OBI-WAN KANOBI
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
26-11-2014, 12:41 PM
RE: OBI-WAN KANOBI
(26-11-2014 12:32 PM)doniston Wrote:  
(26-11-2014 11:20 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  It's also "unknown" if a teapot is orbiting the sun.
It's also "unknown" if a 1957 Chevy is orbiting Pluto.
Is it "PROBABLE", in light of everything we know ?
No

In light of everything we know about how consciousness arises, and what we've ever observed about ALL organisms that die and do not survive, is it PROBABLE there is an afterlife ?
No.

You want to live in a fairy story, go ahead.
Ask yourself, "why do you even (want to) think about the question ?"

Neurologists KNOW that humans (and animals) with DAMAGED brains cannot think any longer. When you die, your brain is not only "damaged" but totally non-functional. It rots.
Now you tell me how you're going to be able to "think" without a brain.
I don't know how, but In have ben visited so to speak by three persons from beyond (beyond where? I don't know,) and there are many many people who swear they have seen apparitions. me? no. but because of such a vision, I ended up with a new step father, back in the fifties.

It's all in your head. It was an hallucination of some sort. . Everything that humans experience is explained by brain chemistry. (That's what being a "naturalist" means). Hallucinations are a common human experience. Many people say they've had them. They are utterly certain that what they thought they experienced was real. In many cases these experiences can be replicated in labs. There is no evidence for "afterlife" There is no mechanism for it. Perhaps you should look for "naturalistic" explanations, if you are a "naturalist".

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
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
26-11-2014, 12:52 PM
RE: OBI-WAN KANOBI
(25-11-2014 05:00 PM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  
(24-11-2014 07:36 PM)doniston Wrote:  I still believe that the Atom is basically like a mini solar system
[Image: Electron_orbitals.svg]
It's amazing how the understanding of quantum physics, orbitals, Pauli's exclusion principle, aufbau principle, hund's rule etc allows us to predict so much about the atoms and their abilities to form covalent bonds, how strongly these bonds will be, whether the result will be magnetic etc, all from just knowing how many electrons each atom has.

If atoms were like solar systems then stars would never shine as we wouldn't have the phenomena of quantum tunneling.

There are so many reasons to know that atoms aren't like solar systems, but if we take knowledge back then perhaps we could entertain "Do not sin's speculations. Except for the after life one, we'd have to go back to a time before Darwin to entertain that one.
How old are you doniston?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Stevil's post
26-11-2014, 01:30 PM
RE: OBI-WAN KANOBI
This is an open mystery to me, and I see it all over in these Forums, No one forces the posters to read everyone's posts. that is left to the member. as for me, there are many threads which I have no interest in or I think they are idiotic, so I don't read them. what I don't understand, and actually don't believe Is that people answer these posts unless they are interested. and if they aren't then why read them or post responses. do you think that one person's possible erroneous information pollutes the next thread or post? that seams very odd to me, I would think that if you aren't interested or don't like someone else's opinion, then why concern yourself with it.

That s why, I don't concern myself with the distractors and naysayers that goes with the territory, and that is their problem, not mine.

There is something else, in the form of an explaination, - but it has to do with the forum,, Many times I see someone posting a comment supposedly to me, wherein I have never seen the actual post, and when I check back on the thread, that post is nowhere to be found, There are three recent ones right now where this is true. Since I can't find the post, I can't answer it.

"I don't Debate, I Discuss" I offer my opinions, and listen to yours, I will not require proof of opinions, but I may ask for clarification or state that I reject your position and why, & if asked, I will further clarify mine --- However, I reject any requirement that I PROVE my position is accurate and proper.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-11-2014, 01:30 PM (This post was last modified: 26-11-2014 01:39 PM by WhiskeyDebates.)
RE: OBI-WAN KANOBI
(26-11-2014 09:23 AM)doniston Wrote:  Just because you say I/m wrong doesn't make it so.

Nice Strawman you got going there. I didn't say or imply you are wrong because I say you are wrong, you are wrong because you have been DEMONSTRATED to be wrong and your understanding of the workings of the atom has been DEMONSTRATED to be faulty. This is not my opinion, you are literally relying on information that is 100 years out of date and considered obsolete by the entire scientific community.
Your not wrong cause I say you are wrong, you are wrong because your position runs counter to the evidence and facts.

Feel free to offer some counter evidence to justify your continued belief in a thing that's demonstrated to be factually incorrect. I suspect instead of doing that you will just whine whine whine like you have been.

Lets see how predictable you really are.


(26-11-2014 09:23 AM)doniston Wrote:  I think you are wrong.
Is this supposed to carry any weight or value? I don't give a flying fuck what you THINK, I'm not convinced you even know how, I care about what you can prove.

You can think I'm wrong all you like but I've actually demonstrated that you are in fact wrong. In reality my position is superior cause it's independently verifiable and demonstrably true.

(26-11-2014 09:23 AM)doniston Wrote:  but that's your problem, not mine.
I have absolutely no problem with a person shown to be wrong, thinking I am wrong, cause they are already shown to be wrong. My work is already done, yours hasn't even started.

You are still back at the starting line buster.

(26-11-2014 09:23 AM)doniston Wrote:  and with all your wailing you haven't proved a thing.
Well that's just a lie, plain and simple. The ENTIRE field of quantum mechanics disproves your claim that atoms and electrons operate similar to solar systems and planets.
This is not a matter of opinion, you are just flat factually incorrect. The Bohr model, which is what your opinion is based on, has been superseded by newer information and better models.

Electrons do not orbit the nucleus in the way planets orbit the sun. This is not a matter of opinion, this has been scientifically verified and is a key component of quantum mechanics. Not a motherfucking opinion. Seriously I want you to understand this: It's not my opinion you are arguing against it's the entirety of quantum mechanics.

You are using 100 years out of date information, but by all means please DEMONSTRATE that your atom=solar system is inline with even a single aspect of quantum mechanics. That would be a neat trick.

(26-11-2014 09:23 AM)doniston Wrote:  your diagram is just a diagram.

It's not my diagram first off, I don't need to go to MS paint to make you look stupid, you are handling that admirably.
Secondly it's not "just a diagram", which by the way is a remarkably anti-scientific thing to say, it's a FACTUALLY ACCURATE representation of the topic being discussed.
Lastly if you think that the atom resembles a solar system then not only are YOU using "just a diagram" asshole I know which fucking one you are using and it's 100 years out of date and obsolete. And not cause I fucking say so dip shit.

(26-11-2014 09:23 AM)doniston Wrote:  I could make one too.

Only if the macaroni and glitter is not locked up and you haven't eaten all the glue. Drinking Beverage

I didn't fucking make that diagram you asshole, you are not required to make one either. Why not just provide one that proves your claim?
(26-11-2014 09:23 AM)doniston Wrote:  and I know you don't believe it but I likely have a higher IQ than you.
[Image: quote-Stephen-Hawking-people-who-boast-a...124571.png]

You are making this way too easy.Laugh out load

You are right though, I don't believe it nor would I care if it was cause a High IQ is not a bulwark against being wrong. It's not a shield you can hide behind instead of actually addressing issues and criticisms which you have failed to do yet again. Once more your responses have been nothing but "nuh uh!! You're wrong!!!!1!!"

You could have an IQ in the 200s and it would not make you any less factually and demonstrably wrong.

That said no I do not believe you:
a)You have a below average grasp of grammar, punctuation, and spelling.
b)You are unable to clearly explain or elaborate on any concept in any sort of meaningful or substantive way thus far.
c)You repeatedly (and hilariously I might add) fail at being able to format a response in a way that does not require OTHER fucking people to come in and clean it up for you in order to make it even a semblance of readable. (Frequently leaving entire posts by you ....absolutely blank due to your personal incompetence which is funny as those are the only posts where you are not provably wrong. Your own stupidity blocks the display of your stupidity. Impressive.)
d)You display a willful tendency towards the usage of logical fallacies (straw-manning seems to be a personal favorite of yours) in your arguments even after they have been explained to you and corrected. Repeatedly.
e)You seem to be physically incapable of answering the vast majority of questions put to you, and you display a tendency towards an anti-science sentiment or evidential based thinking.

You could very well have been able to bluff your way through an IQ test but here, on this forum, you have shown yourself to be magnificently below average. Laughat


(26-11-2014 09:23 AM)doniston Wrote:  By the way, I'm an 85 year old "KID"
So you have had 85 years to learn how to think and reason and you have still managed, spectacularly, to fail in the most ostentatious manner? Good to know kiddo.
It's funny cause I'm sure you thought that was a point in your favor, when really all it means is you don't have a fucking excuse for being so so so bad at this.

I'm sorry, I'm so so sorry you are close to death and can't deal with the reality that when you die your story ends for good and all. If it's any consolation...... it was a boring read anyway. Drinking Beverage

When valour preys on reason, it eats the sword it fights with.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like WhiskeyDebates's post
26-11-2014, 01:35 PM
RE: OBI-WAN KANOBI
(26-11-2014 12:52 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(25-11-2014 05:00 PM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  [Image: Electron_orbitals.svg]
It's amazing how the understanding of quantum physics, orbitals, Pauli's exclusion principle, aufbau principle, hund's rule etc allows us to predict so much about the atoms and their abilities to form covalent bonds, how strongly these bonds will be, whether the result will be magnetic etc, all from just knowing how many electrons each atom has.

If atoms were like solar systems then stars would never shine as we wouldn't have the phenomena of quantum tunneling.

There are so many reasons to know that atoms aren't like solar systems, but if we take knowledge back then perhaps we could entertain "Do not sin's speculations. Except for the after life one, we'd have to go back to a time before Darwin to entertain that one.
How old are you doniston?
In your opinion, but I have discounted or doubted all of them. as for my age, I didn't know Darwin ,(if that was what you were implying), not quite that old. I am a model A" and like it was manufactured in 28, and borne in 29 -I'm 85

"I don't Debate, I Discuss" I offer my opinions, and listen to yours, I will not require proof of opinions, but I may ask for clarification or state that I reject your position and why, & if asked, I will further clarify mine --- However, I reject any requirement that I PROVE my position is accurate and proper.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-11-2014, 01:38 PM
RE: OBI-WAN KANOBI
(26-11-2014 01:30 PM)doniston Wrote:  This is an open mystery to me, and I see it all over in these Forums, No one forces the posters to read everyone's posts. that is left to the member. as for me, there are many threads which I have no interest in or I think they are idiotic, so I don't read them. what I don't understand, and actually don't believe Is that people answer these posts unless they are interested. and if they aren't then why read them or post responses. do you think that one person's possible erroneous information pollutes the next thread or post? that seams very odd to me, I would think that if you aren't interested or don't like someone else's opinion, then why concern yourself with it.

That s why, I don't concern myself with the distractors and naysayers that goes with the territory, and that is their problem, not mine.

There is something else, in the form of an explaination, - but it has to do with the forum,, Many times I see someone posting a comment supposedly to me, wherein I have never seen the actual post, and when I check back on the thread, that post is nowhere to be found, There are three recent ones right now where this is true.

" Whaaaaa! Whaaaaa! Whaaaa! I'm choosing to bitch about unimportant things I don't like instead of dealing with actual criticisms of my bullshit, unsubstantiated, bald assertions. Whaaaaaa! I consider this a valuable use of my time, Whaaaa!"

You need to switch to the no tears shampoo kiddo, before you cause an actual world wide flood. Drinking Beverage

(26-11-2014 01:30 PM)doniston Wrote:  Since I can't find the post, I can't answer it.

You can find mine bitch, so feel free to answer those questions about your little claim and how they are factually evident under the current model of quantum mechanics.

Or should I scheduled you for another whiny-bitch-fest instead? Say.... 1:15ish? Let me get a pencil.

When valour preys on reason, it eats the sword it fights with.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-11-2014, 01:43 PM
RE: OBI-WAN KANOBI
(26-11-2014 12:52 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(25-11-2014 05:00 PM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  [Image: Electron_orbitals.svg]
It's amazing how the understanding of quantum physics, orbitals, Pauli's exclusion principle, aufbau principle, hund's rule etc allows us to predict so much about the atoms and their abilities to form covalent bonds, how strongly these bonds will be, whether the result will be magnetic etc, all from just knowing how many electrons each atom has.

If atoms were like solar systems then stars would never shine as we wouldn't have the phenomena of quantum tunneling.

There are so many reasons to know that atoms aren't like solar systems, but if we take knowledge back then perhaps we could entertain "Do not sin's speculations. Except for the after life one, we'd have to go back to a time before Darwin to entertain that one.
How old are you doniston?
An added response:---- I hesitate to ask this, but I will anyway, "why wouldn't the stars shine???

"I don't Debate, I Discuss" I offer my opinions, and listen to yours, I will not require proof of opinions, but I may ask for clarification or state that I reject your position and why, & if asked, I will further clarify mine --- However, I reject any requirement that I PROVE my position is accurate and proper.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-11-2014, 01:43 PM
RE: OBI-WAN KANOBI
(26-11-2014 12:32 PM)doniston Wrote:  I don't know how, but In have ben visited so to speak by three persons from beyond (beyond where? I don't know,) and there are many many people who swear they have seen apparitions. me? no. but because of such a vision, I ended up with a new step father, back in the fifties.

Way to not answer the fucking question again, shine on you clearly mentally disturbed diamond you.

Oh also, no you have not stop making shit up.

When valour preys on reason, it eats the sword it fights with.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-11-2014, 01:47 PM
RE: OBI-WAN KANOBI
(26-11-2014 01:43 PM)doniston Wrote:  
(26-11-2014 12:52 PM)Stevil Wrote:  It's amazing how the understanding of quantum physics, orbitals, Pauli's exclusion principle, aufbau principle, hund's rule etc allows us to predict so much about the atoms and their abilities to form covalent bonds, how strongly these bonds will be, whether the result will be magnetic etc, all from just knowing how many electrons each atom has.

If atoms were like solar systems then stars would never shine as we wouldn't have the phenomena of quantum tunneling.

There are so many reasons to know that atoms aren't like solar systems, but if we take knowledge back then perhaps we could entertain "Do not sin's speculations. Except for the after life one, we'd have to go back to a time before Darwin to entertain that one.
How old are you doniston?
An added response:---- I hesitate to ask this, but I will anyway, "why wouldn't the stars shine???

Nuclear fusion - the reaction which makes stars shine - requires atoms to be incredibly close together. Nuclei are all positively charged, and therefore repel each other.

Without quantum effects the nuclei would not be close enough to fuse, and stars would not burn.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like cjlr's post
26-11-2014, 01:51 PM
RE: OBI-WAN KANOBI
(26-11-2014 01:43 PM)doniston Wrote:  An added response:---- I hesitate to ask this, but I will anyway, "why wouldn't the stars shine???

Hey, that's just his opinion, he doesn't have to PROVE anything.
Drinking Beverage

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: