Intelligent Design is not creationism

[ZZZzzzzzzz]

Common language, uncommon understanding.

A deep thinker and a shallow thinker share a common language, but they do not share a common point of view when it comes to the depth of their understanding.

You embrace the common point of view, which makes you a commoner...

Your are absorbed in the common ideas, the ideas of the masses, quoting common scripture and verse...as that apparently satisfies you. Your attempted counter to my arguments and definitions is that the arguments and definitions are incorrect because they are uncommon?

That really demonstrates the commoner mentality...

Quote from Turok:

zTroll:
>Your life may be based on the commonly accepted,
>which I suspect it is...I am not interested in what
>commoners think.

This is the joke of your thinking as it pertains to definitions ...

If not for the commonly accepted, we could not be having this conversation. The very fact that we are conversing is proof that you *rely on the commonly accepted" in the language arena.

JB

 

[DerekD]

Yeah, take that Turok! You filthy peasant scum!

Umppph!

 

[Turok]

Quote from DerekD:

Yeah, take that Turok! You filthy peasant scum!

Umppph!

ROFLAO!.

JB

 

[2cents]

Quote from stu:

god +1 cannot = god

very funny... or are u really that dumb??

 

[stu]

Quote from 2cents:

very funny... or are u really that dumb??

...now now, no need for that

 

[2cents]

ok my bad...

let me rephrase, gilbert = gilbert + 1 is simply a basic property of infinite cardinal numbers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cardinal_number

i'd assumed that in common parlance, gilbert (ie god + 1) is not considered to be finite...

lets at least try to educate the zizzzos out there, lost cause or not...

 

[stu]

....no problem.....
i am sure you will be the first to agree, there is more than one way to taste from the fountain of knowledge.

First off though, I respectfully request you be very careful with your explanations. The equation is God +1 = Gilbert.
The gilbert = gilbert + 1 you show, is neither logically nor mathematically rational or relevant.

You should perhaps first understand, Gilbert is whatever God is after +1 has been added (given) to whatever God is.
As I am sure you are aware Cantor sets are obviously not appropriate to the calculation itself. The set {1 1} does not allow nor does it make for the mathematical conclusion or outcome (=)

Where God is represented by the cardinal number 1 ,
...well for the zzzz's.... as they won't see the significance ... 1+1 = 2
qed: God+1 = Gilbert.

Where God is represented by an Infinite number then we are in deep waters, but Gilbert is the Life Boat.
Semi-infinite cardinal interpolation with multiquadrics , or Hilbert's paradox of the Grand Hotel, I suggest, are areas we should NOT go into. Especially when considering you and I have difficulty even on agreeing the semantics around the word semantic.
Suffice it to say even in sets of God and Gilbert , cardinality and therefore bijection is established and Cantor is a happy man.

Finally, philosophically speaking, God has no metaphysical leg to stand on when Gilbert's around.

have a good day

 

[ZZZzzzzzzz]

The absurdity.

All of nature is within God by definition. All of mathematics is within God by definition.

If God could be added to, it would only be God adding to Himself, which would not make God greater.

God cannot be made greater or lesser by definition.

Quote from stu:

....no problem.....
i am sure you will be the first to agree, there is more than one way to taste from the fountain of knowledge.

First off though, I respectfully request you be very careful with your explanations. The equation is God +1 = Gilbert.
The gilbert = gilbert + 1 you show, is neither logically nor mathematically rational or relevant.

You should perhaps first understand, Gilbert is whatever God is after +1 has been added (given) to whatever God is.
As I am sure you are aware Cantor sets are obviously not appropriate to the calculation itself. The set {1 1} does not allow nor does it make for the mathematical conclusion or outcome (=)

Where God is represented by the cardinal number 1 ,
...well for the zzzz's.... as they won't see the significance ... 1+1 = 2
qed: God+1 = Gilbert.

Where God is represented by an Infinite number then we are in deep waters, but Gilbert is the Life Boat.
Semi-infinite cardinal interpolation with multiquadrics , or Hilbert's paradox of the Grand Hotel, I suggest, are areas we should NOT go into. Especially when considering you and I have difficulty even on agreeing the semantics around the word semantic.
Suffice it to say even in sets of God and Gilbert , cardinality and therefore bijection is established and Cantor is a happy man.

Finally, philosophically speaking, God has no metaphysical leg to stand on when Gilbert's around.

have a good day

 

[Turok]

Ztroll:
>God cannot be made greater or
>lesser by definition.

Correction ... that's by *your* definition and historically not a widely accepted one BTW.

But feel free to create your own little "all cows are blue" defiinitions -- it's a hoot to watch.

JB

 

[ZZZzzzzzzz]

"My name is Turok. I go by what is common and historically common...because, well, I am a commoner. It matters to me what is widely accepted...well, because I want to be widely accepted. It doesn't matter to me if it is true or false, and I have no argument against the uncommon beyond the fact that it is uncommon, because the bottom line is that I am a commoner. That's what I understand, common principles, common pleasure, common concepts."

Quote from Turok:

Ztroll:
>God cannot be made greater or
>lesser by definition.

Correction ... that's by *your* definition and historically not a widely accepted one BTW.

But feel free to create your own little "all cows are blue" defiinitions -- it's a hoot to watch.

JB