or the moon to shine on it, for the glory of God gives it light, and the Lamb is its lamp.Wm
Quote (seekingtruth @ Mar. 12 2010,04:43) Quote (Stu @ Mar. 09 2010,11:53) Quote (seekingtruth @ Mar. 09 2010,04:56) Stu,
I'm sure your asking, knowing that we will respond with the moon so you can then smugly point out that the moon is not a source of light but only reflects the sun. I would like to point out that the majority of the light from a flashlight is also reflected light but we refer to it as light.Wm
Sorry if I misjudged you but it is obvious you take pleasure in trashing our belief.
Not sure what the flashlight has to do with it, and the Moon cannot be described as a lesser version of the sun, because the Moon is not luminous at all, as can be seen from the fact that it had phases during which some parts of it cannot be seen, even though it is spherical.But fair enough. It just goes to show that the Judeo-christian scripture is a reflection of the ideas of its time.
Stuart
Obviously I need not of been concerned about misjudging you.My point was that light from the perspective of providing illumination, it matters not whether it is from the source directly, or a reflection of the source, it is light on the receiving end, only lessened by the degree of the reflectivity of the reflector.
If your interest was in facts, and not just in twisting everything said.. But hey where is the fun in that huh?
Let me ask, why so much bitterness, what compels you to want to trash others beliefs? We are at the very least are instructed by scriptures to correct what we feel is an error, your motive seems only to be the enjoyment of the superior self importance gained when belittling others.
Once again I apologize if I've misjudged you.
Wm
What compels you to judge me?Stuart
Quote (seekingtruth @ Mar. 12 2010,05:00) Quote (Stu @ Mar. 09 2010,11:59) Quote (seekingtruth @ Mar. 09 2010,05:12) Stu,
As to the sun coming along on the 4th day some believe that refers to the clearing of the sky so it became visible from earth, but it was there from day one. Others believe that the light (possibly the Son not the sun) referred to on day 1 could sustain the plant life much as referred to in Revelation where it says we will have no need of the sun. The sun heats and illuminates as must the presence of God since a water planet with no sun is an ice planet and He parted the waters prior to day 4 also.My opinion – Wm
On earth there is no light without the sun. So this other light must be some other divine magical source of light. I'm not sure why you feel the need to try and explain it with science, or by inventing new scripture.Of course there is so much else wrong with it that you cannot take it as any more than ancient mythology.
Stuart
I believe in science as a method, but I don't agree all the conclusions reached using unscientific principles that provide us with modern mythology.As to “making up scriptures”:
Revelation 21:23
The city does not need the sun or the moon to shine on it, for the glory of God gives it light, and the Lamb is its lamp.Wm
Exactly what “unscientific principles” do you think have been used to produce conclusions that you do not agree with?Stuart
Quote (seekingtruth @ Mar. 12 2010,05:00) I believe in science as a method, but I don't agree all the conclusions reached using unscientific principles that provide us with modern mythology. As to “making up scriptures”:
Revelation 21:23
The city does not need the sun or the moon to shine on it, for the glory of God gives it light, and the Lamb is its lamp.Wm
Science asks questions and often doesn't provide answers. Science changes its mind often. It is more about questions than answers.Oh, I should add that science is important. We have much technology as a result of it. Asking questions does lead to discoveries.
Quote (t8 @ Mar. 12 2010,17:41) Science asks questions and often doesn't provide answers. Science changes its mind often. It is more about questions than answers.
Science certainly is more about questions than answers, but that is because the answers it achieves opens the door to more questions that otherwise would not have been askable without the previous answers. As the article points out you should ask engineers about the answers because they are the ones turning the answers into real applications for humans.“Divine revelation” has never produced any special answers for engineers to use: if made as described the ark would be far too large to be seaworthy, and Chronicles suggests a bowl that defies basic geometry.
Stuart
Stu,
Quote “Divine revelation” has never produced any special answers for engineers to use: if made as described the ark would be far too large to be seaworthy, and Chronicles suggests a bowl that defies basic geometry. Yes and they couldn't have built the pyramids either.
The weekness of a vessel the size of the ark is in the middle and when supported by waves on either end, then by a large wave in the middle the stress can snap a ship in two. However I read an article by a ship builder who postulated that there was a “tube” in the center section which acted like a catamaran greatly relieving the stress while strengthening the structure and had the added benefit that the raising and lowering of the waves in the tube could be harnessed to create air flow through the ark (something greatly needed I'm sure).
My opinion – Wm
Quote (seekingtruth @ Mar. 12 2010,23:14) Stu, Quote “Divine revelation” has never produced any special answers for engineers to use: if made as described the ark would be far too large to be seaworthy, and Chronicles suggests a bowl that defies basic geometry. Yes and they couldn't have built the pyramids either.
The weekness of a vessel the size of the ark is in the middle and when supported by waves on either end, then by a large wave in the middle the stress can snap a ship in two. However I read an article by a ship builder who postulated that there was a “tube” in the center section which acted like a catamaran greatly relieving the stress while strengthening the structure and had the added benefit that the raising and lowering of the waves in the tube could be harnessed to create air flow through the ark (something greatly needed I'm sure).
My opinion – Wm
I think you're dreaming.Still you may as well, the whole idea of the ark is a fantasy anyway.
What does divine revelation have to do with the building of the pyramids?
Stuart
Quote (Stu @ Mar. 13 2010,07:52) Quote (seekingtruth @ Mar. 12 2010,23:14) Stu, Quote “Divine revelation” has never produced any special answers for engineers to use: if made as described the ark would be far too large to be seaworthy, and Chronicles suggests a bowl that defies basic geometry. Yes and they couldn't have built the pyramids either.
The weekness of a vessel the size of the ark is in the middle and when supported by waves on either end, then by a large wave in the middle the stress can snap a ship in two. However I read an article by a ship builder who postulated that there was a “tube” in the center section which acted like a catamaran greatly relieving the stress while strengthening the structure and had the added benefit that the raising and lowering of the waves in the tube could be harnessed to create air flow through the ark (something greatly needed I'm sure).
My opinion – Wm
I think you're dreaming.Still you may as well, the whole idea of the ark is a fantasy anyway.
What does divine revelation have to do with the building of the pyramids?
Stuart
Hi Stu How are ya?Noahs Ark could have been found?;
Quote (karmarie @ Mar. 13 2010,10:56) Quote (Stu @ Mar. 13 2010,07:52) Quote (seekingtruth @ Mar. 12 2010,23:14) Stu, Quote “Divine revelation” has never produced any special answers for engineers to use: if made as described the ark would be far too large to be seaworthy, and Chronicles suggests a bowl that defies basic geometry. Yes and they couldn't have built the pyramids either.
The weekness of a vessel the size of the ark is in the middle and when supported by waves on either end, then by a large wave in the middle the stress can snap a ship in two. However I read an article by a ship builder who postulated that there was a “tube” in the center section which acted like a catamaran greatly relieving the stress while strengthening the structure and had the added benefit that the raising and lowering of the waves in the tube could be harnessed to create air flow through the ark (something greatly needed I'm sure).
My opinion – Wm
I think you're dreaming.Still you may as well, the whole idea of the ark is a fantasy anyway.
What does divine revelation have to do with the building of the pyramids?
Stuart
Hi Stu How are ya?Noahs Ark could have been found?;
Hi karmarieElvis lives, too:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,455132,00.html
Stuart
Quote (Stu @ Mar. 13 2010,14:12) Quote (karmarie @ Mar. 13 2010,10:56) Quote (Stu @ Mar. 13 2010,07:52) Quote (seekingtruth @ Mar. 12 2010,23:14) Stu, Quote “Divine revelation” has never produced any special answers for engineers to use: if made as described the ark would be far too large to be seaworthy, and Chronicles suggests a bowl that defies basic geometry. Yes and they couldn't have built the pyramids either.
The weekness of a vessel the size of the ark is in the middle and when supported by waves on either end, then by a large wave in the middle the stress can snap a ship in two. However I read an article by a ship builder who postulated that there was a “tube” in the center section which acted like a catamaran greatly relieving the stress while strengthening the structure and had the added benefit that the raising and lowering of the waves in the tube could be harnessed to create air flow through the ark (something greatly needed I'm sure).
My opinion – Wm
I think you're dreaming.Still you may as well, the whole idea of the ark is a fantasy anyway.
What does divine revelation have to do with the building of the pyramids?
Stuart
Hi Stu How are ya?Noahs Ark could have been found?;
Hi karmarieElvis lives, too:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,455132,00.html
Stuart
Celebrity gossip and entertainment? Well Elvis does live on especially with his fans, and He does have a daughter, so they all live on really. What does that have to do with Noahs Ark tho Stu hmm:)Quote (karmarie @ Mar. 13 2010,12:46) Quote (Stu @ Mar. 13 2010,14:12) Quote (karmarie @ Mar. 13 2010,10:56) Quote (Stu @ Mar. 13 2010,07:52) Quote (seekingtruth @ Mar. 12 2010,23:14) Stu, Quote “Divine revelation” has never produced any special answers for engineers to use: if made as described the ark would be far too large to be seaworthy, and Chronicles suggests a bowl that defies basic geometry. Yes and they couldn't have built the pyramids either.
The weekness of a vessel the size of the ark is in the middle and when supported by waves on either end, then by a large wave in the middle the stress can snap a ship in two. However I read an article by a ship builder who postulated that there was a “tube” in the center section which acted like a catamaran greatly relieving the stress while strengthening the structure and had the added benefit that the raising and lowering of the waves in the tube could be harnessed to create air flow through the ark (something greatly needed I'm sure).
My opinion – Wm
I think you're dreaming.Still you may as well, the whole idea of the ark is a fantasy anyway.
What does divine revelation have to do with the building of the pyramids?
Stuart
Hi Stu How are ya?Noahs Ark could have been found?;
Hi karmarieElvis lives, too:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,455132,00.html
Stuart
Celebrity gossip and entertainment? Well Elvis does live on especially with his fans, and He does have a daughter, so they all live on really. What does that have to do with Noahs Ark tho Stu hmm:)
At least the supposed Elvis is made out of the living tissues you would expect the real Elvis to be made of, were he still alive.The ark was supposedly made of wood, yet this incarnation of it looks more like stone to me.
Stuart
Quote (Stu @ Mar. 13 2010,00:52) Quote (seekingtruth @ Mar. 12 2010,23:14) Stu, Quote “Divine revelation” has never produced any special answers for engineers to use: if made as described the ark would be far too large to be seaworthy, and Chronicles suggests a bowl that defies basic geometry. Yes and they couldn't have built the pyramids either.
The weekness of a vessel the size of the ark is in the middle and when supported by waves on either end, then by a large wave in the middle the stress can snap a ship in two. However I read an article by a ship builder who postulated that there was a “tube” in the center section which acted like a catamaran greatly relieving the stress while strengthening the structure and had the added benefit that the raising and lowering of the waves in the tube could be harnessed to create air flow through the ark (something greatly needed I'm sure).
My opinion – Wm
I think you're dreaming.Still you may as well, the whole idea of the ark is a fantasy anyway.
What does divine revelation have to do with the building of the pyramids?
Stuart
You made the statement “too large to be seaworthy” and you would say the same about the pyramids (being built) if all you had was a reference to their spec's and they weren't still here to look at.Wm
Quote (seekingtruth @ Mar. 14 2010,09:50) Stu,
Ever been to the petrified forest, it looks like stone too
I have a piece of petrified wood on my desk.Stuart
Quote (seekingtruth @ Mar. 14 2010,11:15) Quote (Stu @ Mar. 13 2010,00:52) Quote (seekingtruth @ Mar. 12 2010,23:14) Stu, Quote “Divine revelation” has never produced any special answers for engineers to use: if made as described the ark would be far too large to be seaworthy, and Chronicles suggests a bowl that defies basic geometry. Yes and they couldn't have built the pyramids either.
The weekness of a vessel the size of the ark is in the middle and when supported by waves on either end, then by a large wave in the middle the stress can snap a ship in two. However I read an article by a ship builder who postulated that there was a “tube” in the center section which acted like a catamaran greatly relieving the stress while strengthening the structure and had the added benefit that the raising and lowering of the waves in the tube could be harnessed to create air flow through the ark (something greatly needed I'm sure).
My opinion – Wm
I think you're dreaming.Still you may as well, the whole idea of the ark is a fantasy anyway.
What does divine revelation have to do with the building of the pyramids?
Stuart
You made the statement “too large to be seaworthy” and you would say the same about the pyramids (being built) if all you had was a reference to their spec's and they weren't still here to look at.Wm
I don't think you would. While it is astonishing THAT they were built, they are based on good engineering and sound geology. On the other hand if the ark was reduced to 2/3 of its described length it would be utterly unseaworthy without iron bracing. Given the trouble the writer of Genesis went to in describing the application of pitch to the boat, you would think the incredibly difficult processing of providing iron bracing might have rated a mention. Of course the iron bracing wouldn't have helped at full length anyway.Stuart
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
