I challenge the world , bring it on!

[Axe Elf]

I am still waiting to give you any sort of rational argument. Take no offence, you are not as good as you think you are at debate.

As I said, you can refer to your first thread for multiple examples of rational arguments that you were completely unable to grasp, or you can keep waiting and responding in kind to the "blah blah" while you wait.

And I would never take offense to any kettle so limited in their perception of reason as to call me black; I would more likely feel pity for them. Unless of course they were obnoxious enough in their ignorance as to earn ridicule instead. And that's the ground where you have planted your flag.

 

[james blunt]

time does not exist.

The existence of time is a different question . But do you agree that space does not age?

 

[james blunt]

As I said, you can refer to your first thread for multiple examples, or you can keep waiting and responding in kind to the "blah blah."

And I would never take offense to any kettle so limited in their perception of reason as to call me black; I would more likely feel pity for them.

Interesting there was no science posted by you in the other thread. You seem more spiritual than able to give scientific answers.

 

[allfoak]

Cognitive denial and outright lies. Anyone reading this thread can see you have just lied. Your words do not even attempt to challenge it, they attempt to attack the poster and pass the message to one side. A typical failure by you science types when you enter one of my threads. I have no problem that your science skills are not up to the challenge. This is the beginning, I am going to destroy the science lies .
I am in Gods house not your science house.

You have no idea to whom you speak.
Nor do you deserve to know.
What I have said is already coming about.
What you call a lie is manifesting right in front of your face and you can't even see it.
Blinded by your arrogance all you see is your own face.

 

[Axe Elf]

Interesting there was no science posted by you in the other thread. You seem more spiritual than able to give scientific answers.

Well, birds of a feather, you know...

 

[JoshuaTree]

The existence of time is a different question . But do you agree that space does not age?

Hmmmm. I bet the expected rate of quantum fluctuations slow as a volume of empty space accelerates towards light speed. If so that suggests a metric for measuring the age of space so to speak.

 

[james blunt]

You have no idea to whom you speak.
Nor do you deserve to know.
What I have said is already coming about.
What you call a lie is manifesting right in front of your face and you can't even see it.
Blinded by your arrogance all you see is your own face.

OK I am sorry Sir, please tell me oh wise one , where is this space-time you speak of ?

That's called sarcasm, I do not care who you are, you would still be wrong when the truth speaks for itself. You have no idea who I am , I have a self given nick name of the Anti-science.

If you are as smart as you are already pretending with your arrogance, you should have no problem ''showing'' space-time ,.

No doubt like most of your science buddies, they run away , they all do.

 

[DonnieLD]

The existence of time is a different question . But do you agree that space does not age?

#1. Science is the study of of our physical world, science will not be destroyed by an argument of space. It might be modified but never destroyed or in danger, only our theories are in danger of being disproven.

#2. Space is our feeble attempt to understand the universe and what lies around us and outside of it. If God created the universe and God has always been and will always be, then why would space be any different?

#3. The concept that space in our tangible universe ages is more in reference to what is contained within the space within our realm of comprehension. We perceive the particles within the space, but not the space, and so we say that our "space" ages over time when in fact we are referring to the physical creations contained within that space which has not aged.

 

[JoshuaTree]

OK I am sorry Sir, please tell me oh wise one , where is this space-time you speak of ?

That's called sarcasm, I do not care who you are, you would still be wrong when the truth speaks for itself. You have no idea who I am , I have a self given nick name of the Anti-science.

If you are as smart as you are already pretending with your arrogance, you should have no problem ''showing'' space-time ,.

No doubt like most of your science buddies, they run away , they all do.

Me! Me! Pick Me!!!

 

[james blunt]

Hmmmm. I bet the expected rate of quantum fluctuations slow as a volume of empty space accelerates towards light speed. If so that suggests a metric for measuring the age of space so to speak.

You are talking what is referred to as mumbo jumbo, what you said means nothing . You think it means something in your subjective mind, but when the question is so simple as the one I have asked, it needs no mumbo jumbo does it now?

Why not try giving an honest answer and admit space does not age because there is nothing to age?

 

[JoshuaTree]

You are talking what is referred to as mumbo jumbo, what you said means nothing . You think it means something in your subjective mind, but when the question is so simple as the one I have asked, it needs no mumbo jumbo does it now?

Why not try giving an honest answer and admit space does not age because there is nothing to age?

Dude... you sound like my ex-wife.

 

[james blunt]

#1. Science is the study of of our physical world, science will not be destroyed by an argument of space. It might be modified but never destroyed or in danger, only our theories are in danger of being disproven.

#2. Space is our feeble attempt to understand the universe and what lies around us and outside of it. If God created the universe and God has always been and will always be, then why would space be any different?

#3. The concept that space in our tangible universe ages is more in reference to what is contained within the space within our realm of comprehension. We perceive the particles within the space, but not the space, and so we say that our "space" ages over time when in fact we are referring to the physical creations contained within that space which has not aged.

Ok, it looks like we have a honest scientist here.

Do you realise how many of science theories need modifying? Most of them

So you admit space does not age , it is the things within space that age,. so why does science explain it so badly and say time is independent of substances?

Why have such rubbish as space-time when there is no such thing ?

 

[Phantasman]

How old are you? Can you observe the space around you? As it aged any while you age? Is there anything to age of space (void)?

I'm 68.

The space around me isn't what you asked. You tried to put me into a box for observance.

I'm getting a slight feeling why you were banned from the other sites.

I'm not trying to win anything here. But I'm wise enough to not go in circles seeking answers.

I gave my answer. Maybe. Not yes, not no.

 

[YmirGF]

No doubt like most of your science buddies, they run away , they all do.

I'd suggest there is a very good reason for that and it is not the reason that you perceive. Quite the contrary, really.

 

[Axe Elf]

Dude... you sound like my ex-wife.

LOL!

That's it! Sustainer is the official unreasonable "ex" of the board!

 

[james blunt]

Dude... you sound like my ex-wife.

LOl , I am a bit of a nag.

 

[james blunt]

I'd suggest there is a very good reason for that and it is not the reason that you perceive. Quite the contrary, really.

They run away because they can't answer me or they push for a ban. I will not accept untruths , I told science that day one.

 

[Axe Elf]

They run away because they can't answer me or they push for a ban. I will not accept untruths , I told science that day one.

OMG! That's awesome! "I told science that day one."

 

[DonnieLD]

Ok, it looks like we have a honest scientist here.

Do you realise how many of science theories need modifying? Most of them

So you admit space does not age , it is the things within space that age,. so why does science explain it so badly and say time is independent of substances?

Why have such rubbish as space-time when there is no such thing ?

It goes into our comprehension of space, we see space as what is actually contained within the space. Space does not need to flex, only the particles within it so when we say we bend space and time we are actually attempting to understand how to bend the substance within the space in an effort to decrease the time, as we perceive it, to cross the "space" when in fact we are only crossing the physical matter within said space.

As for modifying science theories, they always need modifying because without the study of science we will never truly understand where we were put.

As for scientist, I definitely wouldn't say that. I simply see the space around me differently than most.

 

[james blunt]

I'm 68.

The space around me isn't what you asked. You tried to put me into a box for observance.

I'm getting a slight feeling why you were banned from the other sites.

I'm not trying to win anything here. But I'm wise enough to not go in circles seeking answers.

I gave my answer. Maybe. Not yes, not no.

What is space made of ?

Nothing yes?

 

[YmirGF]

They run away because they can't answer me or they push for a ban. I will not accept untruths , I told science that day one.

Yeah, you are going to have an easy time bringing on world peace. Like, look how effective you have been here on RF in selling you, um, errr... ahhh... "ideas".