Skip to main content

quote:
Originally posted by LMM:
Smooth, I would be careful insulting Cookey's and DF's intelligence.

You are becoming the hateful Christian...........................................

Scientific Law: This is a statement of fact meant to describe, in concise terms, an action or set of actions. It is generally accepted to be true and universal, and can sometimes be expressed in terms of a single mathematical equation. Scientific laws are similar to mathematical postulates. They don’t really need any complex external proofs; they are accepted at face value based upon the fact that they have always been observed to be true.

Specifically, scientific laws must be simple, true, universal, and absolute. They represent the cornerstone of scientific discovery
, because if a law ever did not apply, then all science based upon that law would collapse.

Some scientific laws, or laws of nature, include the law of gravity, Newton's laws of motion, the laws of thermodynamics, Boyle's law of gases, the law of conservation of mass and energy, and Hook’s law of elasticity.

Hypothesis: This is an educated guess based upon observation. It is a rational explanation of a single event or phenomenon based upon what is observed, but which has not been proved. Most hypotheses can be supported or refuted by experimentation or continued observation.

Theory: A theory is more like a scientific law than a hypothesis. A theory is an explanation of a set of related observations or events based upon proven hypotheses and verified multiple times by detached groups of researchers. One scientist cannot create a theory; he can only create a hypothesis.

In general, both a scientific theory and a scientific law are accepted to be true by the scientific community as a whole. Both are used to make predictions of events. Both are used to advance technology.


Thank you for clearing that up before I lost my cool, and said something I would regret later like "don't have a nice day".
OMB, I've been called dishonest by a Creationist..... talk about laughing your ass off.... hahahahahahahahahahhahaha.

L, you have backed the silly beast into a corner, where he had to lash out at you... The intellectual kitten bares his tiny claws... Big Grin


I can't stop giggling at him, L. He accuses me of intellectual dishonesty.... *snort*

Oh, this is such fun.


DF
quote:
Originally posted by Smooth operator:
A scientific "theory" is much different from the definition of "theory" in the common vernacular. A scientific theory is a framework that describes all the FACTS.

I am curious, what is morundity??? I think it's something you made up - kinda like your argument that evolution is not a theory.


Yes...while one type of evolution is a proven scientific LAW (microevolution), the grand scale evolution is a scientific theory, as it explains the FACTS as they are known and understood. In fact, it is ONE way to explain those facts, and possibly the best way. As additional FACTS are determined, the theory may be modified.

Literal biblical creationism (the six-day world) does not rise to the standard of "scientific theory".

The real danger of either of these propositions is lack of scientific objectivity...bending the facts to fit the theory. In the past, both camps have been guilty of this little misdemeanor.

And I think it was "moribundity"...in the process of becoming obsolete, or nearly dead.
quote:
Originally posted by DeepFat:
OMB, I've been called dishonest by a Creationist..... talk about laughing your ass off.... hahahahahahahahahahhahaha.

L, you have backed the silly beast into a corner, where he had to lash out at you... The intellectual kitten bares his tiny claws... Big Grin


I can't stop giggling at him, L. He accuses me of intellectual dishonesty.... *snort*

Oh, this is such fun.


DF


Admit it Fat. It bothers you because I have the guts to take you on without falling for your diversionary tactics (made popular by Reagan), and your sarcasm which is usually used when one doesn't have a legitimate response.
How can I come up with a legitimate response to such an illegitimate posture as Creationism?

There are only two ways to respond to Creationism. In court, when the meatheads try to foist it on children, or by ridicule when grown people try to convince me they believe in it.

If someone truly, truly believes in Creationism, then that person is a meathead. Sorry, no other explanation is possible. Those people are rare.

Most Creationists know in their hearts that they are lying, but it's a matter of toeing the religious party line. They're despicable hypocrites, cowards incapable of speaking truth to tyranny.

I am neither a meathead nor a cowardly hypocrite, simply because I recognize the plain truth of the matter. It's not hard. It's much harder to try to convince one's self that the Earth is only a few thousand years old. That's delusional, and beneath the intellectual dignity of a striped-ass baboon.

My diversionary tactics? I have no reason to employ diversion. Diversion from what? Exposing the idiocy and evil that is Creationism? Never. Not one iota, not one gram.

Besides, you Creationists amuse me. Fossils? "The Devil put them there to confuse us" or "God put them there as a test of faith". What other response can a person of normal intelligence give but laughter and derision?

You're a loser for a lost cause, smoothie. We, the enlightened, we who have the small amount of courage necessary to accept the hammeringly obvious, we who have freed ourselves from this one particularly nasty and detrimental vestige of cruel Medieval fiction will go on and progress in the world, making it a better place for those who come behind us.

You may continue to try to retard human progress with your attacks on all science and reason but there will be me and millions like me who will shut you down every time, every place, every opportunity, time and time again, forever. Your time is over, thank god.

I would say you're simply wrong, but that's not the case. You know what you're saying is inaccurate. There's a word for that.

So, excuse me while I laugh in your face..... Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

I pity you, I really do. Not that it means I won't let you amuse me.


DF
quote:
Originally posted by Smooth operator:
quote:
Originally posted by LMM:
DF,
I believe he/she has already labeled me a bonehead so I suppose I shall have to live with my shame. Frowner


Big Grin


Awww LMM, an intellectual giant such as you can surely come up with a better come back than that.

Nope, not worth the effort. I am a Christian but fundamentalists are very annoying and I don't wish to pursue the battle any more. DF can keep you entertained.
Enjoy.
quote:
Originally posted by Smooth operator:
I am curious, what is morundity??? I think it's something you made up


Yes, I fabricated it. It's not a word but should be.

quote:
suggest you find better sources. I can go to a thousand christian web sites to debunk every thing you have posted,


When I need to exhibit a scientific principal, I'll link to a scientific website, not someones interpretations of the ramblings of Bronze Age goat herders.
quote:
Originally posted by zippadeedoodah:
quote:
Originally posted by AllTalk40:
Be careful putting words into my mouth then, because NOWHERE did I say that I PERSONALLY felt as if it should be taught in a science class. I only said most of the believers that I know think so.


Doesn't invalidate the question.


Agreed...just as it doesn't invalidate that you put words into my mouth Wink I'm not the one worried about 'equal time'....it's most fundamentalists that I know who are. Valid question...I'm just the wrong person to be going after wanting an answer since I could honestly care less.
quote:
Originally posted by Smooth operator:
quote:
Originally posted by tcf531:
by definition all religions are cults.


What is the definition of a cult?


In traditional usage, the cult of a religion, is its sacred writings ("scriptures"), its theology or myths, or the personal faith of its believers, is the totality of external religious practice and observance, the neglect of which is the definition of impiety. Cult in this primary sense is literally the "care" (Latin cultus) owed to the god and the shrine.
quote:
Originally posted by AllTalk40:
Agreed...just as it doesn't invalidate that you put words into my mouth Wink I'm not the one worried about 'equal time'....it's most fundamentalists that I know who are. Valid question...I'm just the wrong person to be going after wanting an answer since I could honestly care less.


Problem with English is that it doesn't differentiate between "you" and "the lot of you". Pah. As I could care less, myself. In Islam, the students are not taught even physical laws (like gravity) because the fundamentalists among them believe that, by doing so, one limits allah. This is the other extreme of teaching "creationism" as science in schools. I'll not "go after you" again on this one.

And I agree totally with your sentiment about a good cigar.
Yeah, the Hollywood types have so little imagination that they can't find another way to imply Southernity by other means than using the word "y'all" inappropriately.

A friend of mine once asked me if I knew the difference between "y'all" and "all y'all". I said yes. He explained anyway that the former is singular, the latter plural.

I told him he was wrong. He didn't care, and thought the joke was funny anyway. Because he's my friend, I told him not to tell that joke to any other Southerners, lest he be accused of brain damage or Creationism or some other form of mental retardation.


DF
quote:
Originally posted by DeepFat:
Yeah, the Hollywood types have so little imagination that they can't find another way to imply Southernity by other means than using the word "y'all" inappropriately.

A friend of mine once asked me if I knew the difference between "y'all" and "all y'all". I said yes. He explained anyway that the former is singular, the latter plural.

I told him he was wrong. He didn't care, and thought the joke was funny anyway. Because he's my friend, I told him not to tell that joke to any other Southerners, lest he be accused of brain damage or Creationism or some other form of mental retardation.
DF

It's my understanding that consuming too few grits early in one's lifetime causes a permanent reduction of cognitive abilities. It's a pity, really, that northerners and californicators don't get it.
Most recently, Acid "Kuba Kubas". My son bought me a Gurkha (about $30) with my own money, of course, but the dark Acid cigars are really pleasant.

My "cigar bar" buddy, recently retired from the AF, has taken a weeklong trip to Arizona, so I'm on my own for a bit. But there's a truly collegial crowd (albeit heavy Lakers fans) that are pleasant to be around.
quote:
Originally posted by zippadeedoodah:
Most recently, Acid "Kuba Kubas". My son bought me a Gurkha (about $30) with my own money, of course, but the dark Acid cigars are really pleasant.

My "cigar bar" buddy, recently retired from the AF, has taken a weeklong trip to Arizona, so I'm on my own for a bit. But there's a truly collegial crowd (albeit heavy Lakers fans) that are pleasant to be around.


Zip,

I seriously need to send you some good sticks. Gurkhas are WAY too overpriced for what you get...you're usually paying for their cost of fancy marketing and packaging. Do you enjoy more of a mild, medium, or fuller strength cigar?

Sorry in advance to anyone who thinks i'm jacking this thread with talk of evil, sinful tobacco. Smiler
quote:
Originally posted by AllTalk40:
quote:
Originally posted by zippadeedoodah:
Most recently, Acid "Kuba Kubas". My son bought me a Gurkha (about $30) with my own money, of course, but the dark Acid cigars are really pleasant.

My "cigar bar" buddy, recently retired from the AF, has taken a weeklong trip to Arizona, so I'm on my own for a bit. But there's a truly collegial crowd (albeit heavy Lakers fans) that are pleasant to be around.


Zip,

I seriously need to send you some good sticks. Gurkhas are WAY too overpriced for what you get...you're usually paying for their cost of fancy marketing and packaging. Do you enjoy more of a mild, medium, or fuller strength cigar?

Sorry in advance to anyone who thinks i'm jacking this thread with talk of evil, sinful tobacco. Smiler


I live in the center of the cigarville, tabacaleros everywhere, and I can't smoke em.
quote:
Originally posted by AllTalk40:
Zip,

I seriously need to send you some good sticks. Gurkhas are WAY too overpriced for what you get...you're usually paying for their cost of fancy marketing and packaging. Do you enjoy more of a mild, medium, or fuller strength cigar?

Sorry in advance to anyone who thinks i'm jacking this thread with talk of evil, sinful tobacco. Smiler


I'll PM you later...can't through the firewall here. I'll bring a box when I come to the Shoals over Christmas.

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×