Part 8 of Post Your Tough Questions Regarding Christianity

Im aware of the common usage. That does not make a less common usage "made up" by NASA. They said there is air on the moon, that is correct both
by dictionary and by fact.

 

Mitt said there is not air on the moon, and THAT is true unless you use a less common definition of air. So what you are doing is like, in your frog example, calling someone a liar for saying "a frog hopped down the road" just because a belt loop can't hop. You are applying an uncommon definition to try to discredit the proper usage of the common definition.

 

And as for you, you are applying psychic powers to determine exactly what it was that our hero had in mind?

As for common usage, when talking about extra terrestrial bodies, the
"less common" usage is the ONLY usage that applies.

He was talking about the moon. He said "Fact, the moon has no air".

Fact: the moon does have air, as you now do agree.

So, you still think he was right? Still going to claim that NASA makes up definitions?

 

Wow! unbelievable here contradict your own post again and again:
Quote Originally Posted by GraspingforPeace View Post
The reason science was conducted by priests and monks during the Middle Ages is because they had the funds and time to waste. Scientists, however, existed for far longer than the existence of Christianity.

And you agree with them even though you did said it is a waste of time you don't have to try to distort what they post what they post is very clear and what you post is also very clear so here I post your post again so you can contradict your own theirs.
Quote Originally Posted by GraspingforPeace View Post
The reason science was conducted by priests and monks during the Middle Ages is because they had the funds and time to waste. Scientists, however, existed for far longer than the existence of Christianity.

Nope it is because you can't understand your own post and contradict your own post and theirs

You are contradicting yourself again now you are saying you did not disagree with me and I agree with you STUDYING SCIENCE Is NOT A WASTE OF TIME so what is your problem???

Of course it is relevant that yu just can not accept that Muslims destroy their own Golden Age and you kept on blaming it on the Crusades the crusades which were all busy defending their lands from Muslim invasion you blame the Mongols that later converted to Islam and you ignore the Mamluks for destroying Egypt and introducing extreme Islamism.

Yes, and the Mamluks will be the ones that will defeat Mongols because they were firecer and the Mamluks will kill and go after the rich Caliphs in golden palaces that you ignore.

You kept contradicting yourself first you deny you posted Quote Originally Posted by GraspingforPeace View Post
The reason science was conducted by priests and monks during the Middle Ages is because they had the funds and time to waste. Scientists, however, existed for far longer than the existence of Christianity. Then you admit you did and responded in your later post that it is not a waste of time to study science then you change again after your buddies started to distort your post and you agree with them and now you are saying again you agree with me??? Come'on for once stand up like a man!

Wow! again you are really so blantant now you accuse me of blatantly lying??? Ok here is your post again and tell me where is my lie: Quote Originally Posted by GraspingforPeace View Post
The reason science was conducted by priests and monks during the Middle Ages is because they had the funds and time to waste. Scientists, however, existed for far longer than the existence of Christianity.
Why do you blatantly continue to contradict yourself (notice I did not call you liar)???

I know but your post said: Quote Originally Posted by GraspingforPeace View Post
The reason science was conducted by priests and monks during the Middle Ages is because they had the funds and time to waste. Scientists, however, existed for far longer than the existence of Christianity.

So are you contradicting your self or are you attempting to change the context of your original post from time to waste to waste of time?

 

No, I'm just using common sense to determine that people generally use the common definitions of things. That's what makes them the common definitions.

Under the "regular" definition, yes he would be right. (I think. I'm not aware of any such amphibians in the Army anyway). Of course, if he then said, "but not frogs like you're thinking of, I'm talking about loops on a belt!", then he would be wrong.

 

Perhaps you should have paid attention, since I never said that you thought the gases weren't present; I just said that you weren't relying on the argument. Geesh.

It it's called air because it is made up of certain gases in certain proportions.

I think it's a stupid conversation as well since Mitt Ryan has said things that are about 1,000 times as wrong, but considering that NASA has come out and said that there is air on the moon... Meh.

 

Quote Posted by dairyair on pg. 58 #573 of Part 3 in response to my post

Can you give me a simple illustration of how something (materialistic) can come from nothing? (Post by Mitt Ryan)

In some folks world, God. (Post by dairyair in response to my post above)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
God did not come from nothing because He has always existed, He has no beginning or no end, He is everlasting, the Eternal One, The Creator of all existence.

Wrap your finite minds around that concept! I know it will be very hard for the unbelievers to understand it.

Some people might object and say but it is the universe that is eternal, but haven't our brilliant intelligent scientist tell us the universe had a beginning?...oh yes they did!

Scripture tells us, "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth."---Genesis 1:1 NLT

 

EXACTLY. But that's one of the problems. It isn't the right gasses, and it isn't in the right proportions.

True that. To call him out on this, of all things, is ridiculous considering all the other crap he's been slinging.

But what they meant clearly does not meet the strict criteria for the word. NASA is an authority on certain things, but semantics is not one. So they used a word according to a loose definition. To try to redefine air just because NASA used it in a certain way is a blatant appeal to authority. And before anyone accuses me of appeal to authority, because I cite the authority of the English usage experts who write dictionaries, that fallacy usually only applies in cases where the authority is not a subject-matter expert.

 

You've said many things. Nothing ever remotely true of correct.
So I ask again, How Do You Know?

- - - Updated - - -

I like her music.

 

NASA is not an expert on the moon. The people who write the definitions in the dictionary are experts. Did you miss that post.

 

You are wrong.

Humans are in the category of APES.

Hominoidea contains two families of living (extant) species:
Hylobatidae consists of four genera and sixteen species of gibbon, including the lar gibbon and the siamang. They are commonly referred to as lesser apes.
Hominidae consists of orangutans, gorillas, chimpanzees, bonobos and humans.[1][2] Alternatively, the hominidae family are collectively described as the great apes.[3][4][5][6] There are two extant species in the orangutan genus (Pongo), two species in the gorilla genus, and a single extant species Homo sapiens in the human genus (Homo). Chimpanzees and bonobos are closely related to each other and they represent the two species in the genus Pan.

LINK...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ape

AboveAlpha...p.s...Humans are APES..

 

Time to waste and waste of time are not synonymous phrases in English.

I never said that they were wasting their time, I said that they had the money and time to waste. Those do not mean the same thing in English.

Do you honestly think that your English is good?

I am not contradicting myself because I never said that it was a waste of time in the first place. You clearly don't understand that the phrases do not mean the same thing.

There was no Muslim invasion of Europe at the time of the Crusades, what are you talking about?

What does them MUCH LATER assimilating and converting to Islam have to do with them sacking the capital, killing the Caliph, and ending the Islamic Golden Age?

...The Mamluks ruled over Egypt for 250 more years and they didn't introduce extremism; why are you just making up history?

...The Mamluks REINSTATED the Abassids in Cairo, they didn't fight them. This is just an incredibly sad attempt at making up history.

Dude, TIME TO WASTE AND WASTE OF TIME DO NOT MEAN THE SAME THING IN ENGLISH.

I'm not trying to change the context, THAT WAS ALWAYS THE CONTEXT, which is what me and other posters have been trying to tell you for a few pages now.

Do you see how I said "they had the funds and time to waste."?

Do you see that? In English, waste can be used as a synonym for SPEND. So, what I was saying, in English, and what the other English speakers understood me to be saying and came to my defense for, was that THEY HAD THE FUNDS AND TIME TO SPEND ON THE SUBJECTS. Not that the following subjects were wastes of time.

Geesh.

Absolutely incredible amount of ignorance of the English language. If you had actually been well versed in English, you would have understood what I was saying, LIKE EVERYBODY ELSE DID EXCEPT YOU.

 

You know he's just yanking your chain. No one, even bad english folk, is that stupid. So he is playing with you.
And if anyone is that ignorant, well, they should try education.

 

I meant not, so hold your horses.

A blatant appeal to authority? What do you call saying that the makers of dictionaries are experts?! And there is no "strict criteria" for the word, you're saying that there is based on an "appeal to dictionary definitions."

 

Of course they are experts in English usage. Who else would you get to make a dictionary?

There obviously IS a more strict definition, one which speaks of gas proportions and location around the Earth. There is also is a loose definition, used by NASA, which basically just means any old gasses surrounding any old rock.

 

I ask you again how do you not know!

The sound of frustration and submission.

It is very obvious that you have not tried it.

 

It is your post not mine and you did clarify it is not a waste of time and I agree with you so what is your problem??

Yup, that is why I am able to expose all you and your buddies attempts to misuse the English language with distortions.

Here it is again read your own post:
Quote Originally Posted by GraspingforPeace View Post
The reason science was conducted by priests and monks during the Middle Ages is because they had the funds and time to waste. Scientists, however, existed for far longer than the existence of Christianity.

They had time to waste on what? For sure you were not referring to their time spend in prayers or meditation.

Wow!!! When was the Islamic Golden Age again? 8th century to 1258 AD

The Islamic invasion of Gaul followed the Islamic conquest of Hispania by the Muslim Commander Tariq ibn Ziyad in 711. During the 8th century Muslim armies conquered the region of Septimania, the last remnant of the Visigothic Kingdom.

The Umayyad conquest was stopped at the Battle of Toulouse in 721, but they sporadically raided Southern Gaul as far as Avignon, Lyon, and Autun.[2] After the 732 Battle of Tours-Poitiers, the Franks checked Aquitanian sovereignty, and reasserted their authority over Burgundy, but only later in 759 did they manage to take the Mediterranean region of Septimania, due to Andalusi neglect and local Gothic disaffection.

Muslim forces were defeated in the Battle of Tours in 732, considered the turning point of Muslim expansion in Gaul. With the death of Odo in 735 and after putting down the Aquitanian detachment attempt led by duke Hunald, Charles Martel went on to deal with Burgundy and the Mediterranean south of Gaul.

First Crusade It was launched on 27 November 1095 by Pope Urban II with the primary goal of responding to an appeal from Byzantine Emperor Alexios I Komnenos, who requested that western volunteers come to his aid and help to repel the invading Seljuq Turks from Anatolia

1529 seige of Vienna
1571 Battle of Lepanto
1683 seige of Vienna

That is what the Muslim Golden Age they were busy waging wars and invading Christian lands. The Crusade was a respond against Muslim aggression.

So please repeat your lies that there was no Muslim invasion????

.

I will answer that after you have educate your self about the Golden Age clearly your brain can not handle all the truth, "truth overload".

Tell that to your buddies and your self here is your post again:
Quote Originally Posted by GraspingforPeace View Post
The reason science was conducted by priests and monks during the Middle Ages is because they had the funds and time to waste. Scientists, however, existed for far longer than the existence of Christianity.

Then stay with that context and stop flip flopping as I said I agree with you that the study of science is not a waste of time!

Yes and you said it very clearly they had FUNDS AND TIME TO WASTE. Time to waste on what? And I ask you, do you consider it a waste of time to study science? and you answer NO it is not. Then your buddies bud in then you change your mind again and again as I said I agree with you that the study of science is not a waste of time you answer that very clearly with a big NO so what is your problem??

There intent was to distort and hide from the truth and you did answer it clearly it is not a waste of time and I agree with you how many times do you want me to repeat it?

If you do not want me to agree with you that is fine with me, sigh!

Indeed so much ignorance and pretentiousness so much flip flopping and self contradictions.

 

At the time of the Crusades from the 11th - 15th century you claim let us be very clear NO MUSLIM INVASION OF EUROPE.
I will give you the benefit of the doubt that you are probably referring to the 1st Crusade only?
So, let us first ask your friends taikoo and dairyair if they agree with you and why?

 

Common sense not to use earth-air definition when talking about extra terrestrial air.

anyway, fun talking to you, Im past ready to drop this.

 

The reason to choose that was that it is a simple matter. He said it is a Fact that the moon has no air. It is not a fact, and the moon does have air.

More often the statements are of a much more difficult nature to pin down. See how hard you made this one!

But no creo will ever admit to being wrong on anything, ever, so of course he didnt admit to it there either. He just ignored it

Oh, and btw, you have probably noticed on occasion that a dictionary definition is not really adequate to express various concepts in science.

 

The thing is, the dictionary does contain a word which is perfectly adequate. That word is gas. Used in the plural. What is a creo?

 

I know. It is widely known.

Liking music is a sound of frustration and submission. LOL. Cukoo cukoo.

It is impossible for me to be that ignorant, so NO, I have not tried it.

 

There you have your answer then you should try it, education is the best cure to ignorance.

since you like to bud in here;

At the time of the Crusades from the 11th - 15th century you claim let us be very clear NO MUSLIM INVASION OF EUROPE.
I will give you the benefit of the doubt that you are probably referring to the 1st Crusade only?
So, let us first ask your friends taikoo and dairyair if they agree with you and why?

 

It is clear you have chose the wrong words to express what you really intent to say which is "it is not a waste of time to study science" that is your real intent but instead you said;
Originally Posted by GraspingforPeace View Post
The reason science was conducted by priests and monks during the Middle Ages is because they had the funds and time to waste.

You should have use the words spare or free instead of waste this way your sentence will be understood clearly as to what you wanted it to be understood "The reason science was conducted by priests and monks during the Middle Ages is because they had the funds and free or spare time" now doesn't that sound better?

Time to waste on what? study science
Free or spare time to do what? study science

 

Thing is that the mittfact was at best only partly right by use of one definition, not the absolute
Fact he presented as.

A creo is a creationist. Their sites are creosites. (I invented that word myself)