Yes Bish I made a mistake. I stated that we were only capable of making a few Light Elements such as Helium and the like during Thermonuclear Fusion and I forgot about this Heavy one. If I make a mistake and someone proves to me I have or tells me and I see I have...as this is the case here...I will admit it! Now if you would...PLEASE stop with the personal attacks. I have purposely held off correcting you upon a vast body of mistaken posts...incorrect scientifically, mathematically and from a physics and Quantum Mechanics perspective. You know WHY I have held off and if you could be so kind as to stop the personal swipes perhaps both of us could interact as Gentlemen? AboveAlpha
Be my guest. You've been corrected, but those who know what they're talking about didn't need to see you be corrected anyway. You trumpet your ignorance with every sentence you write - and actually I encourage you to keep writing, because we need the comic relief around here.
"Most atheists actually are okay without knowing..." Yeah, that pretty much sums it up, doesn't it? And if you, like C Marlowe, believe that there is no sin but ignorance, you are dreadfully derelict in your duties by being "actually okay" with not knowing. Hypocrisy is a dangerous thing, Jonsa. - - - Updated - - - Isn't that just like a neoliberal sophist - chop the portions of the post that so painfully contradict your devout, hypocritical faith to the ideology of anti-faith. And then, you have the gall to claim that you don't even need to attempt to refute my claims - possibly because you are unable to do so, or possibly because your point of view is so deranged that you actually believe I'm wrong merely because I'm not a member of your vocal minority. The best way to silence an argument is to pretend there isn't one.
An antitheist refusing to debate a topic based on accepted logical premise and formula. Imagine my surprise.
This is a hilarious comment, especially when IN THE SAME POST our resident genius complained that we "chop the portions of the post that so painfully contradict" his opinions. Meanwhile, it's true that most atheists recognize what is simply not known, and don't feel the need to make stuff up. But you are using "ignorance" in two different ways here. It is probably a sin not knowing what you should know. It can hardly be a sin not knowing all that IS known. And it is SURELY a sin to claim to know what nobody knows, and fabricate fiction to do so. And thank you for not just saying so, but demonstrating it! You mean, like you just did to Jonsa? And the best way to win an argument is to MAKE on. Mindless blather isn't an argument. Not knowing that mindless blather is mindless is a sin. You said so. Pure ignorance. But you are a laff riot. Most people are at least coherent enough that one can figure out what they're trying to say. Thankfully, you don't suffer boring coherency.
Oh REALLY? You really want to directly debate ME? OK. If you really feel the need to be embarrassed then we will debate...remember...YOU wanted this. You are what I consider the worse of all people of Hypocrisy. You have a belief...you have ABSOLUTELY ZERO EVIDENCE OR ABILITY to back your claims or supply even the tinniest level of proof or at the very least a line of logic. You attempt to use Biblical or other ancient religious text to back your claims even though you don't even realize that the text you hold so dear has been mistranslated and altered so many times through history you would be lucky if even 50% were as the original. Your knowledge of science, physics, genetics and cosmology is in line with a 5th grade curriculum and you will lie if needed to support your claims of fantasy. AboveAlpha
You should understand that in religionland, SAYING something is true MAKES it true. How else could there be magical sky daddies, living corpses, women breeding successfully with imaginary space aliens? Accordingly, the true religious ignoranti simply do not know the difference between a fact and an assertion., They don't know what "evidence" MEANS. They can't distinguish between the empirical, and Received Absolute Truth. They seem to think reality changes depending on how they play word games. And they are NEVER WRONG. After all, they SAID so, and that's how things come true in religionland.
there is a whole chart of HEAVY elements that are manmade You'd be here all day Then quit misleading and QM is an incorrect modeling for nature. I could care less, if you were the pope and voted in to be the final say on QM. It is not the correct model (physics) to define nature. get over it! perhaps because you are making a fool of yourself and just realizing it.
You are absolutely right. I have found that I must carefully look at any LINK such people provide as proof as I have just done this in another Topic and I found a religious member had used a link to something known as the Discovery Institute and he used this a proof to disprove Evolution had been determined to be a FACT in 1999. This is the link he provided...take a look at what this Discovery Institute really is....LINK...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discovery_Institute I got a good chuckle out of this one! LOL! AboveAlpha
The Dishonesty Institute has for some time now been the political action arm of the creationist movement. Their task is to search the literature for quote-mines, to fund and guide creatonist candidates for school boards, to dream up new catch-phrases (like "teach the controversy" and "teach both sides" and "academic freedom" and "strengths and weaknesses") designed to attract contributions and trick judges. You may have difficulty (I did) understanding how profoundly dishonest they are. It's like peeling an onion, and finding deeper layers of dishonesty no matter how many layers you expose. But all of this is easy to sum up: If the DI says it, it's wrong, it's totally wrong, it's distorted, mangled, misrepresented, entirely mendacious and they know it!
OK Bish...I put an Olive Leaf out for you and you slapped it away. There are only 20 Synthetic Elements that are Man Made and such elements only exist for a short time as they have very short half lives. Now I did make a mistake when I posted but this mistake was specific in that my statement should have read that there are only a few stable elements that occur in Nature that Man can make such as Helium from Fusion and a few other from Fusion and Fission. I did not list the Synthetic Elements as they are unstable...WIKI... In chemistry, a synthetic element is a chemical element that does not occur naturally on Earth, and can only be created artificially. So far, 20 synthetic elements have been created (those with atomic numbers 99–11. All are unstable, decaying with half-lives ranging from a year to a few milliseconds. Nine other elements were first created artificially and thus considered synthetic, but later discovered to exist naturally (in trace quantities) as well; among them plutonium—first synthesized in 1940—the one best known to laypeople, because of its use in atomic bombs and nuclear reactors. From now on I will not hold back when I catch you posting some stupidity as you are known to do frequently. This could have been avoided. AboveAlpha
I may not know the exactly when and the exact way millions of sperm came to be, but I can still tell how you got to be born and what those sperms did with pretty good accuracy -- or I could just say God did it, only God decides who lives and who dies and that babies are a gift from God one is science explaining the unknown, the other is using a myth to explain the unknown, I am sure if one asked a church they would be glad to offer up Sunday school to explain the myth .
I will admit I cannot fathom why anyone would want to purposely spread disinformation and outright lies just to keep their observed religious beliefs VIABLE. I mean...no matter what I might believe...I would ALWAYS want to know the reality...even if such a reality might go against the grain of my beliefs. Isn't knowing the facts better than living a lie? AboveAlpha
Ah, you see it from too far outside. From within, your religious belief DEFINES reality. If it ain't compatible with your faith, ipso facto it ain't real. It's always been the case that in religionland "evidence" is anything that supports your faith, EVEN IF you have to make it up. And conversely, if it doesn't support your faith then it can't be evidence. Faith doesn't just trump reality, it MAKES reality. And the point about the Dishonesty Institute is, they are living on the backs of people whose faith is much more strong than it is sane. And the DI people, as I said, KNOW they're lying. It's not their religious faith tricking them into believing what ain't so. They're like the con artists selling snake oil - they know it's fake, but they know how to sell it. They're spreading disinformation because it keeps the contributions flowing, and that's how they make a living.
I have to admit I cannot either understand or fathom why anyone would want to do this...it just is not part of my Genetic makeup. I ALWAYS want to know not just the truth...because a Truth is subjective...I want to know the Cold, Hard Facts! I cannot even begin to understand why anyone would KNOWINGLY make up a false reality of false proofs and false ideology for the purpose of being able to detail to others A KNOWN FALSE GROUP OF EVIDENCE AND PROOFS to create a web of lies that would somehow support by beliefs or religion. You know just typing this made me PHYSICALLY ILL as I have an upset stomach right now and anyone who knows me well could tell you I have an Iron Constitution so for me to feel sick right now tells you just how badly I am responding to just talking and thinking about such a blatantly subversive to ones own self worth planned and intentional lie. Also...what does this say about the people that are able to create such lies and use them as justification to support their beliefs or ideology? Not a Person of Charachter as far as I am concerned. AboveAlpha
Actually, I didn't "chop up" anything. I quoted, and then I took the quote that typified the entirety of the post. I left nothing out that in any way challenged any attempted assertions WOW. Why am I even responding to your drivel? I honestly don't even care. At least the arrogant AboveAlpha will actually debate a topic, unlike you and Jonsa. I won't be wasting my time replying to you. Have fun watching the debate.
Try again, but this time try to deploy a bit of honesty. Jonsa said that atheists do not mind not knowing what IS NOT KNOWN. Atheists don't feel the need to make things up, and are able to say "I don't know". And YOU dishonestly chopped it off at "atheists don't mind not knowing", and used that to argue that atheists don't mind being willfuly ignorant. Jonsa said "not knowing what's not known" and you dishonestly turned this into "not knowing anything." - - - Updated - - - Can 't face the truth? He's absolutely correct, and you are so stupid, you're dumb even to realize it. And you want to debate? Go to kindergarten FIRST. You have a long road ahead of you.
Well, yes and no. We all have our viewpoints, we all kid ourselves, we all see what we want to see and tune out the rest. Indeed, the enterprise of science itself is a systematic effort to eliminate confirmation bias (the tendency to get the results you expect), because scientists are human and suffer confirmation bias just as much as everyone else. Where religion differs is, religion WALLOWS in confirmation bias, and can be quite accurately said to consist of nothing but confirmation bias. But it's entirely possible to have the same set of facts as everyone else, where nobody disputes that they ARE facts, yet multiple conclusions are drawn from them. In fact, this is how science WORKS. A given set of facts allows multiple possible implications. Hypotheses are nearly always constructed when the same set of facts is explained in multiple ways, to eliminate the incorrect ways by collecting the relevant data. We're really talking two different species of things here. The Dishonesty Institute knowingly makes up false reality to sucker the yokels. But the yokels themselves aren't really doing this. Most of them have been trained into a set of religious beliefs from infancy, and their brains have developed hardwiring so that beyond a certain age (probably around six), these beliefs are so wired in that they cannot be unlearned. They "know", in the core of their being, that their god is "real" and that their bible is Absolute Truth because their god SAID so (in the bible, but circular reasoning is fine when you start with the TRUTH indoctrinated into you in infancy and no longer questionable). Whether or not there ever was a Jesus is probably no longer knowable. But whether such a person ever existed is irrelevant to those who devoutly believe, and personally feel Jesus in their minds. Pavlov's dogs salivated even when they were too stuffed to eat another bite, obviously not because they were hungry but because they were trained neurologically and couldn't help it. Belief in Jesus and gods is neurologically trained in this same way, right from the moment of birth. It's like neck-stretching or foot-binding - it must be done extremely young when the flexibility is there, and once done it can't be undone. The con artists at the Dishonesty Institute fully understand this. They know they can grab whole groups of people by their Jesus and shake money out of them, and the suckers can't do anything about it because their Jesus is too thoroughly attached to them anymore.
actually, you made bold statements and had no clue But you're learning, so at least I know you're reading. and it is known information, that is older than you are like what? You and i both know, that there is no such thing as an absolutely closed system within nature, anywhere. So if I say the 2LoT is made moot by the 1LoT, then before you make some stupid defensive claim, just admit, that you already know that there is no such thing as an absolutely closed system to measure, in nature. It's easy to be honest but be certain, I have hashed out the physics, to the letter, decades before you and I began chattin' ie.... qm is a joke and you just cant handle the truth to avoid being educated in the most direct way, then dont mislead. It's easy! Carl Sagan had it down; 'we just dont know" Now you try it!
I think you mean "employ." Unless you think "honesties" are little shocktroopers that one puts in Afghanistan to pursue terrists and nukular weapons n' whatnot.... Yes, I said "nukular," much like a not-so-beloved President we once had. Feel free to think on what that implies. False. The quote is direct. Even Jonsa will admit that. And that ridiculous "not knowing what's not known" bull(*)(*)(*)(*) you posted would be too stupid of a comment to even bother me for a reply. Talk about dishonesty! "He's absolutely correct, and you are so stupid, you're dumb even to realize it." Disregarding the obvious (and unimaginative) ad hominem, this statement is both a run-on and self-contradictory. The run-on is obvious, so I'll leave you to figure it out. I'm sure I'll have to explain the self-contradiction for you, so here: "you're dumb even to realize it" indicates that I would be intelligent to NOT realize. This is in direct opposition to the phrase just prior to the comma. So really, you don't have any clue what you're accusing me of. So out of extreme pity I'm not reporting your ad hominem to the moderators. Well, that, and insults from one such as yourself make me feel quite good about myself. Lesson to be learned: Make sure you're fully capable before insulting someone else's intelligence.
I suggest you try not to create an specious argument by taking a snippet of my response out of context in a vain and obviously clumsy attempt at labelling me a hypocrite. what part of "because they believe that this ignornace fuels the quest for scientific knowledge to satisfy the big picture questions regarding our existence." do you fail to understand. Clearly this qualification is completely and totally in line with my belief that ignorance is the only "sin" - not against some flying spaghetti monster, but a sin against ourselves. How ironic that you try this with me and then in the very next breath you chastise another poster for doing exactly what you attempted to do with me. Shall we discuss the nature of hipocrisy? or perhaps the difference between knowlege and faith? or perhaps the specious and spurious nature of religions self referential proof of the supernatural. Nope, its only the best way to avoid one. Or perhaps its equal to running away with your perverbial tail between your legs, not sure which is more efficacious, since I do neither. You appear to have some experience in this area, which do you think is truly better?
Actually, the quote I used is both verbatim and the main topic of your post. If you had written a post the length of a novel, the title would be "Atheists don't care that they don't know" and, I'm sure, would be just chock-fricken-full of all the truisms you can muster. I notice you use the term "specious" quite often - in this and in other posts. It's a good thing you can use a couple of obscure, semi-intelligent words, since you are incapable of even SPELLING hypocrisy, knowledge, or proverbial. And "perhaps" is the go-to of one who attempts to appear intelligent. A wise man once said that you should endeavor to BE what you desire to appear. Don't put on a facade. Think freely, and then get back to me. I'm done wasting my time with you. As soon as AA gets back, you'll see how an honest-to-goodness intelligent conversation works. Unless, of course, I'm overestimating Alpha - a distinct possibility, I'm sure.
OK...I will debate with you. Promise me ONE THING. Since this topic is called the Origin of Life...in any effort you might use to prove your point...PLEASE DO NOT USE A CIRCULAR ARGUMENT such as by providing the wording of a Religious Text as present proof to PROVE a Religious Viewpoint of the Origin of Life. Thus if you present the argument...GOD created the Earth and Man....PLEASE....don't quote the first page of GENESIS as your proof for your statement. It does not provide proof and is a Circular Argument. Saying that....we know that the Universe is ancient in the extreme at 13.798 ± 0.037 billion. We know this because of a few realities one of them being that using the Hubble Telescope we can visually see 13.4 Billion Light Years distant where lies a wall of Microwave Radiation which beyond lies a sea of Super Heated Plasma which will not allow light to penetrate. This is just 379,000 Light Years prior to the Big Bang and exists due to the Big Bang. As well we know that the Earth is also ancient in the extreme at 4.54 ± 0.05 billion years. From WIKI... ...The age of the Earth is 4.54 ± 0.05 billion years (4.54 × 109 years ± 1%).[1][2][3] This age is based on evidence from radiometric age dating of meteorite material and is consistent with the ages of the oldest-known terrestrial and lunar samples. Following the scientific revolution and the development of radiometric age dating, measurements of lead in uranium-rich minerals showed that some were in excess of a billion years old.[4] The oldest such minerals analyzed to date small crystals of zircon from the Jack Hills of Western Australia are at least 4.404 billion years old.[5][6][7] Comparing the mass and luminosity of the Sun to those of other stars, it appears that the solar system cannot be much older than those rocks. Calcium-aluminium-rich inclusions the oldest known solid constituents within meteorites that are formed within the solar system are 4.567 billion years old,[8][9] giving an age for the solar system and an upper limit for the age of Earth. As well we know when LIFE first appeared upon Earth...from WIKI... Basic timeline[edit] In its 4.6 billion years circling the sun, the earth has harbored an increasing diversity of life forms: for the last 3.6 billion years, simple cells (prokaryotes); for the last 3.4 billion years, cyanobacteria performing photosynthesis; for the last 2 billion years, complex cells (eukaryotes); for the last 1 billion years, multicellular life; for the last 600 million years, simple animals; for the last 550 million years, bilaterians, animals with a front and a back; for the last 500 million years, fish and proto-amphibians; for the last 475 million years, land plants; for the last 400 million years, insects and seeds; for the last 360 million years, amphibians; for the last 300 million years, reptiles; for the last 200 million years, mammals; for the last 150 million years, birds; for the last 130 million years, flowers; for the last 60 million years, the primates, for the last 20 million years, the family Hominidae (great apes); for the last 2.5 million years, the genus Homo (human predecessors); for the last 200,000 years, anatomically modern humans. Periodic extinctions have temporarily reduced diversity, eliminating: 2.4 billion years ago, many obligate anaerobes, in the oxygen catastrophe; 252 million years ago, the trilobites, in the PermianTriassic extinction event; 66 million years ago, the pterosaurs and nonavian dinosaurs, in the CretaceousPaleogene extinction event. Now since we know EVOLUTION to be a FACT....as well we know QUANTUM EVOLUTION to be a FACT...as we see Quantum Evolution occurring every day when we look at the Sun as this is a Universal Mechanism that allows MATTER to arrange itself into greater and greater complexity as in the Sun...Hydrogen the simplest Atomic Structure is Fused into Helium a more complex Atom or Element. Thus a person could argue that is GOD exists GOD would have used the processes of Quantum Evolution and Biological Evolution to create the Universe and all within it be those things Celestial Bodies and the Like and all LIFE. AboveAlpha
Bish...you have NOT hashed out Physics to the letter as you have repeatedly stated completely false and incoherent concepts of fantasy physics and you have said such false statements such as...Photons have Mass. You have said over and over again that Photons have MASS...which they don't You have made completely incoherent statements about QUANTUM PHYSICS AND QUANTUM MECHANICS...some of your statements being so ridiculous that I cannot fathom even the smallest reason why you would state them. You above have brought up that in Nature there is no such thing as a Closed System...I have NEVER...EVER stated that such a Closed System exists nor do I have any idea why you keep bringing this up. Now if you recall I really didn't want to call you out or embarrass you but you kept on pushing and even when I offered up an olive branch you slapped it away so remember....YOU WANTED THIS. I hold multiple degrees some of which are in Business and Finance and one of the several others is specific to PHYSICS AND COSMOLOGY. For you to post that YOU are somehow TEACHING ME by telling me Quantum Mechanics is a JOKE and I can't handle the truth....then perhaps you should tell that to several BILLION PEOPLE who are right now using their CELL PHONES which were created and designed using aspects of QUANTUM MECHANICS. Bish....the facts are you know absolutely NOTHING about Quantum Mechanics or Quantum Chromodynamics or Quantum Electrodynamics. ABSOLUTELY NOTHING! Your standard reply when I might state this is...EVERYTHING IS CHANGING AND THERE ARE NEW THEORIES OUT THERE! Well...I will tell you what. I will give you a chance to prove yourself. Why don't you detail out at least ONE of these new theories for all of us and if it checks out I will be MORE THAN HAPPY to say I was wrong. AboveAlpha
