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

Re: TIME CANNOT EXIST WITHOUT SPACE; SPACE CANNOT EXIST WITHOUT TIME...

Expand Messages
  • Randy C
    ... Randy C: You re kidding, right? Every picture ever taken - if it has something visible has some isolated mass. ... Only if the Nobel judges were as
    Message 1 of 34 , Jul 1 7:35 AM
      > > > > Katherine:
      > > > >  TIME CANNOT EXIST WITHOUT SPACE; SPACE CANNOT EXIST
      > > > > WITHOUT TIME...
      > >
      > > > Victor M:
      > > > Yet no one has ever detected either one.
      > >
      > > Randy C:
      > > Actually, as always, you are completely wrong.
      > >
      > > EVERYONE has detected both.
      > >
      > > > They were contrived mathematically with the first law
      > > > of science...
      > >
      > > But that supposed "first law" doesn't even exist!
      > >
      > > How do we know?
      > >
      > > BECAUSE NO ONE EVER TALKS ABOUT IT!!!!
      > >
      > > Get professional help.
      > >
      > Victor M:
      > Try and isolate some time, some mass or some energy
      > and take a picture of it.

      Randy C:
      You're kidding, right? Every picture ever taken - if it
      has something visible has some isolated mass.

      > You might get a Nobel prize.

      Only if the Nobel judges were as delusional as you are.

      > THESE THIGS are undetectable becasue they only exist in
      > minds that think with assumptions.

      But they ARE detectable. Remember the sore foot test?

      There is NO assumption.

      > What assumption: the first law of science that the
      > properties of matter are fixed, not emerging relationally.

      But we KNOW that "assumption" is not real. We even know
      that "assumption" CANNOT be real.

      We know those things because NO ONE EVER TALKS ABOUT IT!

      > [snip - same nonsense as always]

      Still unable to answer questions, I see.

      Get professional help.
    • Katherine Trammell
      Yes....all Christians are liars....why? Because they cannot prove an historical jesus as a man-god existed; there is not one single original new testament text
      Message 34 of 34 , Jul 18 10:23 PM
        Yes....all Christians are liars....why? Because they cannot prove an historical jesus as a man-god existed; there is not one single original new testament text in existence before the 4th century...and the continued promotion of the bible,etc. as the "word of god"....means that anyone who believes and repeats such frauds and forgeries....are Liars.


        And just how exactly do you people think you can "speak for god or Jesus"....is nothing more than psychopathic narcissicism....as is constantly exampled by the daily parade and incredible number of preachers, prophets, and priests who are convicted for child rape and conning people out of their money.

        Have you listened to American Family Radio lately? Every other word is a scheming advertisment....to get god to give you stuff, or make you happy, or guarantee that you won't go to hell....so SEND US MONEY. 

        And its getting nastier..... AFR just stated today, that J C Penney's stock has dropped 50% because 1million Christian Mothers...are no longer buying at J C Penney's because they promote gay marriage, because they use Ellen deGeneris as one of their spokespersons.

        Now...you christians are also blackmailers and extortionists...throwing your weight around.


        You are liars, and you disgust me. But, keep it up....the more you show your true colors, the very dark, evil, and intolerant hate-filled politics, the more other people will conclude they are Atheists...and reject your dark, 12th century perversions and Inquisitions.


        And you want me to believe in your religion why?

         

        Objectivism - the philosophy of Ayn Rand. "My philosophy, in essence, is the concept of man as a heroic being, with his own happiness as the moral purpose of his life, with productive achievement as his noblest activity, and reason as his only absolute." - Ayn Rand


        ________________________________
        From: dinohunter72 <dinosrus72@...>
        To: creationism@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2012 7:51 AM
        Subject: [creat] Re: TIME CANNOT EXIST WITHOUT SPACE; SPACE CANNOT EXIST WITHOUT TIME...


         
        DINOHUNTER: I'm curious Katherine, are you grouping all Christians in that statement?

        --- In creationism@yahoogroups.com, Katherine Trammell <katherinetrammell@...> wrote:
        >
        > CHRISTIANS DO NOT STUDY PHYSICS, THEY REJECT SCIENCE, AND AS  LIARS FOR CHRIST,  JUST MAKE STUFF UP
        >  
        >
        > Objectivism - the philosophy of Ayn Rand. "My philosophy, in essence, is the concept of man as a heroic being, with his own happiness as the moral purpose of his life, with productive achievement as his noblest activity, and reason as his only absolute." - Ayn Rand
        >
        >
        > ________________________________
        > From: Randy C <carumba17@...>
        > To: creationism@yahoogroups.com
        > Sent: Tuesday, July 3, 2012 3:37 PM
        > Subject: [creat] Re: TIME CANNOT EXIST WITHOUT SPACE; SPACE CANNOT EXIST WITHOUT TIME...
        >
        >
        >  
        > > > > Victor M:
        > > > > Try and isolate some time, some mass or some energy
        > > > > and take a picture of it.
        > > >
        > > > Randy C:
        > > > You're kidding, right? Every picture ever taken - if it
        > > > has something visible has some isolated mass.
        > > >
        > > > > You might get a Nobel prize.
        > > >
        > > > Only if the Nobel judges were as delusional as you are.
        > > >
        > > > > THESE THIGS are undetectable becasue they only exist in
        > > > > minds that think with assumptions.
        > > >
        > > > But they ARE detectable. Remember the sore foot test?
        > > >
        > > > There is NO assumption.
        > > >
        > > > > What assumption: the first law of science that the
        > > > > properties of matter are fixed, not emerging relationally.
        > > >
        > > > But we KNOW that "assumption" is not real. We even know
        > > > that "assumption" CANNOT be real.
        > > >
        > > > We know those things because NO ONE EVER TALKS ABOUT IT!
        > > >
        > > > > [snip - same nonsense as always]
        > > >
        > > > Still unable to answer questions, I see.
        > > >
        > > > Get professional help.
        >
        > > Victor M:
        > > Read Newton's first chapter. He proposed operational
        > > definitions for matter, time, space, velocities and
        > > forces.
        >
        > Randy C:
        > Units are needed to MEASURE something. But units are NOT
        > needed to DETECT something.
        >
        > Those are different.
        >
        > If you drop a bowling ball on your foot, you will DETECT
        > matter.
        >
        > That's true whether or not you know if the ball weighs
        > 16 pounds, 15 pounds, etc.
        >
        > So you don't need to MEASURE something is not needed in
        > order to DETECT it.
        >
        > You say that no one has ever DETECTED mass, energy or time.
        > That is delusional.
        >
        > > He claimed that the quantity of matter and motion are
        > > their measurements. His most important definition was
        > > of time. He rejected the common sense notions of time
        > > used by ordinary folk. Ordinary folk used crowing
        > > roosters and the setting Sun to tell them when to get
        > > up and when to go home. Newtons ASSUMED that clocks
        > > measure a real, unchanging thing: linear time.
        >
        > Newton was right. They DO.
        >
        > How do we know?
        >
        > Because different clocks, often using very different
        > mechanisms, measure the same thing.
        >
        > That means that there is something REAL that is being
        > measured.
        >
        > > He even invented a mathematics of linear time, a calculus
        > > that divided his symbolical version of time into
        > > infinitesimals.
        >
        > We also KNOW that time is linear.
        >
        > How do we KNOW?
        >
        > Because science is about testable hypotheses. Many of those
        > hypotheses involve time. (That's even something that you
        > argue.) We would necessarily notice.
        >
        > Your delusional argument that everything is changing is
        > obviously wrong.
        >
        > We measure distance directly.
        >
        > We measure velocity which is distance divided by time.
        >
        > We also measure acceleration which is distance divided
        > by time- squared.
        >
        > There is no possible way for both distance and time to
        > be changing in any way that wouldn't be noticed by one
        > or more of those formulas.
        >
        > > Yet the light from hundreds of billions of galaxies
        > > reveals that both the clocks and the orbits are both
        > > accelerating.
        >
        > No, it DOESN'T reveal that.
        >
        > If it it did reveal that, more than one person would see
        > it.
        >
        > Only ONE person - YOU - sees these things.
        >
        > So Occam's Razor tells us that these things are nothing
        > but delusions that you suffer from.
        >
        > > [snip - same delusional nonsense as always]
        >
        > Get professional help.
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >




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