why that was nice

Should i start using crystal meth?

  • Sure...its not that bad...

    Votes: 93 62.0%
  • Just say no!

    Votes: 57 38.0%

  • Total voters
    150
You believe that a theory constitutes absolute fact? Looks like you disproved your own point with the definition of theory, and at the same time made yourself look like an *******. You sir, need to be aware that there is a range of models that could explain the observations of the big bang theory itself. Even that cannot be scientifically dis-proven….For instance, I can construct you a spherically symmetrical universe with Earth at its center, and you cannot disprove it based on observations….You can only exclude it on philosophical grounds. Scientists use philosophical criteria in choosing their models. A lot of cosmology tries to hide that.
I digress, in order for matter to come out of nothing, all of our scientific laws dealing with the conservation of matter/energy would have to be wrong, invalidating all of chemistry. All of our laws of conservation of angular momentum would have to be wrong, invalidating all of physics. All of our laws of conservation of electric charge would have to be wrong, invalidating all of electronics and demanding that your TV set not work! Your television set may not work, but that is not the reason! In order to believe matter is uncaused, one has to discard known laws and principles of science. No reasonable person is going to do this simply to maintain a personal atheistic position.

bssmagik83 = PWNED (and I poked his mother)
interesting, i've thought of a lot of reasons why science is flawed... the idea of conservation from nothing is new to me though... good one

 
//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/read.gif.ff512c499c00ed3faae9a20f4b088b29.gif
I read the whole thread... and why would reading the whole thread matter if you were responding to me in the quote that i was responding to... I should know what i said enough to respond to your response.

 
Do you know what a conversation is?
I do know what a conversation is... i was told to read the whole thread in order to find out what somebody was talking about when i already know what they were talking about because they were responding to me. if i'm having a conversation with somebody, why would i have to read other outside comments for reference when they're referring to me?

 
I read the whole thread... and why would reading the whole thread matter if you were responding to me in the quote that i was responding to... I should know what i said enough to respond to your response.
//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/crap.gif.7f4dd41e3e9b23fbd170a1ee6f65cecc.gif

Is reading comprehension even a goal of the schools these days?

 
Because that is how it works in the Internet.
I get that... and as I have read the whole thread... the person I was responding to still didn't make sense by saying read the whole thread because it inferred that I didn't know what I was talking about... but none of this matters cause its taking away from the subject matter of the thread... who has a scripture?

 
Convo synopsis:

Me: the bible wasn't written in english... it was tranlated...

WhoSayWho: where's the proof?

Me: "i hope your kidding"

WhoSayWho: read the whole thread

 
Activity
No one is currently typing a reply...

About this thread

faulkton

5,000+ posts
CarAudio.com Veteran
Thread starter
faulkton
Joined
Location
neverland
Start date
Participants
Who Replied
Replies
31,921
Views
612,338
Last reply date
Last reply from
natisfynest
IMG_20260516_193114554_HDR.jpg

sherbanater

    May 16, 2026
  • 0
  • 0
IMG_20260516_192955471_HDR.jpg

sherbanater

    May 16, 2026
  • 0
  • 0

New threads

Top