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

Todd to Gabor, first person!

Expand Messages
  • rlbaty@webtv.net
    Re: Gabor s epistomology question ... Gabor, it s always incredible to me how people like you claim to be Christians yet tell such bald-faced lies. Here again
    Message 1 of 2 , Sep 1 7:16 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      Re: Gabor's epistomology question

      --- In creationism, Gabor Horvath wrote (post #34310):
      >>> Gabor(former, partial)
      >>> Here it is Eric and Todd my view of dating age back by
      >>> processes which we can measure NOW. That shows the problem of
      >>> them, which is a fact.
      >>
      >> Todd:
      >> Major false assumption on your part, Gabor. Please try to grab
      >> a clue. You need to deal with what I have pointed out to you in
      >> this post:
      >
      > Gabor: I dealt with it Todd, you are not able or do not want to
      > grasp the simple FACT. The past and future are not measurable by
      > the present. Your example what you repeat belongs to the same
      > category. Astronomers calculate and ASSUME that the result is
      > valid projected back hundred thousand on millions or billions of
      > years in the past. Regardless how many agrees it still remains
      > an ASSUMTION as long as time machine can not be used to go back
      > in time.
      >
      > You are pushing that against what I described, which is a FACT.
      > You want to win by an assumption against a hard FACT. It is
      > futile Todd.
      >
      > Cheers: Gabor

      Gabor, it's always incredible to me how people like you claim to be
      Christians yet tell such bald-faced lies.

      Here again is the reference to the post that you have PURPOSELY IGNORED:

      "Re: Horvath v. Greene: Horvath accepts the challenge?" (Aug 26, 2005)

      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/creationism/message/33963

      Your assertions are flat wrong. The FACTS have been pointed out to you
      showing that your assertions are wrong. What do you do? You just IGNORE
      the facts, REFUSE to acknowledge or address them, and then
      you come back and BLATANTLY LIE that you have already addressed them
      when you have not dealt with what was pointed out to you in any way,
      shape, or form.

      From post #33963:

      | Here's an example - another one - that Gabor will run fast away
      | from and never deal with. In the case of the supernova in the
      | Large Magellanic Cloud galaxy designated SN1987A we have:
      |
      | A. The explosion of a star (empirical data).
      Did you acknowledge the fact that we observed this stellar explosion
      in the Large Magellanic Cloud galaxy? No! You did not. Did you even
      mention it? No! You did not. You lie when you pretend that you did.
      | B. The explosion took place approximately 51,500 parsecs from
      | Earth (empirical data).

      Did you acknowledge the fact that this explosion took place about 51-1/2
      megaparsecs from Earth? No! You did not. Did you even mention it? No!
      You did not. You lie when you pretend that you did.

      | C. The speed of light today is about 186,000 miles per second
      | (empirical data).

      This is the one and only idea from that post that you have even
      mentioned, and you've done this only by indirect reference, and you have
      not acknowledged the fact that the speed of light is about 186,000 miles
      per second and NOT infinity, as you asserted previously.

      | D. The speed of light when the explosion took place was the same
      | (empirical data).

      Did you acknowledge the fact that astronomers have observed that the
      speed of light was the same at the time of the explosion as it is
      now? No! You did not. Did you even mention it? No! You did not. You lie
      when you pretend that you did.

      | E. There is zero evidence that speed of light was ever any
      | different between the two times (the two times being, when the
      | explosion took place, and when the light energy from the
      | explosion reached the Earth). (Note that this is not just a
      | lack of evidence of what the speed of light may have been -
      | there is actually a great deal of evidence from astronomical
      | observation - empirical data of light from distances between
      | SN1987A and Earth that shows that the speed of light was no
      | different than it is today.)

      Did you acknowledge the fact that astronomers have observed zero
      evidence that the speed of light was ever different from the time of
      the explosion until today? And that all astronomical observations at of
      all entities at the distance of 51,500 parsecs or less show
      exactly the same thing, that the speed of light was the same? No! You
      did not. Did you even mention this? No! You did not. You lie
      when you pretend that you did.

      | F. There is zero evidence of any "spacetime warps" (relativistic
      | effects) between SN1987A and Earth such that there would be a
      | substantial time differential. (Again, this is not just a lack
      | of evidence, but there are all kinds of astronomical observations
      | - empirical data - of the Large Magellanic Cloud and entities in
      | space between there and here and we OBSERVE the lack of any
      | significant spacetime warping.

      Did you acknowledge the fact that astronomers have observed zero
      evidence of relativistic effects (besides very localized effects
      such as in the immediate vicinity of black holes) that would have any
      effect on the passage of time in the relevant regions? And that
      astronomical observations show just the opposite, that there are no
      significant relativistic effects affecting our observations of SN1987A
      or almost all other entities that we observe in almost all galaxies in
      our neighborhood of the Universe? No! You did not. Did you even mention
      this? No! You did not. You lie when you pretend that you did.

      I'm sick of your ignorant and stupid and blatant lying, Gabor.

      You have no shame. How dare you pretend to be a Christian.

      — Todd Greene
    • rlbaty@webtv.net
      ... This is Gabor demonstrating that he s so clueless about rational discourse that he thinks that *anything* that shows that his assertions are false or that
      Message 2 of 2 , Sep 1 7:22 PM
      • 0 Attachment
        And back to the third person:

        --- In creationism, Gabor Horvath wrote (post #34313):

        >> Todd(partial)
        >> As I pointed out above, this is Gabor demonstrating his
        >> irrational approach in thinking that it's perfectly okay to
        >> just IGNORE what we OBSERVE ABOUT REALITY. What a sad shame.
        >
        > Gabor: Todd if you and your comrade Robert do not stop that
        > third person style evo rubbish I will simply ignore your posts
        > completely.
        >
        > That is thepeak of arrogance and evo conceit. You together with
        > your evo fraternity without the most elementary logic, confused
        > regarding concepts and terms miscosntruing what is said by your
        > opponents. Do not think for a minute that it makes you stronger
        > in debating problems.

        This is Gabor demonstrating that he's so clueless about rational
        discourse that he thinks that *anything* that shows that his assertions
        are false or that his ramblings are irrational is
        just "evolution." Wow.

        > So again unless you are willing to talk to me instead about me
        > consider discussion to be finished right now.

        This is Gabor pretending that he's willing to engage in discussion,
        despite the fact that we have to plead with him and cajole him
        numerous times just to address *anything*, and that's only on rare
        occasions that he actually even attempts to make any kind of
        substantive comments.

        > If you change your evo style I am more than happy to continue.
        >
        > Smiling at your "chuckling": Gabor

        "Evo style."

        Gabor's irrational prejudice-pandering rhetoric is so ridiculous in how
        it is so blatantly obvious.

        This is Gabor pretending that I might actually pay attention to him
        being upset that I would use discussion in different ways at different
        times in different contexts.

        I hope it is clear to him that I could not care less.

        — Todd Greene
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.