I think you're gonna need to explain the immortality thing.
Video| Fine Tuning from the Top Scientists
- Thread starter jem
- Start date
Sheer irony seeing how there goes the 24/7 pheonix trading bot kicking in.
...despite the facts.
....and now folks, welcome to the Jem bot. The worn out broken record devoid of intelligent discussion that just repeat posts the same debunked deadbeat assertions made on the back of the same vids and the same blocks of cut and paste text even though they've all been debunked a thousand times.
If you stop spamming and get over the fact that science is not going to support your religious fantasies, that might help you be less angry about the god complex thing you have going on which compels you to start such threads.
When it comes to any fine tuning, the only g word rationally and scientifically inferred from the meaning of the words is gravity not god.
Tough for you it may be, but there it is.
Now as one of those "Us realists" of the creationist kind, you can go look at that fact and then arrive at a conclusion that ignores it.
You've joined a band of obsessive thread starters and hypocrites who condemn as spammers those who start a religious thread while you start a religious thread.
Apparently it's about as intellectual as you get.
Wrong again Min E Brain.
here is the graph of the 47 percent â a k a. "non-payers" â by state. The 10 states with the highest share of "non-payers" are in the states colored red. Most are in Southern (and Republican) states. Meanwhile, the 13 states with the smallest share of "non-payers" are in blue. Most are Northeastern (and Democratic) states.
First of all this was a update to a previous video.
I never linked to this particular video before.
Secondly the idea you debunked statements by the top minds in science like Rees, Susskind, and Weinberg is so preposterous that not even your sock puppets would agree with you.
To argue that a Tuner might not be responsible for the tuning... is just about the most ignorant thing you could be arguing.
I never linked to this particular video before.
Secondly the idea you debunked statements by the top minds in science like Rees, Susskind, and Weinberg is so preposterous that not even your sock puppets would agree with you.
To argue that a Tuner might not be responsible for the tuning... is just about the most ignorant thing you could be arguing.
are you trying to argue that the democrat party is not the party of the handout lovers..
break your charts down by county like they do during the elections.
I suspect you will see the the handout counties voting for Obama in almost unanimous results in your blue states.
break your charts down by county like they do during the elections.
I suspect you will see the the handout counties voting for Obama in almost unanimous results in your blue states.
Quote from futurecurrents:
Wrong again Min E Brain.
here is the graph of the 47 percent â a k a. "non-payers" â by state. The 10 states with the highest share of "non-payers" are in the states colored red. Most are in Southern (and Republican) states. Meanwhile, the 13 states with the smallest share of "non-payers" are in blue. Most are Northeastern (and Democratic) states.
this is another of your slanted stats fc. That ballot was passed out under suspicious circumstances had light returns.
here is a real stat
http://articles.latimes.com/2009/nov/24/opinion/la-oe-masci24-2009nov24
According to a survey of members of the American Assn. for the Advancement of Science, conducted by the Pew Research Center in May and June this year, a majority of scientists (51%) say they believe in God or a higher power, while 41% say they do not.
today, a century and a half after Charles Darwin published "On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection," the overwhelming majority of scientists in the United States accept Darwinian evolution as the basis for understanding how life on Earth developed. But although evolutionary theory is often portrayed as antithetical to religion, it has not destroyed the religious faith of the scientific community.
According to a survey of members of the American Assn. for the Advancement of Science, conducted by the Pew Research Center in May and June this year, a majority of scientists (51%) say they believe in God or a higher power, while 41% say they do not.
here is a real stat
http://articles.latimes.com/2009/nov/24/opinion/la-oe-masci24-2009nov24
According to a survey of members of the American Assn. for the Advancement of Science, conducted by the Pew Research Center in May and June this year, a majority of scientists (51%) say they believe in God or a higher power, while 41% say they do not.
today, a century and a half after Charles Darwin published "On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection," the overwhelming majority of scientists in the United States accept Darwinian evolution as the basis for understanding how life on Earth developed. But although evolutionary theory is often portrayed as antithetical to religion, it has not destroyed the religious faith of the scientific community.
According to a survey of members of the American Assn. for the Advancement of Science, conducted by the Pew Research Center in May and June this year, a majority of scientists (51%) say they believe in God or a higher power, while 41% say they do not.
LOL You are still the dumbest MFer on this board.
Maybe if we had the border under control we wouldn't have all these illegals and former illegals raiding the treasury. Why do you think it is the southern states, dumbass? You are such a fool FC.
Or, are you just confirming that Republicans are more compasionate than you stupid liberals?
Lol. Right , so you're not repeating a video because you're linking to an update of it.
And you imagine I have sock puppets why exactly....because you were caught red handed with a sock puppet.
Brilliant arguments. Appealing to the douchebag gallery for support clearly appeals to you.
I haven't debunked statements by scientists. I've debunked the wild assertions , pseudoscientific, illogical and bizarre translations you attach to their statements.
Tuning that needs a Tuner equally requires a Tuner that needs Tuning.
That you can't grasp the rather obvious problem with your Tuner is just one reason why your non-argument remains unscientific, illogical and ignorant, and your Tuner a fantasy.
And you imagine I have sock puppets why exactly....because you were caught red handed with a sock puppet.
Brilliant arguments. Appealing to the douchebag gallery for support clearly appeals to you.
I haven't debunked statements by scientists. I've debunked the wild assertions , pseudoscientific, illogical and bizarre translations you attach to their statements.
Tuning that needs a Tuner equally requires a Tuner that needs Tuning.
That you can't grasp the rather obvious problem with your Tuner is just one reason why your non-argument remains unscientific, illogical and ignorant, and your Tuner a fantasy.