• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Allergies and Other Proofs Against God

ThereIsNoSpoon

ThereIsNoSpoon

Active Member
slave2six said:
Uh, yeah we do. That was how we discovered that, even though we got to the moon, our calculations for there the moon actually was were off by 10 meters. We just got lucky that the calculation wasn't more off...
Click to expand...

As far as I know we didn't know that the distance was increasing.
But I have no problem if I was wrong. Can you give me a link concerning your information?
 
ThereIsNoSpoon

ThereIsNoSpoon

Active Member
slave2six said:
It's really hard to read your posts.
"What's the difference between an orange?"

"Twenty seven, because iguanas have no earlobes."
​
This is what your posts sound like to me.
Click to expand...
You quoted a post of mine.

After rereading it i think it was not very clear in formulation. I simply wanted to state that it was not initially the distance increase that made us build mirrors on the moon, but the simple attempt to measure the orbit.
 
ThereIsNoSpoon

ThereIsNoSpoon

Active Member
richardlowellt said:
here is your statement on post #321---"We definitely DON'T have mirrors as to measure the orbit with lasers"
Click to expand...
Learn to quote.
Here is my statement:
We most DEFINETLY dont have mirrors as to measure the orbit with lasers BECAUSE it moves slightly further away.
Click to expand...
Now perhaps i am missing something in "your" English here or you are missing something in mine.
I stated the part after BECAUSE is not the reason why we have the part before the because.
I didn't state (or at least meant to state) that we do not have any mirrors at all on the moon in order to measure the distance.
Actually that should be obvious by the other posts i made concerning that topic. Especially from the post you based your other reply on where i said:
And i again tell you that it is not because of the distance increasing that we have these mirrors. Actually the fact that it moves away is something we came to know because of the mirrors.
Click to expand...


Now, do us all a favor and go to www.science.nasa.gov----read what it has to say, then get back to me telling me just how wrong you were.
Click to expand...
You do not have a qualified link ?
How about this one?

This corresponds to what i have come to know during school. The experiment showed that the moon orbit moves away.
Of course people knew before that the distance between moon and earth varies but the increase of the orbit itself was as far as i know not known.
We have one poster here who claims that it was known before. If so then of course i would stand corrected.

Reading comprehension one more time, where did i ever say an orbit had to be STABLE OR CONSTANT.
Click to expand...
You didn't state anything about that. Thats why I asked. And i didn't claim that you did. You may show me where i supposedly did so. But i guess we finally can agree that according to you it doesn't have to be stable and therefore a teapot can orbit the sun.

Now if we might come back to the topic.

I claimed that a teapot could physically be in orbit around the sun. You denied that possibility. I brought forth some (simplified) calculation, you even acknowledged that an orbit doesn't have to be absolutely stable (see the moon). Hence i would like to know if you have changed your mind concerning the possibility of the teapot?
If not and if you insist on your ideas about the impossibility of a teapot orbiting the sun i would like to see the calculations presented here that disprove the possibility.
 
R

richardlowellt

Well-Known Member
You do not have a qualified link ?
How about this one?
Click to expand...
I think I do.



If not and if you insist on your ideas about the impossibility of a teapot orbiting the sun i would like to see the calculations presented here that disprove the possibility.
Click to expand...
[/QUOTE]An elliptical orbit would bring such a small object to close to the sun, it would melt. Our teapot would also need a power source to keep it in a stable orbit, teapots don't have retro-rockets.
 
ThereIsNoSpoon

ThereIsNoSpoon

Active Member
An elliptical orbit would bring such a small object to close to the sun, it would melt. Our teapot would also need a power source to keep it in a stable orbit, teapots don't have retro-rockets.[/quote]
If that is not some kind of hypocrisy.
I asked several times about your definition of an orbit.
In one of your last posts you even insisted on not having said yet anything about its stability.
And now suddenly you come foreward with an
a) elliptical
b) stabile
orbit.

And even then you dont even provide any evidence for your claim.
Why would an elliptical orbit bring it to close to the sun?
Why would it need to have retro rockets (comets dont have them either)
Why does it have to be an elliptical one now?
Why suddenly a stable? What does stable at all mean? Stable for how many circulations?

So far you claim much but you dont give even one single mathematical term for why it supposedly has to be so.

Just like a religious zealot. Much "blabla", no substance.
 
V

Vile Atheist

Loud and Obnoxious
Dirty Penguin said:
You my friend are a LIAR......Liar, Liar...pants on fire.....because I have it on good authority....:biglaugh:That the banana was "made" by God specifically for humans....So surely you are mistaken.....

YouTube - Kirk Cameron And Bananas

:sorry1:

I kid with you...I kid...
Click to expand...

You are blind sheeple! The banana was designed for the human hand. Note how it is curved towards the face. It has a non-slip grip. It comes in a biodegradable package. A tab exists for easy access. Fits perfectly into the hand.

...And it's not that much of a stretch of the imagination to find the myriad of sexual uses for it. All of that is testament to the wonders of God!
 
Dirty Penguin

Dirty Penguin

Master Of Ceremony
ContentiusMaximus said:
You are blind sheeple! The banana was designed for the human hand. Note how it is curved towards the face. It has a non-slip grip. It comes in a biodegradable package. A tab exists for easy access. Fits perfectly into the hand.

...And it's not that much of a stretch of the imagination to find the myriad of sexual uses for it. All of that is testament to the wonders of God!
Click to expand...


:biglaugh:.....
 
U

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
slave2six said:
It's really hard to read your posts.
"What's the difference between an orange?"

"Twenty seven, because iguanas have no earlobes."
​
This is what your posts sound like to me.
Click to expand...

In high school I was told the difference between an orange is:
ice cream because it has no bones.
 
U

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
Quaxotic said:
So god killed possibly millions of people to take out a couple of demons.

Surely an all powerful god can come up with a better plan that doesnt even killing people.

And i'm pretty sure demons can swim.

-Q
Click to expand...

Would it really matter if demons can swim?

Apparently more than a couple of demon were involved. About 1/3 followed Satan. The hybrid offspring from those demons that they had with the women of earth were called Giants (Nephilim) at Gen 6:4.
These were bullies and violent causing others to fall.
Verse 5 gives God's estimate of the situation and it was not a positive report.

Jude 6 relates what happened to those de-materialized demons. They are held in dense darkness. The Greek uses the word Tartarus (tartao'o).

Genesis (18:23-32) shows God would never destroy the upright with the wicked. There were no righteous ones left. There is a difference between killing and an execution for justice. If there would have Not been divine intervention those violent people would have not only turned on each other they would have killed Noah and his family. God had to intervene because of the promise of Genesis (3:15), and the promise to Abraham at Genesis (12:3; 22:18) that all families of the earth will be blessed, and all nations of the earth will be blessed. Revelation (22:2) shows that promise will be fulfilled.
 
The Neo Nerd

The Neo Nerd

Well-Known Member
So instead of just targeting the evil beings with bolts of divine lightning (which wouldnt be difficult because god is ALL POWERFUL)

BUT god creates a flood, that destroys millions of people and destroys every piece of infrastructure.

So the remaining people are left with a limited food supply with no shelter no nothing so your RETARD god can kill a couple of demons.

What an *******.

-Q
 
JustWondering

JustWondering

Jerk
Quaxotic said:
So instead of just targeting the evil beings with bolts of divine lightning (which wouldnt be difficult because god is ALL POWERFUL)

BUT god creates a flood, that destroys millions of people and destroys every piece of infrastructure.
Click to expand...

Why not just delete the ones he did not like. God supposedly made the universe from nothing just by willing it to be so. He could just as easily will someone/something to not exist.
 
R

richardlowellt

Well-Known Member
BUT god creates a flood, that destroys millions of people and destroys every piece of infrastructure.
[/QUOTE]And then place a rainbow in the sky to remind us of what a huge prick he was.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top