Jump to content
Evolution Fairytale Forum

Enoch 2021

Veteran Member
  • Content Count

    1,423
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    73

Enoch 2021 last won the day on October 30 2016

Enoch 2021 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

411 Excellent

1 Follower

About Enoch 2021

  • Rank
    Veteran Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Interests
    The WORD of GOD. Biochemistry, Microbiology, Physics, Genetics

    Military(ret.)

Previous Fields

  • What is your Gender?
    Male
  • How old are you?
    50
  • What is your affiliation/religion?
    Christian
  • What is your Worldview?
    Young Earth Creationist
  • Where do you live (i.e. Denver, Colorado)
    Missouri

Recent Profile Visitors

280 profile views
  1. Enoch 2021

    A Conversation With Enoch

    So the EXPERIMENT that Validates "gravity" is responsible for attracting then holding GASSES (The Atmosphere) to the Earth --- Violating the Laws of Entropy and ground squirrel level reasoning is... 1) the weight of an empty CO2 fire extinguisher vs the weight of a full one. 2) The weight of an empty scuba tank vs the weight of a full one. 3) The weight of an empty nitrogen tank (used by race crews to power tools at the track) vs the weight of a full one. And lol, since these are 'Experiments' (according to you and your cohorts), Please Post the Formal Scientific Hypothesis and identify the Independent and Dependent Variables for EACH...? And can you please tell us the difference bewteeen a "Closed System" ( CO2, Scuba, and Nitrogen TANK) and an "Open System" (Earth and THE ATMOSPHERE) --- My Argument, Mr. Straw Man Fallacy...? And we're still waiting for you to show us The Walls and ROOF for your claim: "Earth is the Container"...? regards
  2. Enoch 2021

    A Conversation With Enoch

    Maybe cause it has more "stuff' in it. I was responding to this trainwreck... paisan: "Gravity attracts matter toward the center of the planet .... including any gas.' Pretty much the same trainwreck your proffered earlier in this thread, then....WHOLESALE DODGED quite a number of times !!! "ALWAYS" --- unless it's Physically Hindered --- it's called the Laws of Entropy, Gilligan. Really?? And...., Go ahead? You kinda have to know what something 'is' BEFORE you claim it's responsible for something else. If not, you're simply extrapolating off an Appeal to Ignorance (Fallacy). 1. False Analogy Fallacy 2. We're not interested in 'descriptions' ---that which Equations (Math) @ Best are only capable of, we're interested in EXPLANATIONS. Any idiot can 'describe' something. 3. Math (Equations) don't/can't 'PREDICT' anything They could, because all you have is a Fairytale Equation... If all you have is the "Mathematical Form" supporting that it's " GRAVITY " (5 - 3 = 2 ), then how do you know, it's not: " Duccolslopelgerts " (6 - 4 = 2), " Kinichifucolsloms " (7 - 5 = 2), " Wiggleytiggleyskurts " (8 - 6 = 2) ad infinitum that's ACTUALLY at play in lieu of "Gravity"....? Moreover, that "Mathematical Form" (Newtonian Gravity) that you're 'Stage 5 Clinging To' has been relegated to dust bin of History... For the 10th Time... "Einstein created his general theory of relativity—which provides our modern understanding of gravity—with the express purpose of expunging nonlocality from physics. Isaac Newton's gravity acted at a distance, as if by magic, and general relativity snapped the wand in two by showing that the curvature of spacetime, and not an invisible force, gives rise to gravitational attraction." Musser George: How Einstein Revealed the Universe's Strange "Nonlocality"; Scientific American, November 2015. http://www.scientifi...ge-nonlocality/ AGAIN, Define NOT ...? Furthermore, to stay ON TOPIC...Can you show GASSES (Nitrogen, Helium, Hydrogen, Methane ect) being attracted toward Earth at a rate of ~9.86 m/s^2 ...???? regards
  3. Enoch 2021

    A Conversation With Enoch

    Yes Well prior to your Feeble Diversion and hammering the c4 fire with: the same way you can have water pressure without a container" my point was 'gravity' (Whatever that is, lol) has no attractive affect on GASSES. 'duh' You can't have WATER PRESSURE there Gilligan...without a Container EITHER. my word Goodness gracious. regards
  4. Enoch 2021

    A Conversation With Enoch

    and then you call me silly. Can you show the Walls and Roof...? Right, so... Please post the Experiment that Validates your claim...? (Citation Please) i.e., Post The Formal Scientific Hypothesis; then Highlight the "Independent" and Dependent Variables...? 1. Begging The Question Fallacy x 2: 'gravity' and 'gravity attracts'. 2. Any GAS, eh? So what about: Nitrogen, Hydrogen, Helium, Methane ect...??? 1. Begging The Question Fallacy x 2: 'gravitational force'. 2. 'gravity' is not a "FORCE", young SkyWalker. SEE: George Musser and your 'scientific community'. regards
  5. Enoch 2021

    A Conversation With Enoch

    Yes, it's called "Science" (lol) And, weighing marbles then adding more marbles then weighing it again ---identifying the difference; THEN concluding (rotflol): "The Marbles are affected by 'gravity' is so Stupefyingly Nonsensical the English Language is ill suited to capture the sheer Absurdity. It's not 'attracted down', you have the "GAS" trapped in a CONTAINER (!!), Gilligan. And for about the 35th Time, why aren't: Nitrogen, Hydrogen, Helium, Methane, ect (GASSES) 'attracted down', professor ?? Yes, like answering "what color is a Blue Wall??" and the response is: "Sweet". Gilligan, The Natural Tendency for a Gas is to Increase Entropy (High to Low Pressure) and dissipate gradients until equilibrium is reached. You are aware that the diffusion solute particles --- and a PRESSURE GRADIENT with respect to partial pressures of GASES, always moves DOWN a concentration/pressure gradient respectively until uniform concentration/pressure is achieved, RIGHT?? It's called Equilibrium !!! "Thus the diffusion of solute particles takes place down the concentration gradient (A PRESSURE GRADIENT with respect to partial pressure of GASES) until uniform concentration is achieved". [ i.e., until equilibrium is reached ]Chatterjea, MN., Shinde, R: Textbook of Medical Biochemistry; 8th Edition, p. 817 So, Show the elevation where EQUILIBRIUM is reached and MAINTAINED in our atmosphere....? LOL Sure, that's exactly what they're saying... "Einstein created his general theory of relativity—which provides our modern understanding of gravity—with the express purpose of expunging nonlocality from physics. Isaac Newton's gravity acted at a distance, as if by magic, and general relativity snapped the wand in two by showing that the curvature of spacetime, and not an invisible force, gives rise to gravitational attraction." Musser George: How Einstein Revealed the Universe's Strange "Nonlocality"; Scientific American, November 2015. http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-einstein-revealed-the-universe-s-strange-nonlocality/ Define NOT ...? 1. Technically (or any other way), it wasn't an Experiment. It was a flippin joke! 2. Why in the World would you need a Vacuum to show how a Non-Vacuum (GASSES) is affected by 'gravity'? Well, Errr...if you can't EXPLAIN "The Cause" of your Fairytale Force, then... you very well can't EXPLAIN then VALIDATE your claim 'gravity' ---("The Why/How "). SEE: 'duccolslopellgertzz' is just as VALID as your claim. (previous post.) Unbelievable. Really?? So (lol), you're saying that this... "Einstein created his general theory of relativity—which provides our modern understanding of gravity—with the express purpose of expunging nonlocality from physics. Isaac Newton's gravity acted at a distance, as if by magic, and general relativity snapped the wand in two by showing that the curvature of spacetime, and not an invisible force, gives rise to gravitational attraction." Musser George: How Einstein Revealed the Universe's Strange "Nonlocality"; Scientific American, November 2015. http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-einstein-revealed-the-universe-s-strange-nonlocality/ ...is saying that the 'Scientific Community' follows Newtonian Gravity, eh? And the Declaration of Independence is a Treatise on the GNP of the Netherlands. Sure. Begging The Question Fallacy: " due to 'gravity' ". Errr, you have yet to VALIDATE 'gravity' !! It wasn't, that's kinda the point !! Along with 5 other Non-Sequitur (Fallacies). And it wasn't an EXPERIMENT for numerous reasons, but this is the Belly Laugher: So "The EFFECT" ( Dependent Variable ---"Prediction" ) is "gravitational pull". "The CAUSE" (Independent Variable) of gravitational pull is PRESSURE ?? regards
  6. Enoch 2021

    A Conversation With Enoch

    Ahhh, no I don't think that (lol). And... How can it... since you said, StormanNorman--- "water pressure without a container". Errr.... a Liquid "Water" ALWAYS conforms to the shape of it's container. So how can you have Water Pressure... without a Container ?? Absolutely Unbelievable Isn't the Balloon, Errr....the Container?? So again, How can you have a Gas Pressure...without a Container ?? my word sir
  7. Enoch 2021

    A Conversation With Enoch

    Errr... is Water a Liquid?? THEN... "A liquid is a nearly incompressible fluid that conforms to the shape of its container." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid And... "The *PRESSURE OF A GAS* is the force that the gas exerts *on the walls of its container.*" http://chemistry.elmhurst.edu/vchembook/180pressure.html So I say again... How can you have a Gas Pressure...without a Container ?? regards
  8. Enoch 2021

    A Conversation With Enoch

    Oh, I can't 'weight'. The only question is, will it rival your Entropy, Scientific Hypothesis - Independent Variable, Time, EinsHsteinan, Light Speed, ect... stupefying trainwrecks of the past ?? The 1600's called, they want their arguments back!! Pssst... "Einstein created his general theory of relativity—which provides our modern understanding of gravity—with the express purpose of expunging nonlocality from physics. Isaac Newton's gravity acted at a distance, as if by magic, and general relativity snapped the wand in two by showing that the curvature of spacetime, and not an invisible force, gives rise to gravitational attraction." Musser George: How Einstein Revealed the Universe's Strange "Nonlocality"; Scientific American, November 2015. http://www.scientifi...ge-nonlocality/ Newton himself wasn't exactly enamored/married to the idea... In a letter to Dr. Richard Bentley on Feb. 25th, 1692, Isaac Newton says: "Tis inconceivable that inanimate brute matter should (without mediation of something else which is not material) operate upon and affect other matter without mutual contact... “That gravity should be innate inherent and essential to matter so that one body can act upon another at a distance through a vacuum without mediation of anything else by and through which their action or force may be conveyed from one to another is to me SO GREAT AN ABSURDITY that I believe no man who has in philosophical matters a competent faculty of thinking can ever fall into it."Scheurer, PB., Debrock, G: Newton's Scientific and Philosophical Legacy, 1988, p.52 I do believe, Sir Isaac is calling into question your mental faculties sir. Why are you attempting to "EXPLAIN" something with a De-Bunked idea that your very own "Scientific Community" pays no mind to ?? AND, we're not looking for 'Descriptions', we're looking for EXPLANATIONS !! What Experiment ?? Begging The Question Fallacy: 'gravity', Validate this first!! And what CAUSES "MASS"...? Profound!!! Have you submitted this to the Nobel Committee yet?? I have a Feeling Great Googly Moogly!!! What's the gas "attracted to"...the Scale ?? What happens to the "MASS" if we remove Fjuri's ball (Container) ?? ps. Yes, this DOES "Rival' your other stupefying trainwrecks !! (Which I didn't think was possible). regards and oy vey
  9. Enoch 2021

    A Conversation With Enoch

    It wasn't an experiment (LOL), it was the clumsiest Non-Sequitur Fallacy I've heard in some time, congrats!! A juvenile explanation of a "duh" scenario; Basically... A. You have a ball with some amount of air....you weigh it. B. Then you add some more air...you weight it. The Ball weighs more in B, Therefore: 'Gravity' affects GASSES !!! Essentially, A. I have some marbles in a bag...I weigh it. B. I put some more marbles in the bag...I weight it. Since B weighs more, French Toast is better than Pancakes. You call that tear jerkin belly laugher above an Explanation?? AND, You have another BIG Problem... "Einstein created his general theory of relativity—which provides our modern understanding of gravity—with the express purpose of expunging nonlocality from physics. Isaac Newton's gravity acted at a distance, as if by magic, and general relativity snapped the wand in two by showing that the curvature of spacetime, and not an invisible force, gives rise to gravitational attraction." Musser George: How Einstein Revealed the Universe's Strange "Nonlocality"; Scientific American, November 2015. http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-einstein-revealed-the-universe-s-strange-nonlocality/ Newton himself wasn't exactly enamored/married to the idea... In a letter to Dr. Richard Bentley on Feb. 25th, 1692, Isaac Newton says: "Tis inconceivable that inanimate brute matter should (without mediation of something else which is not material) operate upon and affect other matter without mutual contact... “That gravity should be innate inherent and essential to matter so that one body can act upon another at a distance through a vacuum without mediation of anything else by and through which their action or force may be conveyed from one to another is to me SO GREAT AN ABSURDITY that I believe no man who has in philosophical matters a competent faculty of thinking can ever fall into it."Scheurer, PB., Debrock, G: Newton's Scientific and Philosophical Legacy, 1988, p.52 I do believe, Sir Isaac is calling into question your mental faculties sir. Why are you attempting to "EXPLAIN" something with a De-Bunked idea that your very own "Scientific Community" pays no mind to ?? LOL, How bout on these Gasses: Helium, Hydrogen, Nitrogen, Methane ?? This isn't a Scientific Hypothesis, Gilligan. It's a Begging the Question Fallacy, Declaration. So "The EFFECT" ( Dependent Variable ---"Prediction" ) is "gravitational pull". "The CAUSE" (Independent Variable) of gravitational pull is PRESSURE ?? It's not even coherent !!! You also need to call Sir Martin Rees and tell him that YOU have the answer to what CAUSES gravity... Martin Rees; FRS, Astronomer Royal; Esteemed British cosmologist/astrophysicist: "WHAT CAUSES GRAVITY AND MASS? Is the universe infinite? How did atoms assemble—on at least one planet around at least one star—into beings able to ponder these mysteries? THESE QUESTIONS STILL BAFFLE ALL OF US. Rather than the “end of science†being nigh, we are still near the beginning of the cosmic quest." {emphasis mine} http://press.princeton.edu/chapters/p7115.html Can you please post the content of that discussion?? (After Professor Rees is resuscitated from laughing to near death!!) Apparently: Helium, Hydrogen, Nitrogen, Methane, ect... didn't get the Memo And 'gravity' is NOT a Force, Young Skywalker. Begging The Question Fallacy: "gravity working" -- is what you have yet to VALIDATE! Just because things "weigh" more when we add more of the same things, doesn't Ipso Facto grant you warrant to state " The 'gravity' force' " by mere Fiat, professor!! I say it's duccolslopelgertzz That's the EXACT OPPOSITE of what George Musser just told us. (SEE above: "Magic", Invisible "Force", ect) Oh and you forgot these... Then for fun: 1. How can you have a Gas Pressure...without a Container ?? 2. And, @ what speed does the atmospheric gases have to be "Spinning" @ 300 miles above the equator (Thermosphere) if the equator is "Spinning" @ 1037 mph...? Please show the "Mechanism" i.e., Please elucidate the specific type of INTER-MOLECULAR BONDS between the Gases (LOL) AND between the Gases and Rotating Solid availing this feat of Preposterous Ludicrous Contradictory Absurdity --- from the Black Lagoon...? regards
  10. Enoch 2021

    A Conversation With Enoch

    Where's the 'gravity' part?? And which one--- Newtonian or EinsHstienian ?? Ahhh: 1. What Causes Mass...? Errr... Mass doesn't = 'gravity'. And.... Mass and Weight are 2 Different Animals...but I'm sure you already knew that. 2. So for clarity: The Formal Scientific Hypothesis is....? Independent Variable.....? Dependent Variable....? Then show how your Non-Existent Hypothesis reveals 'gravity' stage 5 clinging to the atmosphere (all levels)...? Then for fun: 1. How can you have a Gas Pressure...without a Container ?? 2. And, @ what speed does the atmospheric gases have to be "Spinning" @ 300 miles above the equator (Thermosphere) if the equator is "Spinning" @ 1037 mph...? Please show the "Mechanism" i.e., Please elucidate the specific type of INTER-MOLECULAR BONDS between the Gases (LOL) AND between the Gases and Rotating Solid availing this feat of Preposterous Ludicrous Contradictory Absurdity --- from the Black Lagoon...? Thanks in advance.
  11. Enoch 2021

    America's Changing Religious Landscape

    Why didn't you post 1 (a) Mr. Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy ??? : "the state of religious". http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/religion nothing like defining a Word with the Same Word!! Kinda Circular dontcha think?? How bout: the service and worship of nature (??) As mentioned, the Object of worship/service/adherence is quite irrelevant. Or: 2. "a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices". http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/religion Maybe because it has 'religious" in the definition of "Religion" AGAIN ?? (Laughingly Circular) Or: 3. "archaic : scrupulous conformity". http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/religion kinda ambiguous ?? Or: 4. "a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith". http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/religion Why not this one?? Ha ha ha... "Anybody who has been seriously engaged in scientific work of any kind realizes that over the entrance to the gates of the temple of science are written the words: YE MUST HAVE FAITH. It is a quality which the scientist cannot dispense with." {emphasis mine} Max Planck (Nobel Prize, Physics): WHERE IS SCIENCE GOING; 1932 Define "FAITH" (Please CITE a Reference) ...?? I don't prefer, thanks. I haven't come across any source that Explicitly States it; However, I really can't CITE a reference of a Physical Law that starts with: "Nature/Natural Phenomena" either...does that Ipso Facto mean Physical Laws aren't Natural Laws?? Ya SEE, it's IMPLIED. Nope. I'm saying that the "Secular Take/Narrative" of believing in God... is without evidence. (You know, the: sticking the fingers in the ears, blindfolded, saying La La La over and over again motif.) THEN... They Frivolously and Fallaciously Juxtapose: "Science" and "Religion" ("Science vs Faith" motif) in a feeble clumsy attempt to somehow color the former with legitimacy; and hence... color the latter as mere faiytale "Belief". Of course, the ones propagating the poorly contrived (and executed) False Dichotomy Fallacy Color Commentary Comparison along with the hordes of wanna be "wiki/google' scientist fairytale atheists...wouldn't know what either were if they landed on their head, spun around, and whistled dixie !!!! But this Color Commentary False Dichotomy Fallacy Sign Post, along with the incoherent hordes propagating it INCESSANTLY in Shangri-La, muddies the water sufficiently...so that Joe Coffee and Betty Breadmaker --- if they can get their attention off of: Debt, Kids, Jobs, American Idol, Cheese Fries, 'My Vote Counts' et al (General Life Concerns) --- that might wonder into the fray of LIFE'S biggest questions, are suddenly met with the barrage of Pseudo-Scientific and Logical trainwrecks which most just don't have the time to ferret out The REAL TRUTH of the Matter from the background noise and/or are so overwhelmed with Peer Pressure and 'The Majority'... that they let themselves be convinced that: Since transistors work; Therefore...evolution/something from nothing/multiverses/dark matter/big bangs/billion of years, ad nauseam, are Scientific FACTS and REALITY !!!! Perhaps you should go back an actually READ the PUMMELING of your trainwreck appeal here that I systematically dismantled --- ad nauseam, to you personally...how many times?? (@ least 10) Scripture refers to HIM as Spirit...sure isn't 'Matter'. HE is most assuredly not "A Concept". You said you went to 'uni' for religious studies?? If so, you should immediately appeal to them for a FULL REFUND...you have an Open/Shut Case! Well he's not a "A Concept" Mr Straw Man Fallacy. A Better Question is: How did "Matter" create itself ?? Did it pre-exist prior to it's existence...then Poofed Itself into reality?? Sir, you 'believe' that (Short List): Ink/Paper/Glue molecules can author Technical Instruction Manuals/Blue Prints and Something can come form Nothing, "Naturally". So your assessment of others "VIEWS" is kinda Inadmissible...it strains credulity well past critical mass. No I think I got it... Atheism -- a Positive Claim concerning the absence of A Deity. Really?? CITE it please...? So you're a Supernatural Atheist ?? Define Supernatural and give a few examples...? Actually, I'm not. Ya don't say?? Perhaps they want to stay somewhat logically consistent. What on Earth sir?? I said Cosmology is Pseudo-Science. Can you please "Quote Me" --- Date and Time Stamped, to SUPPORT your Nonsensical Buffoonery...? Logic. And Dawkins just called, he wants his trainwreck "Who Created The Creator" argument back --- so he can bury that Pummeled Buffoonery, properly. Ya see, He is the CREATOR. The "CREATOR" can't be "created" or else, HE couldn't be the "CREATOR", by simple definition. Furthermore Logically....for finite things to exist (Universe, Us), there MUST be an Infinite/Eternal "Always Was" Source; it's a Contingent Necessity (Antecedent). SEE: Aristotle (Prime/Unmoved Mover, First Cause). To deny this, you are forced into a logical checkmate then reduced to introducing an Infinite Regress (like you just did in your query)...it's Fallacious. Nothing can CREATE itself...... because that would mean: It Existed Prior To It's Existence. Logical Seppuku Also, there can be Only One "CREATOR"...considering more than one, even for a Planck Time, is Logical Seppuku. Sure. Ahhh, You forgot to state what the "so-called" 'hindering pedantry' actually was Is it common practice for you to charge people with a conjured 'Label' --- of whatever sways you @ the time, without giving Specific SUPPORT to Warrant that Label ?? Do you think you can hide/cloak your utter inability to coherently respond to points by conjuring ad hominems (Fallacies) ?? Ahhh, WE SEE YOU !! (duh) Object means "MATTER"---The Physical (Tangible). Ahhh Gilligan, Matter (an Object)... doesn't EXIST in Superposition of itself The Wave Function is a 'DESCRIPTION' of the Superposition "Concept", it's a mathematical construct that assists in 'Describing' Experimental Results... Regarding The Wave Function: "This wave here is not a physical wave, it does not carry any energy. And it's not even a property of a beam of photons, it's a property of one photon....The Wave is purely mathematical, it's a construct we use to determine what will happen in this experiment." Ramamurti Shankar; Professor of Physics, Yale. Quantum Mechanics I: The key experiments and wave-particle duality. (20:30 mark.) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uK2eFv7ne_Q regards
  12. Enoch 2021

    Proving A Negative

    An interesting twist...Very Well Played Then have a Billboard @ each station a promoting a Contest: 'Define the "Scientific Theory" of evolution'...guess how many different answers you'd get ? I doubt they would rival the BLANK sheets of Paper . The winner gets an imitation fossilized Finch Beak! regards
  13. Enoch 2021

    Proving A Negative

    The Absence of evidence isn't evidence of Absence; HOWEVER (and that's a BIG 'however')... when it is 'reasonable' to expect evidence, and there is NONE, THEN the Absence of evidence IS evidence of Absence. That brings up something funny, I told this guy the other day that TIME is not "Physical"...he said PROVE IT !! I said, Post the Chemical Formula and location of "Time"...? He ignored that retort right quick and said I couldn't 'Prove it'. Then I said the Absence/Non-Existence of the Physical attributes of 'TIME' is THE EVIDENCE of the Absence of the Physical Attributes of TIME. (lol) That was a 'Bridge Too Far' for him. regards
  14. Enoch 2021

    America's Changing Religious Landscape

    Really?? Well go ahead and post the definition...? And the amount of TIME spent 'in something' doesn't offer any veracity whatsoever to your knowledge of it. Heck, just look @ evolutionary biologists...they haven't the first clue what evolution even is!! So? People 'SAY' alot of different things. What on Earth?? Ahhh, God is not an 'OBJECT'. And there wouldn't be 'OBJECTS' EXISTING in the first place without a "KNOWER" First. Well Atheism is a 'Belief'---"A Concept", so it doesn't SAY anything because 'Concepts' aren't alive and don't have Vocal Chords; Ergo...Reification Fallacy. It's quite apodictic that the foundational tenet of Atheism is that the Physical/Material World is all that exists. A Supernatural Atheist rivals Married Bachelors. Sure. Ahhh Begging The Question (Fallacy): where'd you get the Human; then, the Human Mind?? Can you please post the Chemical Structure of the "Mind"...? That's why we LUV YA, your OCD like attention to excrutiating detail !! (And your Incessant Affinity to Straw Man Fallacy your opponents into Oblivian !!) Gilligan, I never said or even remotely implied that "NOTHING" exists outside Human Counciousness. I CITED this... "The doctrine that the world is made up of objects whose existence is independent of human consciousness [Materialism/Realism --- aka: Atheism] turns out to be in conflict with quantum mechanics and with facts established by experiment."--- Bernard d'Espagnat (Particle Physicist): The Quantum Theory and Reality; Scientific American, 1979, p. 151. https://www.scientif...197911_0158.pdf And as I said previously, God is not an OBJECT--- " MATTER ". And my argument is " MATTER " doesn't exist without "A Knower"... “The atoms or elementary particles themselves ARE NOT REAL; they form a world of potentialities or possibilities rather than one of things or facts." Werner Heisenberg (Nobel Laureate, Physics); Physics and Philosophy, p.160 Sir Rudolph Peierls PhD Nuclear Physics.... "The moment at which you can throw away one possibility and keep only the other is when you finally become conscience of the fact that the experiment has given one result... You see, the quantum mechanical description is in terms of knowledge, and knowledge requires SOMEBODY WHO KNOWS." {emphasis mine} The Ghost in the Atom, p. 73-74 So when you decide to get to the ACTUAL ARGUMENT --- in lieu of the clumsy incoherent trainwrecks (Fallacies) you proffer, you make sure and let us know, mmm K? Yes, with 100% Certitude. And can SUPPORT it EMPIRICALLY till the cows come home. Both are TRUE, Mr. False Dichotomy Fallacy. What is 'my version' of QM...? Then, your feeble appeal implies 'other' versions eh? Post the 'other versions' --- And SUPPORTING SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE for each --- to SUPPORT your ongoing --- @ Light Speed, trainwreck....? regards
×

Important Information

Our Terms