Evolution vs. Intelligent Design

When you accuse me of unrelated arguments, that are clearly directly related, in an effort to avoid having to confront the absurdity of some of your assertions you are showing an intellectual and ethical weakness.
The bible got one thing right. Pride goeth before the fall.

 

No, what you have highlighted is, you can't explain the origins of the CMBs outside of the Big Bang.

**** on.

 

I dunno. Possibly nothing. It was supposed to have a faint whiff of humour. To the extent that I could be said to have a sense of humour, it probably is on the dry side.

 

I don't know what more you want. I have made basic arguments and used logical reasoning. If you have specific questions, then perhaps you need to state your points with more clarity. I'm actually not catching the meaning of your football analogy.

I don't know if you are posting via a mobile phone, perhaps that is why you are having trouble with your attributions.

This is where we part your beliefs from common sense, but we've been through this thought process enough already.

This is were we get into more doublespeak and separation of meaning of the words being used. Words such as, "faith, proof, theory and fact" have definitive meanings regardless of who the speaker is.

How similar your, "there is no proof but it is a fact" argument mirrors that of Creationists.

I would rather not debate meanings of words. If you want to contend that the words you use mean different things when you use them there is no point of agreement from the beginning if we don't speak the same language.

Facts are facts there is no opinion involved.

Again you seem to be contradicting yourself.

Many Christians would argue that there is a lot of proof that there is a God.

Again???????????

 

And the Sun goes around the Earth.

 

Is this the logic you offer?
You are provided exactly what you requested and then refuse to address it?
That seems to be your modus operandi to demonstrate your intellectual acuity.
RUN!!!!!!

 

I'm not going over this post point by point because of your intransigence and contradictions of truth and other things which makes it pointless to banter about. I don't know if you are indeed using a cell phone and that is why you still have attribution issues but you have learned to provide links albeit without quoting relevant information from those links that you think pertinent.

You say that I name call (I don't remember doing that) and then you once again challenge my intelligence or education level. Frankly, I really see no more use in exchanges with you if that is your attitude. You are welcome to go ask your doped up college professors whatever you want. Coincidentally, I am watching a college professor on TV right now talking about the greatness of pot smoking. This is the problem with education today, some of the most stupid people are teaching children nonsense like science can't prove facts and cannabis is good. I consider the source automatically suspect. It used to be encourage to question authority, now it is becoming heresy.

I have no intention of banning myself as much as you'd like that.

 

So, you cry for citations, and when you get them, you ignore them.

If you have no interest in a proper debate then congratulations, you made your intentions clear.

 

So your belief is education is detrimental?
Got it.
Explains a lot.

 

Actually, the Big Bang theory does answer what "came before" the Big Bang. Nothing. Time started with the expansion of the Universe. To ask what happened before time existed is a meaningless question.

 

I am accusing you of misstating my arguments which you have over and over...

- - - Updated - - -

No, that is just not true. If you want me to provide other scientific explanations for the CMB's then just ask like I said. But don't characterize it as I can't. That is not true at all.

I already posted this once, perhaps you didn't read it:

This is all I can find in the time that I have. But I will see if I can find the actual arguments for alternate explanations for CMB. I am not a physicist making the argument but there is proof that there are some out there who are.

 

So simply show how earth predating the sun and day and night being independent of a light source and a rotating sphere are "identical" to the BBT.
How does that misrepresent your position?

 

That is the theory I am offering since theories cannot be proved as fact then that is just as factual as any other theory according to his argument. But I figured you would not see the sarcasm that I expressed to Prof Sarcasm.

What do you want me to debate? That facts are not provable? I think that is a ridiculous and superfluous exercise.

 

Again with the straw man arguments. Do you do it intentionally or are you just oblivious of what it is you are doing?

 

Sure. Just as useless as asking who made God. But even proponents of the Big Bang do not know what came before the expansion, what triggered it etc.

I have also seen proponents say that it wasn't nothing but a singularity inside of which everything was infinitely compacted, superheated particles I forget what the call them right now.

- - - Updated - - -

How does that not misrepresent my position. Straw man after straw man. Just don't bother, I won't play your game.

 

Not really, considering that question is usually following a theist using the argument that "everything needs to have a cause".

I just told you that it is a nonsensical question to ask about "before" the Big Bang. And sure, we don't know what triggered it, but there are many working hypotheses out there.

Uh, well yeah, this is true, that's why you see people saying it.

 

So rather than acknowledge that he supplied exactly what you were after, which makes your argument in this post specious, you chose to be sarcastic and run away.
I understand.

 

Did you not say BBT and Genesis were "very similar if not identical"?
Shall I cite the post? Again?
There is no strawman.
There is only intellectual cowardice.

 

Absolutely nothing.

Except for the fact that it only works if we happen to be in the exact center of a spherical universe which we are!

You see, there is this thing called the "Cosmic microwave background" (CMB) which is the oldest light in the sky when the Universe was just 380,000 years old.

Now I know that I am not a physicist so perhaps someone who is a proponent of the Big Bang Theory can tell me why it is the CMB is coming at us from all directions (The glow is very nearly uniform in all directions) and since light travels at the same speed wouldn't that put us at the exact center of the universe since this light is traveling from the farthest edges of the Universe. One would think that if we were not at the center of the universe, some of this CMB would have passed by us from the closer edges of the finite universe, and others would never reach us giving the distance, speed of light and the exponentially speed of the expanding universe.

Is it not just too much of a coincidence that we are at the center of the universe? Doesn't this put todays scientists back to pre-heliocentric days of Catholic Dogma of an Earth centered universe?



^^^ Map of the know Earth-centric Big Bang Creationists Theory Universe

 

Im not going to run away, but back away. It may be contagious. Whatever does that to a persons mind, I dont want it for myself.

 

You know Bruce the only thing that I can figure is that there is an extreme disconnect between the point being made and the information that enters your head. I don't have to enter into a discussion with anyone regarding the merits of someone's irrelevant and faulty thesis. That is not running away, that is choosing not to waste my time.

 

I know that what I said and what you say I said have very little resemblance.

 

You are of course free to think wrongly if you wish. Have fun with it!