Hoax is a hoax

[styca]

Everybody uses physics. Engineers aren't some special class of people who use physics while the rest of the people don't. So, why pick on them or physicists?

I didn't, you brought up engineers.

Search here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.0 and you will find the proof that God exists... if you happen to be enough of a scientist that you know how to apply scientific proof.

Yes, I have a science background, thanks, I know how it works.
That link talks about mitochondrial Eve. What does that have to do with religion? It's just the most recent common female ancestor. It's not a fixed person, it can change over time. Have a look here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitochondrial_Eve#Popular_reception_and_misconceptions
The only link to religion is the name 'Eve'. A bit of an unfortunate choice, like the Higgs Boson being dubbed the God particle.

[notbatman]

^^ Space carnival physics, the science of the mad tilted ride spinning in your mind. Monkey machine mechanics, fueled by coincidence and chance. See with your eyes not with your mind.

An argument founded in assumption [evolution] is a clowns gambit. We have two clowns who agree on a theoretical framework i.e. the Copernican system, who then takes shots at one another. One clown says "reeeee evolution!", while the other who has agreed to rig the system, says he's a fool. One clown feeds the rope while the other one takes it and ties it into a bow.

These two are engaged in sodomy of the mind with one or both actively rigging the system.

[styca]

^^ Space carnival physics, the science of the mad tilted ride spinning in your mind. Monkey machine mechanics, fueled by coincidence and chance. See with your eyes not with your mind.

An argument founded in assumption [evolution] is a clowns gambit. We have two clowns who agree on a theoretical framework i.e. the Copernican system, who then takes shots at one another. One clown says "reeeee evolution!", while the other who has agreed to rig the system, says he's a fool. One clown feeds the rope while the other one takes it and ties it into a bow.

These two are engaged in sodomy of the mind with one or both actively rigging the system.

The '^^' suggests that you're responding to my post, but I can't see any link at all between what I've put and what you've put.
Not too sure about these clowns taking shots at each other, either - wouldn't they just use custard pies?

[BADecker]

Everybody uses physics. Engineers aren't some special class of people who use physics while the rest of the people don't. So, why pick on them or physicists?

I didn't, you brought up engineers.

Search here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.0 and you will find the proof that God exists... if you happen to be enough of a scientist that you know how to apply scientific proof.

Yes, I have a science background, thanks, I know how it works.
That link talks about mitochondrial Eve. What does that have to do with religion? It's just the most recent common female ancestor. It's not a fixed person, it can change over time. Have a look here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitochondrial_Eve#Popular_reception_and_misconceptions
The only link to religion is the name 'Eve'. A bit of an unfortunate choice, like the Higgs Boson being dubbed the God particle.

No. You brought up engineers - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5198202.msg53078198#msg53078198. But even if I brought it up in a previous post, you continued with it. But now it seems that you are trying to play ignorant. Perhaps you are.

So you read all 500+ pages of that thread. So you see that the scientific proof for God exists... or you don't, and really aren't a scientists at all.

[styca]

No. You brought up engineers - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5198202.msg53078198#msg53078198. But even if I brought it up in a previous post, you continued with it. But now it seems that you are trying to play ignorant. Perhaps you are.

You are saying I brought up engineers, and your evidence is a post in which you bring up engineers and I respond to it?
Evidence is proof that something does happen (like evolution), not proof that it doesn't (like creationsim).

So you read all 500+ pages of that thread. So you see that the scientific proof for God exists... or you don't, and really aren't a scientists at all.

I'll admit I've not read the whole thing. Please could you show me the bit where there is scientific proof that God exists?

[BADecker]

No. You brought up engineers - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5198202.msg53078198#msg53078198. But even if I brought it up in a previous post, you continued with it. But now it seems that you are trying to play ignorant. Perhaps you are.

You are saying I brought up engineers, and your evidence is a post in which you bring up engineers and I respond to it?
Evidence is proof that something does happen (like evolution), not proof that it doesn't (like creationsim).

So you read all 500+ pages of that thread. So you see that the scientific proof for God exists... or you don't, and really aren't a scientists at all.

I'll admit I've not read the whole thing. Please could you show me the bit where there is scientific proof that God exists?

We don't have to go there. I showed it to you right here - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1917510.msg53112081#msg53112081.

Since your memory is so short, stop reading anti-God literature, and start reading the Bible. Soon you will believe in God, because you will have forgotten all about atheism.

[af_newbie]

No. You brought up engineers - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5198202.msg53078198#msg53078198. But even if I brought it up in a previous post, you continued with it. But now it seems that you are trying to play ignorant. Perhaps you are.

You are saying I brought up engineers, and your evidence is a post in which you bring up engineers and I respond to it?
Evidence is proof that something does happen (like evolution), not proof that it doesn't (like creationsim).

So you read all 500+ pages of that thread. So you see that the scientific proof for God exists... or you don't, and really aren't a scientists at all.

I'll admit I've not read the whole thing. Please could you show me the bit where there is scientific proof that God exists?

We don't have to go there. I showed it to you right here - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1917510.msg53112081#msg53112081.

Since your memory is so short, stop reading anti-God literature, and start reading the Bible. Soon you will believe in God, because you will have forgotten all about atheism.

What is God and how was 'He' created?

[notbatman]

Created Gods are false.

"I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last." -- Revelation 22:13, KJV

[BADecker]

What is God and how was 'He' created?

God is love.

As notbatman said, God was never created, but always exists.

[af_newbie]

What is God and how was 'He' created?

God is love.

As notbatman said, God was never created, but always exists.

First of all, you are confused, you insisted that God is a male.  Now it is love. WTF.

More like, God was never created because it never existed until someone called love a God. LOL.

So it is a human emotion, that is what I expected.

If God is love, then it did not exist before human life.  It makes sense.

BTW, why do you guys using a new word for love?

If love is love, why do you need to call it a God?  To scam poor and uneducated people?

PS. Maybe that is why chimpanzees don't organize themselves into religious groups.

[BADecker]

What is God and how was 'He' created?

God is love.

As notbatman said, God was never created, but always exists.

First of all, you are confused, you insisted that God is a male.  Now it is love. WTF.

More like, God was never created because it never existed until someone called love a God. LOL.

So it is a human emotion, that is what I expected.

If God is love, then it did not exist before human life.  It makes sense.

BTW, why do you guys using a new word for love?

If love is love, why do you need to call it a God?  To scam poor and uneducated people?

PS. Maybe that is why chimpanzees don't organize themselves into religious groups.

Where did I ever insist God is male? But Jesus is male. God is Creator, and Creator is in the direction of male. So, God is God.

God always was love. People have been given love as they were originally made in God's image. So, it is people learning love from God. When people have love, because their love is imperfect love, such love is a human emotion. Nobody knows what the great love of God is really like.

Since you want to twist God into something that He is not, you simply show that you are trying to hide your own guilt. But you can't. You might be able to cover it somewhat. But it will always poke its way through into your consciousness. As you get older, you will not be able to keep it down so easily. As it comes through more and more, you will become bitter, like Voltaire in his later years. Why was he bitter? Because he was unwilling to accept God's Jesus-forgiveness, so that the bitterness could actually dissipate. But hey. Maybe you enjoy being bitter.

Take a look at your posts. Your bitterness is showing. Even though you are reasonably young, it's poking its way through already.

[notbatman]

@af_newbie the Copernican system is a filter for your mind.





As long as you're onboard BADecker's mad carnival ride,





he's just going to keep plowing your face with custard pies.

[af_newbie]

What is God and how was 'He' created?

God is love.

As notbatman said, God was never created, but always exists.

First of all, you are confused, you insisted that God is a male.  Now it is love. WTF.

More like, God was never created because it never existed until someone called love a God. LOL.

So it is a human emotion, that is what I expected.

If God is love, then it did not exist before human life.  It makes sense.

BTW, why do you guys using a new word for love?

If love is love, why do you need to call it a God?  To scam poor and uneducated people?

PS. Maybe that is why chimpanzees don't organize themselves into religious groups.

Where did I ever insist God is male? But Jesus is male. God is Creator, and Creator is in the direction of male. So, God is God.

God always was love. People have been given love as they were originally made in God's image. So, it is people learning love from God. When people have love, because their love is imperfect love, such love is a human emotion. Nobody knows what the great love of God is really like.

Since you want to twist God into something that He is not, you simply show that you are trying to hide your own guilt. But you can't. You might be able to cover it somewhat. But it will always poke its way through into your consciousness. As you get older, you will not be able to keep it down so easily. As it comes through more and more, you will become bitter, like Voltaire in his later years. Why was he bitter? Because he was unwilling to accept God's Jesus-forgiveness, so that the bitterness could actually dissipate. But hey. Maybe you enjoy being bitter.

Take a look at your posts. Your bitterness is showing. Even though you are reasonably young, it's poking its way through already.

Here you crossed 'it' and put 'He'.  It was you who did that.

What is God and how was it He created?

The fact that God was not in the universe before He created it, shows that the essence of God is something that we can't know except that He tells us. Why? Because we, being universe beings, can't think in extra-universal terms necessary for knowing anything about God.

However, you ask this question in the wrong thread. This is the thread where we emphatically prove that evolution is a hoax.

I hate to have to hurt all those evolution religion believers' feelings. But it is better that their feelings are hurt here, so that they find God and get saved.

Evolution is a hoax.

My original post, which you corrected is here:

...

What is God and how was it created?

BTW, love is a feeling and as such, it cannot physically create anything.  Independent thinking agents can. Dig deeper.

[notbatman]

^^^ Stop asking for an explanation of God within a system powered by the Copernican revolution; there is no God on the impossible mad carnival ride spinning in your mind.

Your brain cell is stuck in an infinite loop-de-loop, first take off the blindfold then behold the light!

[BADecker]

What is God and how was 'He' created?

God is love.

As notbatman said, God was never created, but always exists.

First of all, you are confused, you insisted that God is a male.  Now it is love. WTF.

More like, God was never created because it never existed until someone called love a God. LOL.

So it is a human emotion, that is what I expected.

If God is love, then it did not exist before human life.  It makes sense.

BTW, why do you guys using a new word for love?

If love is love, why do you need to call it a God?  To scam poor and uneducated people?

PS. Maybe that is why chimpanzees don't organize themselves into religious groups.

Where did I ever insist God is male? But Jesus is male. God is Creator, and Creator is in the direction of male. So, God is God.

God always was love. People have been given love as they were originally made in God's image. So, it is people learning love from God. When people have love, because their love is imperfect love, such love is a human emotion. Nobody knows what the great love of God is really like.

Since you want to twist God into something that He is not, you simply show that you are trying to hide your own guilt. But you can't. You might be able to cover it somewhat. But it will always poke its way through into your consciousness. As you get older, you will not be able to keep it down so easily. As it comes through more and more, you will become bitter, like Voltaire in his later years. Why was he bitter? Because he was unwilling to accept God's Jesus-forgiveness, so that the bitterness could actually dissipate. But hey. Maybe you enjoy being bitter.

Take a look at your posts. Your bitterness is showing. Even though you are reasonably young, it's poking its way through already.

Here you crossed 'it' and put 'He'.  It was you who did that.

What is God and how was it He created?

The fact that God was not in the universe before He created it, shows that the essence of God is something that we can't know except that He tells us. Why? Because we, being universe beings, can't think in extra-universal terms necessary for knowing anything about God.

However, you ask this question in the wrong thread. This is the thread where we emphatically prove that evolution is a hoax.

I hate to have to hurt all those evolution religion believers' feelings. But it is better that their feelings are hurt here, so that they find God and get saved.

Evolution is a hoax.

My original post, which you corrected is here:

...

What is God and how was it created?

BTW, love is a feeling and as such, it cannot physically create anything.  Independent thinking agents can. Dig deeper.

God is not male. He is a "He" because He is Creator and Father of life. Jesus is male.

Love is way more than a feeling. But if feeling is all you consider, it explains why you are so shallow at times.

[styca]

So you read all 500+ pages of that thread. So you see that the scientific proof for God exists... or you don't, and really aren't a scientists at all.

I'll admit I've not read the whole thing. Please could you show me the bit where there is scientific proof that God exists?

We don't have to go there. I showed it to you right here - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1917510.msg53112081#msg53112081.

Ah. Thanks, here it is. The thread, I mean. Not the proof. I didn't remember it as proof, because there is no scientific proof that God exists.

there is the proof for God in the fact that when you combine cause-and-effect, entropy and complexity as they are in this universe, there is no other method for the universe to exist other than creation by God.

Agreed we don't know how the universe started (big bang is a theory not proven) or why it exists. We can't probe the very beginning. At least not yet. Science advances though. We know so much now that we didn't know 10 years ago, 100 years ago. Perhaps the origin of the universe will always remain beyond human understanding, perhaps not. That's no reason to say 'God did it'. It's fine that we don't (yet) know. There's no need to invent a deity to hide the uncertainty.

Throw handfuls of element dust into the air for a hundred years. Nature will never make anything approaching the complexity of life out of any of it. There has to be design, and nature isn't intelligent, so it can't design things.

Sure. But throw some organic molecules into a pool somewhere, give them nutrients, sunlight, leave it for a billion years... that's 1,000,000,000 years... just maybe... we get the simplest form of single-celled life.
Then over (vast) time... multi-cellular life. A billion years wasn't enough in this case, single-celled to multi-celled took 3 billion years. Then after that, over the last 650 million years or so... fish, amphibians... eventually mammals... eventually man.

[BADecker]

So you read all 500+ pages of that thread. So you see that the scientific proof for God exists... or you don't, and really aren't a scientists at all.

I'll admit I've not read the whole thing. Please could you show me the bit where there is scientific proof that God exists?

We don't have to go there. I showed it to you right here - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1917510.msg53112081#msg53112081.

Ah. Thanks, here it is. The thread, I mean. Not the proof. I didn't remember it as proof, because there is no scientific proof that God exists.

there is the proof for God in the fact that when you combine cause-and-effect, entropy and complexity as they are in this universe, there is no other method for the universe to exist other than creation by God.

Agreed we don't know how the universe started (big bang is a theory not proven) or why it exists. We can't probe the very beginning. At least not yet. Science advances though. We know so much now that we didn't know 10 years ago, 100 years ago. Perhaps the origin of the universe will always remain beyond human understanding, perhaps not. That's no reason to say 'God did it'. It's fine that we don't (yet) know. There's no need to invent a deity to hide the uncertainty.

Throw handfuls of element dust into the air for a hundred years. Nature will never make anything approaching the complexity of life out of any of it. There has to be design, and nature isn't intelligent, so it can't design things.

Sure. But throw some organic molecules into a pool somewhere, give them nutrients, sunlight, leave it for a billion years... that's 1,000,000,000 years... just maybe... we get the simplest form of single-celled life.
Then over (vast) time... multi-cellular life. A billion years wasn't enough in this case, single-celled to multi-celled took 3 billion years. Then after that, over the last 650 million years or so... fish, amphibians... eventually mammals... eventually man.

https://cdn.britannica.com/98/398-050-C8C36AE1/scale-events.jpg

Since you show that you would rather believe the hoax rather than understand the truth, you absolutely show that you are a religions being.

[notbatman]

Time spans of greater than ~10,000 years are a hoax.

Q: How do they know how old a fossil is?
A: They know because of the type of rock it's found in. They pass the buck to another field of science who tells them how old the rocks are.

Q: How do they know how old a rock is?
A: They know because of the fossils found in the rock. They pass the buck to another field of science who tells them how old the fossils are.

This is how modern science works, it shuns the scientific method all-together for an authority driven circular philosophy with cartoon pies and charts, to the face.

[o_e_l_e_o]

-snip-

Have you honestly never heard of radiocarbon dating?

Or maybe they used uranium thorium dating. Or uranium lead dating. Or lead lead dating. Or potassium argon dating. Or argon argon dating. Or rubidium strontium dating. Or iodine xenon dating. Or amnio acid dating. Or luminescence dating. Or rehydoxylation dating. Or carbon wiggle matching dating. Or archaeomagnetic dating. Did I miss any out?

But yeah, I'm sure we should be trusting the opinion of someone who doesn't even know these exist, let alone understands them, as to how scientists determine the age of objects.

[BADecker]

-snip-

Have you honestly never heard of radiocarbon dating?

Or maybe they used uranium thorium dating. Or uranium lead dating. Or lead lead dating. Or potassium argon dating. Or argon argon dating. Or rubidium strontium dating. Or iodine xenon dating. Or amnio acid dating. Or luminescence dating. Or rehydoxylation dating. Or carbon wiggle matching dating. Or archaeomagnetic dating. Did I miss any out?

But yeah, I'm sure we should be trusting the opinion of someone who doesn't even know these exist, let alone understands them, as to how scientists determine the age of objects.

Have you honestly never heard of the flaws in radiocarbon dating?

If there wasn't any C-14 in the atmosphere back beyond 5,000 years ago, and radiocarbon dating results were still the same as we have today, what would such mean? There are indications that there wasn't anything other than a hint of C-14 in the atmosphere back then.

Radiocarbon dating has the same flaws in it that notbatman is talking about.