Page 36 of 36 FirstFirst ... 26343536
Results 351 to 352 of 352

Thread: They aren't actually "trick" questions, you know.

  1. Top | #351
    Senior Member remez's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    640
    Archived
    920
    Total Posts
    1,560
    Rep Power
    45
    Quote Originally Posted by skepticalbip View Post
    This is the general religion forum. You offered what you believed proved that the universe had a beginning starting with your flawed kalam syllogism
    Steve claimed it failed. I asked for some evidence. He ran off the Santa and you jumped in. I redressed this with you back in post 298….thus here you are lying.
    Quote Originally Posted by skepticalbip View Post
    which started your red herrings of arguments over cosmological models.
    You presented some wild possibilities to counter the argument. When I asked you the support those possibilities from science ……you could not ….thus you called my attempts to discuss the science red herrings. You suggested the CCC. I first pointed out to you the problems with cyclic models. You responded that CCC was mathematically sound and then criticized me for claiming it was mathematically sound. I went a step further and asked you to explain to me how the CCC avoided the 2nd LoT, I was ready to show you how it did not. I even gave you a hint about black holes…..you couldn’t hang and claimed my request was a red herring.

    Regarding the QSS. You offered it as a counter to the SBBM. Again I gave you the problems with SSM which many proceed through to the QSS. You addressed none of those issues other than the SSM was discarded not the QSS. So I stepped it up and asked you to show me how the QSS transforms from a steady state ESS to an expanding universe. I was ready to show you that any mechanism you would use to accomplish this would also render the universe past finite….thus showing you the futility of the QSS. NO NO NO we could not get there. You could not hang. You ran off crying that I was creating red herrings and picking on your models. Plus lying about my ignoring the faults of the SBBM…………………….
    Quote Originally Posted by skepticalbip View Post
    The cosmological model you offered as 'proof' is certainly not... it was a model with serious problems to overcome. Your attempts to 'prove' your chosen model were pointing out problems with other models while ignoring the problems with your chosen model (and funny as hell, claiming that is scientific reasoning).
    Talk about ignoring the facts. Seriously. I have acknowledged the faults of the SBBM repeatedly. But any model that would “replace, modify or add on” would still need to incorporate the science in the model that we do know…..and that science most plausibly implies a beginning.

    Quote Originally Posted by skepticalbip View Post
    If you want to discuss cosmological models then I suggest you start a thread in the natural science forum. Your bull shit here is a derail from the OP.
    Seriously Dude I can live with that.
    You are free to run away.
    Have a great weekend…….ttfn.

  2. Top | #352
    Veteran Member skepticalbip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Searching for reality along the long and winding road
    Posts
    4,487
    Archived
    12,976
    Total Posts
    17,463
    Rep Power
    61
    Quote Originally Posted by remez View Post
    Steve claimed it failed. I asked for some evidence. He ran off the Santa and you jumped in. I redressed this with you back in post 298….thus here you are lying.

    You presented some wild possibilities to counter the argument. When I asked you the support those possibilities from science ……you could not ….thus you called my attempts to discuss the science red herrings. You suggested the CCC. I first pointed out to you the problems with cyclic models. You responded that CCC was mathematically sound and then criticized me for claiming it was mathematically sound. I went a step further and asked you to explain to me how the CCC avoided the 2nd LoT, I was ready to show you how it did not. I even gave you a hint about black holes…..you couldn’t hang and claimed my request was a red herring.

    Regarding the QSS. You offered it as a counter to the SBBM. Again I gave you the problems with SSM which many proceed through to the QSS. You addressed none of those issues other than the SSM was discarded not the QSS. So I stepped it up and asked you to show me how the QSS transforms from a steady state ESS to an expanding universe. I was ready to show you that any mechanism you would use to accomplish this would also render the universe past finite….thus showing you the futility of the QSS. NO NO NO we could not get there. You could not hang. You ran off crying that I was creating red herrings and picking on your models. Plus lying about my ignoring the faults of the SBBM…………………….
    Quote Originally Posted by skepticalbip View Post
    The cosmological model you offered as 'proof' is certainly not... it was a model with serious problems to overcome. Your attempts to 'prove' your chosen model were pointing out problems with other models while ignoring the problems with your chosen model (and funny as hell, claiming that is scientific reasoning).
    Talk about ignoring the facts. Seriously. I have acknowledged the faults of the SBBM repeatedly. But any model that would “replace, modify or add on” would still need to incorporate the science in the model that we do know…..and that science most plausibly implies a beginning.

    Quote Originally Posted by skepticalbip View Post
    If you want to discuss cosmological models then I suggest you start a thread in the natural science forum. Your bull shit here is a derail from the OP.
    Seriously Dude I can live with that.
    You are free to run away.
    Have a great weekend…….ttfn.
    So open a thread in the natural science forum...

    Now, back to something more close to the OP... Why would a theist that talks about their god think that an atheist asking what they mean by god would be a trick question?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •