Godfree wrote:Oh really ,,and people who havn't read the bible can't rubbish it .
Yes, that's right. On what grounds could you rubbish it? Faith?
People who don't inject heroin can't criticize those who do .
They can't understand why people go back and do it again, no. But they can always take the advice of doctors on Faith, can't they?
Maybe that is what you are advocating; atheism through faith?
I shouldn't knock suicide until I'v tried it ,Chaz
Not a particularly good analogy, since no one can try it and live to tell the tale.
A Challenge to Richard Dawkins and the Atheists
-
- Posts: 5304
- Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 7:31 pm
Re: A Challenge to Richard Dawkins and the Atheists
Re: A Challenge to Richard Dawkins and the Atheists
Chaz , if you would just come off your high horse for a second ,
you might work out that we can learn from life , people ,tv ,books ,internet .
Just because one doesn't have a recognized degree ,
doesn't discount their opinion .
Surely we must base each individual on the substance of the posts ,
not on how many qualifications they have .
I have spent a lot of time on many sites discussing these subjects over and over again .
I have had most of the current beliefs/faiths ,used as arguments against my opinion .
I have discussed religion since I was a child .
You don't think 40 years of debate qualifies a person to have an opinion Chaz???????
you might work out that we can learn from life , people ,tv ,books ,internet .
Just because one doesn't have a recognized degree ,
doesn't discount their opinion .
Surely we must base each individual on the substance of the posts ,
not on how many qualifications they have .
I have spent a lot of time on many sites discussing these subjects over and over again .
I have had most of the current beliefs/faiths ,used as arguments against my opinion .
I have discussed religion since I was a child .
You don't think 40 years of debate qualifies a person to have an opinion Chaz???????
-
- Posts: 5304
- Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 7:31 pm
Re: A Challenge to Richard Dawkins and the Atheists
Do you know what a straw man is?Godfree wrote:Chaz , if you would just come off your high horse for a second ,
you might work out that we can learn from life , people ,tv ,books ,internet .
Just because one doesn't have a recognized degree ,
doesn't discount their opinion .
Surely we must base each individual on the substance of the posts ,
not on how many qualifications they have .
I have spent a lot of time on many sites discussing these subjects over and over again .
I have had most of the current beliefs/faiths ,used as arguments against my opinion .
I have discussed religion since I was a child .
You don't think 40 years of debate qualifies a person to have an opinion Chaz???????
Re: A Challenge to Richard Dawkins and the Atheists
Straw man Chaz , often used in such forums .
We could presume we were talking Wizard of Oz ,
One of the little pigs made his house of straw,
But you will probably have your own twist on it Chaz
probably just like Atheism or science , we both claim to know what we are talking about on both it seems .
But seldom agree
We could presume we were talking Wizard of Oz ,
One of the little pigs made his house of straw,
But you will probably have your own twist on it Chaz
probably just like Atheism or science , we both claim to know what we are talking about on both it seems .
But seldom agree
-
- Posts: 5304
- Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 7:31 pm
Re: A Challenge to Richard Dawkins and the Atheists
Maybe you should google it?Godfree wrote:Straw man Chaz , often used in such forums .
We could presume we were talking Wizard of Oz ,
One of the little pigs made his house of straw,
But you will probably have your own twist on it Chaz
probably just like Atheism or science , we both claim to know what we are talking about on both it seems .
But seldom agree
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
QED: I was not discounting your opinion because you lack an education (as you seem to imply).
I was rejecting your opinion, simply because it is based on ignorance and is wrong.
That is what made your post a straw man.
Re: A Challenge to Richard Dawkins and the Atheists
I think your clutching at straws Chaz ,
My knowledge is pretty sound .
Years ago I blogged that Nuetrino's could go faster than light from a doco I saw last century .
And yet it's claimed as a new discovery this year .
I have always raced ahead of the pack and waited yawning for the general public to catch up .
There is a big difference between claiming something to be real ,
verses possible probable , or "most probable"
I think a whole heap of crap is possible ,
a slightly smaller group probable ,
but the group of most probable is usually one .
My knowledge is pretty sound .
Years ago I blogged that Nuetrino's could go faster than light from a doco I saw last century .
And yet it's claimed as a new discovery this year .
I have always raced ahead of the pack and waited yawning for the general public to catch up .
There is a big difference between claiming something to be real ,
verses possible probable , or "most probable"
I think a whole heap of crap is possible ,
a slightly smaller group probable ,
but the group of most probable is usually one .
-
- Posts: 5304
- Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 7:31 pm
Re: A Challenge to Richard Dawkins and the Atheists
Godfree wrote:I think your clutching at straws Chaz ,
My knowledge is pretty sound .
Years ago I blogged that Nuetrino's could go faster than light from a doco I saw last century .
And yet it's claimed as a new discovery this year .
I have always raced ahead of the pack and waited yawning for the general public to catch up .
There is a big difference between claiming something to be real ,
verses possible probable , or "most probable"
I think a whole heap of crap is possible ,
a slightly smaller group probable ,
but the group of most probable is usually one .
Pity you did not learn to SPELL neutrino.
And since I am answering you dumb-ass post. Let us all know how you KNEW that neutrinos could go faster than light.
Maybe you have a cyclotron in your back garden?
Re: A Challenge to Richard Dawkins and the Atheists
As I said in the post you replied to .
From a doco last century .
There is a large water tank built specifically to catch neutrino's ,
It's I think about 300 metres below the surface .
So as to make sure no other light could reach .
When a neutrino burst from the sun came at us , the neutrino burst reached earth 8 seconds before the light .
In the dark deep tank , flashes of light would be seen as neutrino's collided with
I presume the neuclei of water molecules .
The doco made the claim then that neutrino's go faster than light .
From a doco last century .
There is a large water tank built specifically to catch neutrino's ,
It's I think about 300 metres below the surface .
So as to make sure no other light could reach .
When a neutrino burst from the sun came at us , the neutrino burst reached earth 8 seconds before the light .
In the dark deep tank , flashes of light would be seen as neutrino's collided with
I presume the neuclei of water molecules .
The doco made the claim then that neutrino's go faster than light .
-
- Posts: 64
- Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2011 1:46 pm
Re: A Challenge to Richard Dawkins and the Atheists
I can't find any trace of an experiment such as the one described.
You may be mis-remembering. Neutrinos and other particles can travel faster than light in a material medium such as water, and when they do it gives rise to a form of light called Cherenkov radiation. The particles are still travelling slower than the speed of light in a vacuum, they are just going faster than light travels through water.
You may be mis-remembering. Neutrinos and other particles can travel faster than light in a material medium such as water, and when they do it gives rise to a form of light called Cherenkov radiation. The particles are still travelling slower than the speed of light in a vacuum, they are just going faster than light travels through water.
-
- Posts: 5304
- Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 7:31 pm
Re: A Challenge to Richard Dawkins and the Atheists
Godfree wrote:As I said in the post you replied to .
From a doco last century .
There is a large water tank built specifically to catch neutrino's ,
It's I think about 300 metres below the surface .
So as to make sure no other light could reach .
When a neutrino burst from the sun came at us , the neutrino burst reached earth 8 seconds before the light .
In the dark deep tank , flashes of light would be seen as neutrino's collided with
I presume the neuclei of water molecules .
The doco made the claim then that neutrino's go faster than light .
And your reference is WHAT?
Re: A Challenge to Richard Dawkins and the Atheists
[q
And your reference is WHAT?[/quote]
A doco I saw last century ,
your a bit slow on the uptake mate ,!!!
And your reference is WHAT?[/quote]
A doco I saw last century ,
your a bit slow on the uptake mate ,!!!
-
- Posts: 5304
- Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 7:31 pm
Re: A Challenge to Richard Dawkins and the Atheists
Godfree wrote:
A doco I saw last century ,
your a bit slow on the uptake mate ,!!!
You call THAT a reference?
Dingbat!
Re: A Challenge to Richard Dawkins and the Atheists
I thought I was lazy , jees Chaz ,,Try googling Neutrino detectors ,chaz wyman wrote:Godfree wrote:
A
You call THAT a reference?
Dingbat!
and you will find they have known about neutrino's since 1956 ,
hardly a new idea .
There are many types of tanks been made to capture the neutrino's as they pass through .Some use heavy water ,chlorine , all sorts.
Science is reluctant to publish such info because it conflicts with their precious
BBT , and Einstein , and other accepted theories .
I blogged years ago , that it is my opinion ,that Einsteins mistake,
was to call light the constant and time the variable .
I believe it is the other way around .
and the neutrino findings would support my claim,,!!!!!!!
-
- Posts: 5304
- Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 7:31 pm
Re: A Challenge to Richard Dawkins and the Atheists
Godfree wrote:I thought I was lazy , jees Chaz ,,Try googling Neutrino detectors ,chaz wyman wrote:Godfree wrote:
A
You call THAT a reference?
Dingbat!
and you will find they have known about neutrino's since 1956 ,
hardly a new idea .
There are many types of tanks been made to capture the neutrino's as they pass through .Some use heavy water ,chlorine , all sorts.
Science is reluctant to publish such info because it conflicts with their precious
BBT , and Einstein , and other accepted theories .
Ho, ,ho, ho. Science does not publish the facts that you know???
You are a fucking joke.
You are asking me to accept shit for which you can claim no evidence. That is palpably ridiculous.
You are just like a Theist, posing God.
I blogged years ago , that it is my opinion ,that Einsteins mistake,
was to call light the constant and time the variable .
Ha,ha, ha and you expect the scientific community to listen to your rantings - a man who has rejected the importance of basic education?
I believe it is the other way around .
and the neutrino findings would support my claim,,!!!!!!!
Gee whizz - If only science would produce the non existent evidence you claim they are suppressing - your ideas would be shown to be correct.
Gee Whizz - If only you would all just have faith in God then, everything the theists say would be true.
Re: A Challenge to Richard Dawkins and the Atheists
Chaz ,,
I will presume from your response,
that you couldn't be bothered googling Neutrino detectors,
or that you did and you don't want to admit, I was right,,!!
So when science calls the BBT a fact ,
Then I will be more inclined to believe it .
Evolution is called a fact by the likes of Carl Sagan .
I don't believe there are any such claims for the bbt ,
if science hasn't been convinced yet ,!!!
aren't you accepting it all on FAITH ,,,Chaz
I will presume from your response,
that you couldn't be bothered googling Neutrino detectors,
or that you did and you don't want to admit, I was right,,!!
So when science calls the BBT a fact ,
Then I will be more inclined to believe it .
Evolution is called a fact by the likes of Carl Sagan .
I don't believe there are any such claims for the bbt ,
if science hasn't been convinced yet ,!!!
aren't you accepting it all on FAITH ,,,Chaz