Ivan Panin's "Proof".
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
25-06-2013, 04:11 PM (This post was last modified: 26-06-2013 05:18 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Ivan Panin's "Proof".
(25-06-2013 02:21 PM)JesuisSean Wrote:  
(24-06-2013 01:46 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  Why are we complicating this issue? Each Hebrew, Chaldean and Greek letter has a numerical equivalent on a base 10 number system, yet there are extraordinary encodings of primes throughout the 66 books. "The Bible Code" or at least the simplest one of them...

DON'T WORRY ABOUT IT.Thumbsup

We simply had to make it clear time and time and time again that some people have chosen to be left behind, and that for many of them there is no way in which their minds can be changed.

Throwing away the chance of having an eternal life in a heavenly paradise is a shocking choice, but some people simply insist upon it.Shocking

They just laugh at the "idea", as they would call it.

You have a short life on this side of reality, and a massively huge lengthy life on the other side.

Some people choose to live it up on the short side, and thus be miserable at best on the eternal long side.

Other folk choose to work hard, despite the suffering, humility, and often rejection, and do so on the short side, thus to be forever happy on the eternal long side.

Thus the point is, many people are quite willing to possibly make the biggest and most costly mistake that is ever achievable. Now think about it, can you ever change a mind like that?

LMAO.

AH yes, the ole self-righteous "Me and my friends are going ta heaven, and yer not, so na-na, na-na, na, na."
All we have to do is *say" we believe in your garbage, even though we really don't, and we get to go too as your dumb god is too stupid to know the difference.

Did your Babble code inform you of the fact that your Babble code culture, (the Hebrews), did not believe in immortality ?

I thought not.

Not only does your physics direct you to "sit down", so does your infantile 2nd Grade knowledge of the Bible, and Theology. For someone who thinks he knows something about time and space you sure talk nonsense about "the long side". Any 1st year Theology student knows "eternal" means TIMELESS, not "endless time".
Please explain how it is your god lives within, (and requires it for even a rudimentary understanding of "existence"), the dimension of spacetime if she created it ? (And use NO temporal reference in doing so). For someone who slaps himself so hard on the back about hiis expert knowledge of Physics, you don't seem to even be able to transfer a 3rd Grade level of that over to religious bs. Just proof you know nothing about either.

Weeping

Bible codes debunked:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/09/13...ible-Codes
http://torahcode.us/torah_codes/biblical...ism1.shtml
http://cs.anu.edu.au/~bdm/dilugim/torah.html
Panin's cheating ways. http://cs.anu.edu.au/~bdm/dilugim/panin_mark.html
http://cs.anu.edu.au/~bdm/dilugim/panin.html
http://www.netjeff.com/wp/?p=270
http://cs.anu.edu.au/~bdm/dilugim/moby.html
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Ma...terFallacy
http://www.inplainsite.org/html/bible_co...crock.html
http://www.paultanner.org/English%20HTML...Tanner.pdf
http://www.etsjets.org/files/JETS-PDFs/4...6_JETS.pdf
http://www.csicop.org/sb/show/many-heade...d_suggest/
http://cs.anu.edu.au/~bdm/dilugim/poe.html

And BTW JebusSean, your Physics are as screwed up as your religious garbage. You would flunk Physics 101 with this crap.

http://www.outersecrets.com/real/forum_againstum2.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_%28physics%29

Objects which move NEVER "disappear" either from human sight, or in fact, from other observational media. At any infinitesimally small T2, and position 2, they are very much evident. As visible, and evident as they were at T1. They never "disappear", and they never "reappear". They are always visible. Your entire premise is shit. If things "disappear" to your eyes, then you are suffering from a mental disorder. You are the ONLY person on the face of the Earth who would say this, (to say nothing of physicists). The continual presence of moving objects at EVERY instant along the continuum of their motion is very easily documented. I see you have no degree in physics, no competence in the field, just as you have none in Biblical Studies. Just another nut case free to spout his crap as there are no constraints on the internet.
This garbage would get an "F" in any school in the world, as I'm sure you well know.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Bucky Ball's post
25-06-2013, 05:45 PM
RE: Ivan Panin's "Proof".
(25-06-2013 04:11 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(25-06-2013 02:21 PM)JesuisSean Wrote:  DON'T WORRY ABOUT IT.Thumbsup

We simply had to make it clear time and time and time again that some people have chosen to be left behind, and that for many of them there is no way in which their minds can be changed.

Throwing away the chance of having an eternal life in a heavenly paradise is a shocking choice, but some people simply insist upon it.Shocking

They just laugh at the "idea", as they would call it.

You have a short life on this side of reality, and a massively huge lengthy life on the other side.

Some people choose to live it up on the short side, and thus be miserable at best on the eternal long side.

Other folk choose to work hard, despite the suffering, humility, and often rejection, and do so on the short side, thus to be forever happy on the eternal long side.

Thus the point is, many people are quite willing to possibly make the biggest and most costly mistake that is ever achievable. Now think about it, can you ever change a mind like that?

LMAO.

AH yes, the ole self-righteous "Me and my friends are going ta heaven, and yer not, so na-na, na-na, na, na."
All we have to do is *say" we believe in your garbage, even though we really don't, and we get to go too as your dumb god is too stupid to know the difference.

Did your Babble code inform you of the fact that your Babble code culture, (the Hebrews), did not believe in immortality ?

I thought not.

Not only does your physics direct you to "sit down", so does your infantile 2nd Grade knowledge of the Bible, and Theology. For someone who thinks he knows something about time and space you sure talk nonsense about "the long side". Any 1st year Theology student knows "eternal" means TIMELESS, not "endless time".
Please explain how it is your god lives within, (and requires it for even a rudimentary understanding of "existence"), the dimension of spacetime if she created it ? (And use NO temporal reference in doing so). For someone who slaps himself so hard on the back about hiis expert knowledge of Physics, you don't seem to even be able to transfer a 3rd Grade level of that over to religious bs. Just proof you know nothing about either.

Weeping

Bible codes debunked:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/09/13...ible-Codes
http://torahcode.us/torah_codes/biblical...ism1.shtml
http://cs.anu.edu.au/~bdm/dilugim/torah.html
Panin's cheating ways. http://cs.anu.edu.au/~bdm/dilugim/panin_mark.html
http://cs.anu.edu.au/~bdm/dilugim/panin.html
http://www.netjeff.com/wp/?p=270
http://cs.anu.edu.au/~bdm/dilugim/moby.html
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Ma...terFallacy
http://www.inplainsite.org/html/bible_co...crock.html
http://www.paultanner.org/English%20HTML...Tanner.pdf
http://www.etsjets.org/files/JETS-PDFs/4...6_JETS.pdf
http://www.csicop.org/sb/show/many-heade...d_suggest/
http://cs.anu.edu.au/~bdm/dilugim/poe.html





And Bucky with the TKO!

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-06-2013, 02:52 AM
RE: Ivan Panin's "Proof".
You see what I mean PleaseJesus.

They just can not see the the truth.

Here in the middle we see the results of absolute evil against the absolute good.

The good is winning. But here we see only the collision between the two, thus the differences seem so small.

Now imagine a God that is aware of the motion of every subatomic particle across the entire universe, a God who sees this from the beginning of time all the way to the end, a God who also knows of all good, just how good is good in his heaven?

It is beyond that which any mere human mind can comprehend in its present form, but not in the final form.

Again, many a folk are willing to throw this all away.

Granted it is hard to see this unless you have not already seen it.

Those that have seen that which is so greater are regarded as nothing but lunatics.

Riding a bicycle at first may have seemed to be difficult, but suddenly it became so easy. Here there was a sudden jump from one negative extreme to the opposite positive extreme.

Concerning the eternal picture, so many are not even willing to get onto the bicycle and give it a try, thus they never make that huge jump from one extreme to the other.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-06-2013, 05:13 AM
RE: Ivan Panin's "Proof".
(26-06-2013 02:52 AM)JesuisSean Wrote:  You see what I mean PleaseJesus.

They just can not see the the truth.

Here in the middle we see the results of absolute evil against the absolute good.

The good is winning. But here we see only the collision between the two, thus the differences seem so small.

Now imagine a God that is aware of the motion of every subatomic particle across the entire universe, a God who sees this from the beginning of time all the way to the end, a God who also knows of all good, just how good is good in his heaven?

It is beyond that which any mere human mind can comprehend in its present form, but not in the final form.

Again, many a folk are willing to throw this all away.

Granted it is hard to see this unless you have not already seen it.

Those that have seen that which is so greater are regarded as nothing but lunatics.

Riding a bicycle at first may have seemed to be difficult, but suddenly it became so easy. Here there was a sudden jump from one negative extreme to the opposite positive extreme.

Concerning the eternal picture, so many are not even willing to get onto the bicycle and give it a try, thus they never make that huge jump from one extreme to the other.

There is no 'this' to throw away. You have no knowledge, just feelings.
Feelings are not facts, they are not evidence of anything except that you have feelings.

And, yes, you are regarded as lunatics.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-06-2013, 02:59 PM
RE: Ivan Panin's "Proof".
Exactly, we can likewise examine the formula for the tug of gravity itself:

Fg = G (m1*m2)/(d^2)

That last "2" is 2.00000 and is thought to be random. Random might be 1.34576 or 2.14356. Any deviation from "2" and things in the universe fall to pieces...

"Random", right?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-06-2013, 03:05 PM
RE: Ivan Panin's "Proof".
(26-06-2013 02:59 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  Exactly, we can likewise examine the formula for the tug of gravity itself:

Fg = G (m1*m2)/(d^2)

That last "2" is 2.00000 and is thought to be random. Random might be 1.34576 or 2.14356. Any deviation from "2" and things in the universe fall to pieces...

"Random", right?

No.

It's a consequence of cosmic geometry. It arises from the boundary conditions on a symmetric field (that is, divergence is zero away from [point] sources). A (macroscopically) n-dimensional space will give rise to n-1 dimensional inverse distance relationships.

Learn to science.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-06-2013, 03:05 PM (This post was last modified: 26-06-2013 03:21 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Ivan Panin's "Proof".
(26-06-2013 02:59 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  The last "2" is 2.00000 and is thought to be random.
"Random", right?

Thought to be "random" by whom ?
You really are a idiot troll.
Name me one physicist that says the equation for gravity is "random".
Not only are you completely and totally ignorant of your own field, but now you show you are also ignorant of even basic science also and
just parrot shit from any fundie web site you can find it. You are lying about ever attending a college.
You cannot possibly even have a GED.
You can't even tell us what that "2" refers to.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-06-2013, 03:02 PM
RE: Ivan Panin's "Proof".
Quote:Thought to be "random" by whom ?
You really are a idiot troll.
Name me one physicist that says the equation for gravity is "random".
Not only are you completely and totally ignorant of your own field, but now you show you are also ignorant of even basic science also and
just parrot shit from any fundie web site you can find it. You are lying about ever attending a college.
You cannot possibly even have a GED.
You can't even tell us what that "2" refers to.

Random in terms of the underlying physics on a macro, Newtonian level are the products of the big bang, n'est pas?

Quote:It's a consequence of cosmic geometry. It arises from the boundary conditions on a symmetric field (that is, divergence is zero away from [point] sources). A (macroscopically) n-dimensional space will give rise to n-1 dimensional inverse distance relationships.

No, cosmic geometry is a consequence of cosmology, that is, how the universe began? Big bang? Steady state? God did it? PICK ONE. "2" shows evidence of DESIGN.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-06-2013, 03:17 PM (This post was last modified: 28-06-2013 04:59 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Ivan Panin's "Proof".
(28-06-2013 03:02 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  
Quote:Thought to be "random" by whom ?
You really are a idiot troll.
Name me one physicist that says the equation for gravity is "random".
Not only are you completely and totally ignorant of your own field, but now you show you are also ignorant of even basic science also and
just parrot shit from any fundie web site you can find it. You are lying about ever attending a college.
You cannot possibly even have a GED.
You can't even tell us what that "2" refers to.

Random in terms of the underlying physics on a macro, Newtonian level are the products of the big bang, n'est pas?

Quote:It's a consequence of cosmic geometry. It arises from the boundary conditions on a symmetric field (that is, divergence is zero away from [point] sources). A (macroscopically) n-dimensional space will give rise to n-1 dimensional inverse distance relationships.

No, cosmic geometry is a consequence of cosmology, that is, how the universe began? Big bang? Steady state? God did it? PICK ONE. "2" shows evidence of DESIGN.

It shows no such thing. You forgot to tell us what the "2" referred to. You are obviously just copy/pasting shit from creationist web sites.
What EXACTLY does the "2" refer to, in the equation ?
Unless you can state EXACTLY what it refers to in your next post, we will all assume you haven't the slightest clue what you are even talking about.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-06-2013, 03:22 PM
RE: Ivan Panin's "Proof".
(26-06-2013 03:05 PM)cjlr Wrote:  No.

It's a consequence of cosmic geometry. It arises from the boundary conditions on a symmetric field (that is, divergence is zero away from [point] sources). A (macroscopically) n-dimensional space will give rise to n-1 dimensional inverse distance relationships.

Learn to science.

Interesting you would bring out the Inverse Square Law, I have to use it to explain underwater illumination using strobes and what happens to light intensity as it travels further from its source.

Science - it works whether you believe in it or not.

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: