Deist smoke and mirrors at work, its not hard you have a hypothesis from a basic look at nature things fall when you drop them. Then you develop through experiment why they fall and after verification have a theory tested until proven wrong. Or one says we don't know! How did life start - we don't know but it did we are here. We have many hypotheses but no theory. Evolution is as sound a Theory as we can get and IMHO should be a Law on the same level as the Theory of Gravity backed by multiple areas of science.
That is strange.. just a few days ago, I filled a balloon and after tying it so that it would not deflate, I let it go and it took to the sky so fast that I could not get hold of it again. It did not fall like balloons have fallen before. Hmmm. I suspect the balloon was made of rubber and rubber is heavier than air (or so I have been told), it should have dropped to the ground... (I think it should have?)
So it will. Just because you temporarily negated the effects of gravity does not mean it will not fall to the ground when it eventually deflates - which, given time it will.
all isee are pics of white folk pretending to be Israel getting eaten by dragons and other assorted creatures. iguess the moral is dont pretend to be something you are not
You must be desperate to win the argument if you don't acknowledge that everything in this world deteriorates or changes over time.
All of that is irrelevant and is evasive of the question/challenge. The challenge was for you to "Show proof that the passage of time will cause the balloon to deflate." Can you show such proof? Yes or No.
Well, my goodness... another opinion from the audience. How nice. IMHO, your ability to detect sarcasm is a bit lacking in itself.
It is argued that unicorns are actually rhinoceroses, nobody really knows... The Hebrew root is ambiguous at best. Satyrs and cockatrices however are not disputed... there are a lot more if you want to get into it. My problem? That in this day and age, people believe in Unicorns because the bible is infallible, OR they accept that the bible is flawed, which is their sole instruction manual... and so much of our lives are walled by this mythology.
Study the Bible and the area of the time. Compare 2 Chron. 13:3. The figures are all ridiculously exagerrated. 2 Chron. 13:3. 1.2 million soldiers????????? That was probably half way to the total population of the area. 2 Chron. 14. A million man Ethiopian army would either have to force its way through Pharaohs Egypt, take the long road round Egypt through deserts or have Pharaohs permission to pass through. Some hopes!!!!!!!! This was probably an Egyptian General under Pharaoh leading Egyptians and mercenary troops. 1 million men to crush a minor state? In the famous Battle of Kadesh where Egypt faced the Hittites, a far more formidable foe, troop numbers were only a fraction of those numbers used in Bible battles. The sheer volume of numbers would make battle impossible. Scrambling over the bodies of dead and wounded. These were foot soldiers. No vehicles save their own 2 feet. Heaven help us! You have only to study the periods to realise the unreliability of Biblical numbers. And Asa's army? nearly 600,000 soldiers? From where? 2 small Canaanite kingdoms!
...maybe,... The Hebrew word used in Chronicles can also mean "company," not necessarily thousands, as a number: eleph http://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons/hebrew/kjv/eleph-2.html a thousand as numeral a thousand, or, company as a company of men under one leader, troops 8 And Asa had an army of men that bare targets and spears, out of Judah three hundred company; and out of Benjamin, that bare shields and drew bows, two hundred and fourscore company: all these were mighty men of valour.
Everything looks the same as it did last night before I went to sleep. So, that would be evidence that things don't change as a result of the passage of time. Do you want to try again?
...OK,... 9 And there came out against them Zerah the Ethiopian with an host of a thousand company, and three hundred chariots; and came unto Mareshah.
Unfortunately CD... that has nothing to do with the challenge that I posed, and is therefore irrelevant to the discussion I was engaged in with trevor2539
Have you looked at your skin. It's a day older than yesterday. It will deteriorate during this day whether you see it or not. That food you bought yesterday has a use by date on it (in the UK anyway). It indicates that the food will deteriorate. It will change form and its components will eventually be used by nature in some way. Given time nothing remains the same. And I don't intend replying again to something so obvious.
Your comment highlighted above, indicates that you are not abiding by the scientific method by allowing non observation. If I do not see it can be construed as not observing, or that it was too small to observe with the naked eye, or that there was no change. BTW: "nothing" is an absolute.
Okay lets keep this simple, and pick one story the Exodus account there are clear facts demonstrated from Archeology. 1. Slavery was not largely brutal, large projects were done by common peasants between harvests with a small full time number of elite professionals. Slaves had rights, many skilled and were well treated unless they tried to escape. 2. There is NO evidence of plagues laying the nation low from any source - no subordinate State, no Rival States or others. 3. NO evidence of a mass of slaves leaving Egypt. So lets see science demonstrated to me the story is BS. There were I'm sure Hebrew slaves just likely well treated and working among the Egyptians at various trades. They had rights preventing mistreatment far better than other societies at the time. And we still have the issue of the morality (lack of) demonstrated in the Torah and other books.
Exactly, and science will tell you that even the earth has undergone change over time and will pass away with the sun. So you don't admit your skin changed overnight, regardless of the fact you didn't bother to check. It could also be construed as wriggling out not admitting that all things change, regardless of noticing.
I read somewhere that much of the Persian army that fought with the Greeks were made up of "Egyptian Conscripts" i.e Slaves for Xerxes and Cyrus. I think the movie 300 also retold this part of history. When I researched, I found plenty of evidence for it.
