Originally posted by srankmissingnin
Any theory can work in a mathematical model if you create a hypothetical particles, energies and cosmic events and just assume they exist and occur somewhere, then spend your life looking for the variables you made up. 😈
not really
parameters in a mathematical model that don't explain a significant portion of variance aren't kept in the model
science is not the same as opinion...
Originally posted by srankmissingnin
Mostly I was just referring to unified field theory.
well, ok, but thats almost like saying we have made no significant steps forward in space exploration because we haven't put a man on pluto.
For instance, a few years ago in one of the colliders, they managed to observe quark-gluon plasma for the first time.
Physics has always been a very theory based and forward looking science with an enormous scope, that the single hardest problem in the field has yet to be solved is not evidence we aren't making progress. like, would you honestly say physicists know an equal amount about UFT now as they did in the 70s?
EDIT: it would be like saying we aren't learning anything about psychology because we can't explain consciousness yet
Originally posted by srankmissingnin
Any theory can work in a mathematical model if you create a hypothetical particles, energies and cosmic events and just assume they exist and occur somewhere, then spend your life looking for the variables you made up. 😈
Except that scientists go out and find the particles. Everything in the "particle zoo" has been shown to exist by experiment. The Higgs boson isn't on the list yet.
Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
Mans best shot is working together: Something that religious divides had gone in the face of since the get go...as their leaders wanted to control all understanding of the universe based on absolutes since proven to be mostly untrue: We can take it on faith that the rest that they were on about was equally false.
I mostly agree but there are some religions out there that strongly encourage discovery, academia, etc. Some religions out there are pretty good at "raising" the standard.
Originally posted by alltoomany
The Bible was first written for the RICH people...and those who could read and write
A bit strange considering that one of the "lessons" is about the rich young man that was told to sell all of his possessions.
Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
Sure. Accepted.I dont feel I have to disprove god, I feel its up to god to prove itself.
Or for it's defenders/claimants to.
Under the old "extraordinary claims.." rule.
I agree. This is why I had a hard time but stuff just felt right. Others and yourself alluded to that being ESP, craziness, or other things...but I would like to call it my soul communicating with God.
You know...I WISH someone like Dawkins would arrange an event and plan for it, and get tons of people to attend. He would ask God to prove himself by burning up a "sacrifice" (probably iPods, Android phones, and iPhones...lol!). It would be most awesome IF God proved himself by humoring Dawkins for just an instant. Just once. Atheism would cease to exist for at least several decades....from almost everyone. Sometimes, I wish I could see something like. Don't you? Of course, I would gloat about it, but don't you think life would be easier if you knew we were SUPPOSED to be these uber charitable people? I know reading and then asking for a confirmation from a person you don't believe in, is pretty much impossible. But wouldn't it be easier if you just had ONE little tiny piece of evidence? Just a tiny one...nothing like parting the Red Sea or something...just a "feat" from God saying, "yo, I'm hear...now stop dicking around and start behaving." That's how it was the in the old testament...so why can't we get some sort of sign, now?
If God proved himself, that way...
Re: Re: show me some evidence, evidence, and evidence
Originally posted by srankmissingninso just because i see that bruce was the height of physical perfection i should be religious?
I would think that someone who buys tickets onto the Bruce Lee hype train based on decades old anecdotal evidence would be more open to the concept of faith...
plz leave that in the other threads 😐
Jesse Glover- "Bruce would take hold of a 70lb dumbbell with one arm and raise it to a lateral position, level to his shoulder and then he'd hold the contraction for a few seconds. Nobody else I knew could even get it up there, let it alone hold it up there".
Joe Lewis- "Bruce was incredibly strong for his size. He could take a 75lb barbell and from a standing position with the barbell held flush against his chest, he could slowly stick his arms out, lock them and hold the barbell there for 20 seconds, that's pretty damn tough for a guy who at the time only weighed 138lbs. I know 200lb weight lifters who can't do that.
Danny Inosanto- "Bruce had tremendous strength in holding a weight out horizontally in a standing position. I know because I've seen it. He'd take a 125lb barbell and hold it straight out".
& more
Wally Jay- "I last saw Bruce after he moved from Culver City to Bel Air. He had a big heavy bag hanging out on his patio. It weighed 300lbs. I could hardly move it at all. Bruce said to me "Hey, Wally, watch this" and he jumped back and kicked it and this monster of a heavy bag went up to the ceiling, Thump!!! And came back down. I still can't believe the power that guy had".
now kindly leave this in the right threads 😬
Originally posted by srankmissingninbecause the are people lee trained and sparred with...
How does quoting anecdotal evidence invalidate what I said? You might as well be quoting bible verses...
you might as well be quoting bible versesthat would be true if i were saying lee can split a ocean 😬
also offtopic
Originally posted by inimalist
well, ok, but thats almost like saying we have made no significant steps forward in space exploration because we haven't put a man on pluto.For instance, a few years ago in one of the colliders, they managed to observe quark-gluon plasma for the first time.
Physics has always been a very theory based and forward looking science with an enormous scope, that the single hardest problem in the field has yet to be solved is not evidence we aren't making progress. like, would you honestly say physicists know an equal amount about UFT now as they did in the 70s?
EDIT: it would be like saying we aren't learning anything about psychology because we can't explain consciousness yet
What I said was a bit of a exaggerated hyperbole, and I guess I shouldn't be breaking the nuts of Theoretical Physicists for not having perfecting a working UFT and TOE... they are pretty massive in scope after all. 😮
Originally posted by dadudemon
You know...I WISH someone like Dawkins would arrange an event and plan for it, and get tons of people to attend. He would ask God to prove himself by burning up a "sacrifice" (probably iPods, Android phones, and iPhones...lol!). It would be most awesome IF God proved himself by humoring Dawkins for just an instant. Just once. Atheism would cease to exist for at least several decades....from almost everyone. Sometimes, I wish I could see something like. Don't you? Of course, I would gloat about it, but don't you think life would be easier if you knew we were SUPPOSED to be these uber charitable people? I know reading and then asking for a confirmation from a person you don't believe in, is pretty much impossible. But wouldn't it be easier if you just had ONE little tiny piece of evidence? Just a tiny one...nothing like parting the Red Sea or something...just a "feat" from God saying, "yo, I'm hear...now stop dicking around and start behaving." That's how it was the in the old testament...so why can't we get some sort of sign, now?If God proved himself, that way...
😂 That would be hysterical.
Raises the question (and I think this came up before) of what could actually be an unmistakable sign.
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
😂 That would be hysterical.
As a believer...something like that would make it soooo much easier to follow the "though shalt not covet thy neighbors wife" rule...or things like it. I'M WEEEEEAK against nice boobs. 🙁
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Raises the question (and I think this came up before) of what could actually be an unmistakable sign.
I used that example because it was an actual example that occurred in the old testament: Elijah and some "false-prophets" were assigned a task of praying to their gods. The pagan prophets prayed for hours and hours and hours and their sacrifice was not burnt up. Elijah poured water all over his and called to God... and an absurdly powerful pillar of fire came from the heavens and consumed Elisha's offering AND the false prophets offering.
Anyway, something like that would be really damn cool, I think...from a science perspective alone.