Intelligent Design is not creationism

I see you too have no answer to such simple questions I asked. You are stumped just like the child you always emulate.

LMAO...

Oh, here is one that non one wants to touch.

If the physical universe and all the supporting properties that support the physical universe and all its physical energy ceased to exist, would mathematics still exist?

If so, where would it exist?

Or,

Explain how would the properties of mathematics even cease to exist?

Too ridiculously simple to be addressed in this moron gallery.

Reminds me of something someone said many many years ago during a discussion of free will.

They said:

"Free will is like a goat freely roaming around....tied firmly and fastly by a tethered rope."

Quote from 2cents:

and in the realms of inept unanswered questions a la zizzo one cld add:
. what is the colour of a word?
. what is sex of the universe?
. what is the weight of nirvana?
. how many morons does it take to divide pi?
. how/what/when/where [A: anything really] {random verb} [any definitionally incompatible item to A, simply use your pocket dictionary]

i mean, just off the top of my head but we shld all feel free to add...


soooo many unanswered questions out there... kinda frightening innit?


how about these ones zizzo? any ideas?

. why does e(i*pi) + 1 = 0 ?

. why is it that the moon seems so well designed to perfectly block the sun on total solar eclipses?
 
Quote from Turok:

yip:
>When the fact is given, the probability is alway 1.

Yes, and this fact is given -- we are here ... thus it is 1.

JB

I agree. The probability of the existence of life is 1.

The real question is "Who put the apple in the basket?" or "Why is there an apple in the basket?"

Consider this example:
You observed that I had 100 winning trades in a row. For each trade, I got out the trade after exactly 5 minutes of holding the postion. The probability of my 100 winning trades in a row is 1. But you want to know my trading strategy.

Someone might believe I randomly picked the trades, and someone might believe I have a trading system. What do you believe?

jem proposed that I didn't randomly picked the trades. He used a scientific method to prove that it was not random.

1. Assume my trade is random
2. The trade is profitable exactly after 5 minutes is very reasonable to be considered 0.5 or close to 0.5
3. Under the assumption of 1 and 2, the probability of winning 100 trades in a row is (0.5)^100.

Now he randomly picked the trade using historical data, and using monte carlo simulation, the probability of a profitable trade exactly after 5 minutes is very close to 0.5, and so the assumption of 2 is considered statistically reasonable, and so he infered that I didn't randomly picked the trades.

Please tell me what is wrong with the method.
 
Quote from ZZZzzzzzzz:



No, actually scientists held a static point of view and watched the sun revolve around them. That was their direct evidence.

.


Oh, troll, clearly you are ignorant about both science AND history.

You shall go on ignore. I am done playing with you. Go play with yourself.
 
and yet another one slams the door on their way out...

"And she breaks just like a little girl..."

Nice emotive demonstration of how you "think critically."

ROTFLMAO...

Quote from smilingsynic:

Oh, troll, clearly you are ignorant about both science AND history.

You shall go on ignore. I am done playing with you. Go play with yourself.
 
soooo... what have you conceptualized today zizzo that would still be available for re-conceptualization by another less perfect indeed life form should thou, god forbid, disappear?
 
Maybe I'll check back in a year or so, see if there has been any maturation on your part.

Doubt it, but "ya" never know...

Quote from 2cents:

soooo... what have you conceptualized today zizzo that would still be available for re-conceptualization by another less perfect indeed life form should thou, god forbid, disappear?
 
Quote from smilingsynic:

If natural selection is not the best explanation for the data that exists on the history of life on this planet, then what is?

Be specific, if you can.

Consider time to be holographic, and consider that all that time holds was made simultaneously.

If this is true, evolution is just a smokescreen. Smokescreen implies motive by design. Why would a designer capable of simultaneous assembly make anything appear to evolve?

Distraction is the name of the game here.

1. Evolution implies that this universe generates it's own contents. This distracts attention from the actual origin of things. It conceals motive. If everything originates from this universe, it implies that your origin is from this place. This is not true. The smokescreen serves to keep you here.
2. Evolution implies that things are getting better, keeping you interested in the future and in the past. This is a distraction. A past/future consciousness keeps you here...literally.
3. Evolution gives the appearance that some things are more complex than others...and therefore more impressive than others. This is a smokescreen that distracts you from the fact that all things are equally unreal. If anything can be made more special than another, then all things are made real. It's a subtle psychological ploy. But very effective for keeping you here.
4. Evolution, natural selection, reinforces the concepts of attack and death in your belief system. This subverts the truth about creation which is but a distant memory in your mind. This serves to keep you here.

The whole history of the universe - past and future - is simply a script written by a thinking 'bot', a machine sometimes called "God", which plays out, in every conceivable way, the act of separation. Everything in this universe is set up to convince you of the reality and uniqueness of your body, and thus the validity of the thinking machines whole system.

Consider that a body is an assembly of separated bits and pieces set apart by relative "miles" between atoms. These assemblies are separated from their environments by death, and corruption separates the assembly from itself. The assembly comes into the world by separating from its host source, and stays alive by separating other assemblies from their environments. Meanwhile, each assembly is separate from all others, each species separate from another, living on separate landmasses, separated by distance and time, separated by a separating galaxy in a universe which separates to live, and collapses to die.

The making of the universe was the fourth division of mind giving rise to a Big Bang followed by an almost infinite number of splits which gives rise to a world of multiplicity. This happens all at once. What appears to be a more complex assembly of parts, is merely something with more separate parts assembled together.

This is not the most popular explanation. The universe is a smokescreen. Evolution serves the purpose of keeping you here. The motive was to make separation permanent, proving that it's possible to separate from reality.

Jesus
 
Back
Top