Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Mike Johnson 949 customs wants to know the best arguements for evolution

Expand Messages
  • Roger Stanyard
    ... Your religous opinions are irrelevent to this forum which contns members with a wide variety of religious views. This is a science-only forum. As the
    Message 1 of 87 , May 1, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In DebunkCreation@yahoogroups.com, "Dennis Kean" <dk@...> wrote:
      >
      >
      > --
      > This message has been scanned for viruses and
      > dangerous content by our Antivirus and Antispam MailScanners
      > and is believed to be clean.
      > If you find that this message does contain a virus or came as spam,
      > please contact NexGen Business:
      >
      > it@...
      > --
      >
      Your religous opinions are irrelevent to this forum which contns members with a wide variety of religious views. This is a science-only forum. As the creationists keep telling us, and the courts (under oath, creationism (and ts scam, ID) is proven by science alone, without reference to religion.

      Or are they lying?

      So why do you have to keep peaching your religion? No-one in this group gives a stuff about your religious opinions (or mine). Only your science.
    • Dave Oldridge
      ... Without running a bunch of math, I would not be able to straighten out his physics either. I would suggest he read and understand Max Born before being
      Message 87 of 87 , May 4, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        On 1 May 2009 at 19:16, Anne Gilbert wrote:

        > Brian:
        >
        > He tries to disprove Einstein???? I don't think I have the strength
        > for this!
        > Anne G
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > [[[Re: a moderator warning
        > Posted by: "Dennis Kean" dk@... datalite4
        > Date: Thu Apr 30, 2009 5:08 pm ((PDT))
        > When the cursing begins the argument has ended. We thank you for
        > conceding, though through a subterfuge. This one did not take long
        > and I will make a note of it. Genesis is pretty tough to beat,
        > Lenny. Maybe you can change the title of the forum, now. It is no
        > longer possible to call it DebunkCreation". But you could now call
        > it "Debunked BY Creationism!" And no more cursing, young lad... We
        > all know that you can curse, by now, when you lose. The question is
        > can you think? That remains to be determined, but we will not test
        > you on that. That opinion has already been formed for me.]]]
        >
        > ---Well, waddya know. After years of silence, we suddenly have a
        > veritable mass invasion of creationists.
        >
        > I went to have a look at the guy's website at
        > http://denniskean.net/index.php
        >
        > A talented artist and composer, and for all I know his disproof of
        > Einstein might also make perfect sense. I would advise him not to
        > dabble in biology though.

        Without running a bunch of math, I would not be able to straighten
        out his physics either. I would suggest he read and understand Max
        Born before being too critical of Einstein. SR only works with
        inertial (non-accelerating) reference frames. Spaceships are things
        that accelerate. Compared to earth, the spaceship in his story
        accelerates a LOT, both negative and positive acceleration with
        respect to the earth frame.

        --

        Dave Oldridge
        ICQ 454777283
        VA7CZ
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.