Philosophy Now Forum

Godfree wrote:Chaz ,,
I will presume from your response,
that you couldn't be bothered googling Neutrino detectors,
or that you did and you don't want to admit, I was right,,!!
So when science calls the BBT a fact ,
Then I will be more inclined to believe it .
Evolution is called a fact by the likes of Carl Sagan .
I don't believe there are any such claims for the bbt ,
if science hasn't been convinced yet ,!!!
aren't you accepting it all on FAITH ,,,Chaz

You are a moron. Why would I want to check out anything you say?

[

You are a moron. Why would I want to check out anything you say?[/quote]
I presume you have faith in your own judgment .
Fact is there are numerous Neutrino detectors at various places in the world.
Some are as deep as 2000 feet .
And they have been detecting neutrino's for a long time .How the current group can claim it as a new discovery is beyond me .
And you seem to enjoy engaging morons ,
or why is it that you reply to most of my posts,???

Godfree wrote:[

You are a moron. Why would I want to check out anything you say?

I presume you have faith in your own judgment .
Fact is there are numerous Neutrino detectors at various places in the world.
Some are as deep as 2000 feet .
And they have been detecting neutrino's for a long time .How the current group can claim it as a new discovery is beyond me .
And you seem to enjoy engaging morons ,
or why is it that you reply to most of my posts,???[/quote]

None of which is the slightest bit relevant to what we were talking about.

Moron , the term refers to a specific IQ quota ,
there was about four categories I believe , Moron imbicile stupid ,dumb.
I can't recall the four terms but they relate to say20 to 40 points imbicile,like people who can't spell,,LOL ,moron 40 to 60 ,stupid,60 to 80 and dunb 8o to 100 .
My IQ is about 125 , so that is "Proof " , I'm not a moron.
and this debate about neutrino's is relevant .
it refers to the bb and a lot of commonly accepted science .
religion uses popular science to try and gain credibility .
destroy the science and you destroy their credibility .

Godfree wrote:Moron , the term refers to a specific IQ quota ,
there was about four categories I believe , Moron imbicile stupid ,dumb.
I can't recall the four terms but they relate to say20 to 40 points imbicile,like people who can't spell,,LOL ,moron 40 to 60 ,stupid,60 to 80 and dunb 8o to 100 .
My IQ is about 125 , so that is "Proof " , I'm not a moron.
and this debate about neutrino's is relevant .
it refers to the bb and a lot of commonly accepted science .
religion uses popular science to try and gain credibility .
destroy the science and you destroy their credibility .

Please indicate how you babbling about neutrinos is relevant to; "A Challenge to Richard Dawkins and the Atheists."

[

Please indicate how you babbling about neutrinos is relevant to; "A Challenge to Richard Dawkins and the Atheists."[/quote]


Neutrino's go faster than light , according to Einstein this is impossible , he saw light as the cosmic constant . And time as the variable .
Einstein supports the bbt , if Einstein is wrong that would surely put doubt as to the bbt being correct .
As an Atheist I see the bbt as creating room for religions moment of creation .
So I would challenge the bbt and neutrino's are that challenge .

Godfree wrote:

chaz wrote: Please indicate how you babbling about neutrinos is relevant to; "A Challenge to Richard Dawkins and the Atheists."

Neutrino's go faster than light , according to Einstein this is impossible , he saw light as the cosmic constant . And time as the variable .
Einstein supports the bbt , if Einstein is wrong that would surely put doubt as to the bbt being correct .
As an Atheist I see the bbt as creating room for religions moment of creation .
So I would challenge the bbt and neutrino's are that challenge .

FUCKING HELL.

Please indicate how you babbling about neutrinos is relevant to; "A Challenge to Richard Dawkins and the Atheists.

[

N
FUCKING HELL.

a nod is a good as a wink to a blind horse Chaz

Godfree wrote:Neutrino's go faster than light ...

This is not a scientific fact. It may well become one but the jury is well and truly out on this matter, at present physics is checking for errors in the methodology of the experiments. The reason why it'll take some time is that physics is complicated and a fairly slow process but at least they are open to challenge, most would just love it to be correct as it just means more exploration and excitement. That many physicists are sceptical that the observations are correct is that Einstein's theory supports and is supported by so much of the rest of Physics.

Godfree wrote:[

N
FUCKING HELL.

a nod is a good as a wink to a blind horse Chaz

No shit!
Shall I call you Dobbin, or Seabiscuit?

chaz wyman wrote:

Godfree wrote:[

N
FUCKING HELL.

a nod is a good as a wink to a blind horse Chaz

No shit!
Shall I call you Dobbin, or Seabiscuit?

you could choose to see the point , or not as the case may be .
you can lead a horse to water , but you can't make it THINK,!!!

Godfree wrote:

chaz wyman wrote:

Godfree wrote:[

N
FUCKING HELL.

a nod is a good as a wink to a blind horse Chaz

No shit!
Shall I call you Dobbin, or Seabiscuit?

you could choose to see the point , or not as the case may be .
you can lead a horse to water , but you can't make it THINK,!!!

What's up Dobbin, is the water too cold?

So whats your role here Chaz , as a skeptic ,
are you defending the Atheists or the challenger ,
or are you just skeptical about it all,???

Godfree wrote:So whats your role here Chaz , as a skeptic ,
are you defending the Atheists or the challenger ,
or are you just skeptical about it all,???

I am an atheist - But that does not mean I am a cheerleader for the cause of Atheism and support dodgy views.
If the BBT is correct or if it is not - I do not select what mosts suits an anti-theist cause like a pussy.
If the BBT means that theist get a crumb of hope, I don't give a shit.
The bible thinks the sun goes round the earth - they lost the argument centuries ago.
Theism is not relevant to how I feel about the BBT.
You ought to follow that lead or you being to sound like a faith cheerleader for atheism.
This is about truth/ Not about God.

This is about truth/ Not about God.[/quote]
I totally agree Chaz,
I have been checking out sites that see the truth as ,
A Static universe fits the observational data better ,
In order to make the bbt fit , they have to adjust too many parameters .
In other words , it doesn't fit .
They just tweek a few things here and there to make it fit .
And as I was going on about ,
the most distant galaxies should be infants cos we can see their 13 billion year old image ,
not the case "the most distant galaxies show insufficient evidence of evolution"
I'm all about truth Chaz .
Do you think the American government/funders of such studies are honest ,
and seeking the truth ,
OR IS IT JUST A BIG PILE OF SPIN ,!!!!!!!!!