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

Return Of The Master/Jack..

Expand Messages
  • jacktogery
    Dave.O and Randy.C, are evidence that the bible is the word of God! Just as there is night and day, sun and moon, good and bad. Etc.., there are these two guys
    Message 1 of 135 , Jan 31, 2010
      Dave.O and Randy.C, are evidence that the bible is the word of God!
      Just as there is night and day, sun and moon, good and bad. Etc..,
      there are these two guys who are able to agree, yet, one proclaims God, the other denounces him. Strange, but interesting.
      JackT.
    • Donna Porter
      The calculations below only show the use of LOGICAL DEDUCTIVE REASONING...not the use of science . A child may decide, from past experience, that it s best
      Message 135 of 135 , Feb 14, 2010
        The calculations below only show the use of LOGICAL DEDUCTIVE REASONING...not "the use of science".
        A child may decide, from past experience, that it's best NOT to lean too close to the edge of a box that he's sitting on or else he might fall off. He is not "doing science" but simply applying principles of deductive reasoning from past experience. (previously falling OFF the box) Now IF he decided to lean further and FALL, then you might argue that his falling INVOLVES some of the aspects of science...gravity etc but this small child is in NO way "doing science" whether he decides to lean...or not to lean. That's ridiculous. By *your reasoning...every single act of human (or animal or plant) nature could be considered "doing science". The rules and laws of "science" happen all around us on a constant basis...but that in no way means that we are actively participating in "the act of doing" science. Thats like saying we're participating in the wind blowing...just because the wind is blowing. I see no logic in that at all.
        JM2 cents.
        D.
        ========================

        >> When I first learned how to drive, the single most challenging
        >> thing I thought was what happened when I approached an
        >> intersection with a signal light. If the light was green,
        >> there was always that chance that it was about to turn yellow.
        >> I had to learn when I should stop and when should I continue
        >> through the intersection.

        >> If I was a mile away I knew that I should always stop. If I
        >> was five feet away, I should always continue through. But
        >> there were always those intermediate places where knowing
        >> whether or not to stop was not as cut-and-dried and was
        >> something that I had to worry and learn about.

        >> Factors to determine what action I should take were: how fast
        >> I was going; how close I was to the intersection; how fast
        >> the car could stop. Velocities, momentum, etc. are all
        >> things associated with science. So is that "using science"?

        >> OF COURSE IT IS!


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.