Hawking says physics proves there is no time for "Gawd".

[daws101]

I am a Christian and no part of a cult.

another lie!

cult (klt)
n.
1.
a. A religion or religious sect generally considered to be extremist or false, with its followers often living in an unconventional manner under the guidance of an authoritarian, charismatic leader.
b. The followers of such a religion or sect.
2. A system or community of religious worship and ritual.
3. The formal means of expressing religious reverence; religious ceremony and ritual.
4. A usually nonscientific method or regimen claimed by its originator to have exclusive or exceptional power in curing a particular disease.
5.
a. Obsessive, especially faddish, devotion to or veneration for a person, principle, or thing.
b. The object of such devotion.
6. An exclusive group of persons sharing an esoteric, usually artistic or intellectual interest.

you'll deny it but this :cult (klt)
n.
1.
a. A religion or religious sect generally considered to be extremist or false, with its followers often living in an unconventional manner under the guidance of an authoritarian, charismatic leader.
b. The followers of such a religion or sect.
2. A system or community of religious worship and ritual.
3. The formal means of expressing religious reverence; religious ceremony and ritual.
4. A usually nonscientific method or regimen claimed by its originator to have exclusive or exceptional power in curing a particular disease."
is a spot on description of evangelical Christianity and that's what you believe.
don't try to bullshit your way out of it!

 

[daws101]

The only time I have quoted wiki is to show your side are not in agreement on a view you portray as a fact.

so now you admit you have used it ,the reason why is meaningless. since you have no facts that's ironic.
bottom line is you lied and that's very un Christian and chicken shit!

I don't use it as a source so how is that a lie ?

Besides it's your turn moron to tell us your education and pick a subject to discuss.

lie! saying you never used it is a lie ,now you're attempting to qualify that lie.

honesty not in your skill set?

 

[Youwerecreated]

yes. the subject is why do you feel the need to lie about your education?
and what degree or degrees you hold (specifics)

I have a bachelor's degree in biology and my associates in both molecular and micro biology from the university of Arizona.

Now your education ?

I have AA in science from orange coast college a bachelor's
and an MFA IN TECHNICAL THEATRE /FILM from cal state Fullerton.
you've been told this before....

Well Theatre/film will not help you with this discussion.

So tell me your thoughts on organic compounds or intermediates ?

 

[Youwerecreated]

so now you admit you have used it ,the reason why is meaningless. since you have no facts that's ironic.
bottom line is you lied and that's very un Christian and chicken shit!

I don't use it as a source so how is that a lie ?

Besides it's your turn moron to tell us your education and pick a subject to discuss.

lie! saying you never used it is a lie ,now you're attempting to qualify that lie.

honesty not in your skill set?

No, my fault I should have been clearer I guess you could call it a lie if you must.

 

[Liability]

In the time before time matter and energy could be created and destroyed.

If we accept that as our major premise, then what conclusions are logically not possible?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I have a bachelor's degree in biology and my associates in both molecular and micro biology from the university of Arizona.

Now your education ?

I have AA in science from orange coast college a bachelor's
and an MFA IN TECHNICAL THEATRE /FILM from cal state Fullerton.
you've been told this before....

Well Theatre/film will not help you with this discussion.

So tell me your thoughts on organic compounds or intermediates ?

You have an arts degree in science?

 

[Youwerecreated]

In the time before time matter and energy could be created and destroyed.

If we accept that as our major premise, then what conclusions are logically not possible?

Uncle,what ?

 

[Liability]

In the time before time matter and energy could be created and destroyed.

If we accept that as our major premise, then what conclusions are logically not possible?

Uncle,what ?

Uncle What?

Did he play second base by any chance?

 

[Youwerecreated]

In the time before time matter and energy could be created and destroyed.

If we accept that as our major premise, then what conclusions are logically not possible?

Uncle,what ?

Uncle What?

Did he play second base by any chance?

I don't know played 2nd base.

 

[Youwerecreated]

I have AA in science from orange coast college a bachelor's
and an MFA IN TECHNICAL THEATRE /FILM from cal state Fullerton.
you've been told this before....

Well Theatre/film will not help you with this discussion.

So tell me your thoughts on organic compounds or intermediates ?

You have an arts degree in science?

No a B.S. if you are talking to me.

 

[Youwerecreated]

In the time before time matter and energy could be created and destroyed.

If we accept that as our major premise, then what conclusions are logically not possible?

Uncle,what ?

Uncle What?

Did he play second base by any chance?

I was saying what is the answer.

 

[Liability]

Uncle,what ?

Uncle What?

Did he play second base by any chance?

I was saying what is the answer.

And I was asking you if that's the same What who used to play second base.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Uncle What?

Did he play second base by any chance?

I was saying what is the answer.

And I was asking you if that's the same What who used to play second base.

I can't remember Abbott and Costello are the ones who made it famous though.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Uncle What?

Did he play second base by any chance?

I was saying what is the answer.

And I was asking you if that's the same What who used to play second base.

You are right.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RatKhtboq2E&feature=related]Abbott and Costello - Who's on First? - Naughty Nineties - High Quality - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Liability]

Uncle,what ?

Uncle What?

Did he play second base by any chance?

I was saying what is the answer.

But not everybody loves Abbott and Costello, so -- moving on.

I BELIEVE the "answer" is that there is absolutely NO conclusion that would qualify as "logically not possible" under that circumstance.

For the "premise" is a contradiction of other scientific laws. If two premises are both "true" but both contradict each other, then by a logical process there is literally NO logical syllogism that could yield an invalid conclusion.

This is explained better in Introductory Courses in College in the field of Logic.

But it went something like this:

If Lincoln was assassinated, then he did not finish his term. (T)
If Lincoln was not assassinated, then he finished his second term. (T)
If Lincoln is alive, then he was not assassinated. (T)
Lincoln is alive. (False, but if it is assigned the value of "T" then it can be used as a premise in the syllogism.)
____________________________________________________
∴ Lincoln finished his second term.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Well everyone have a great weekend I am headed out to california for another trip to the beach and a wedding.

Where did daws go.

 

[daws101]

I have a bachelor's degree in biology and my associates in both molecular and micro biology from the university of Arizona.

Now your education ?

I have AA in science from orange coast college a bachelor's
and an MFA IN TECHNICAL THEATRE /FILM from cal state Fullerton.
you've been told this before....

Well Theatre/film will not help you with this discussion.

So tell me your thoughts on organic compounds or intermediates ?

dodge!

 

[daws101]

I have AA in science from orange coast college a bachelor's
and an MFA IN TECHNICAL THEATRE /FILM from cal state Fullerton.
you've been told this before....

Well Theatre/film will not help you with this discussion.

So tell me your thoughts on organic compounds or intermediates ?

You have an arts degree in science?

I switched my major in college.
thought I might make more money in the biz
BTW it's not an "arts" degree per say it's closer to an engineering degree.
as evidenced by the word technical. IE. lighting science, design science ,construction technology etc...

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

No, I asked you how you knew what his math said. You haven't even looked at his math.

I actually have looked at it, I just haven't bothered to double check it.

Great. Show me the math you claim to have looked at.

He has lots of people that actually do that for him

Like who?

,and I am unlikely to find a mistake that gets through that vetting process.

Who said there was a mistake?

I also know that, never once has he ever claimed his math showed one thing when it actually showed something else.

Lack of evidence isn't evidence.

Since my claim is that he says his math shows that there is not time for God, I see no reason to double check his math to see if it actually shows that.

I'm not asking you to double check it. I'm merely asking you to show me exactly what math you are talking about. Why won't you?

That still does not change the fact that I know what his math says because he says that, and that that is not an appeal to authority.

Its hearsay evidence. If you haven't inspected the actual piece of evidence - the math - then a person's claims about what the math says, whoever they are, is hearsay.

his math showed that the universe would have collapsed unless it was a lot younger than it actually is.

Again you make claims about what math has showed without referencing the actual math. Can you show me this math that Einstein used to show that the universe would have collapsed unless it was a lot younger than it actually is? Do I get to see that or do I just have to take your word for it?


By the way, the FLWR metric actually allows for six solutions, not just three.
[/quote]

List them.

The so-called 'fudge' factor was introduced BEFORE observation of the distribution of the microwave background radiation. When your 'fudge factor' reliably predicts observation BEFORE its made its no longer a 'fudge factor', its tested theory.

Umm, what? The cosmological constant was discredited until we discovered that the rate of expansion is accelerating in 1998, cosmic background radiation was discovered in 1965.

Want to try again?

Your ignorance is truly showing, and augments your smug attitude well.

I would direct your attention to the inflationary model of the early universe.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Great. Show me the math you claim to have looked at.

If you have access to physics journals just look up his papers on black holes, the math is not new, all that is new is his claim that it disproves God.

Like who?

Like his students, editors, and everyone else that does things like that for people like him.

Who said there was a mistake?

You implied that I did.

Lack of evidence isn't evidence.

Pointing out that Hawking has never been wrong when he is talking about his math is evidence of his credibility, not a lack of evidence of anything. If you had gotten past third grade in school I wouldn't have to point that out.

I'm not asking you to double check it. I'm merely asking you to show me exactly what math you are talking about. Why won't you?

Because you can't tell me why the area of a circle is equal to the square on a line equal to the quadrant of the circumference.

Its hearsay evidence. If you haven't inspected the actual piece of evidence - the math - then a person's claims about what the math says, whoever they are, is hearsay.

Wrong.

Again you make claims about what math has showed without referencing the actual math. Can you show me this math that Einstein used to show that the universe would have collapsed unless it was a lot younger than it actually is? Do I get to see that or do I just have to take your word for it?

I thought you said you already read Einstein's general theory of relativity. In fact, I recall once pointing out that it wasn't about what you think it is. If you haven't I can provide a link, but it does lead me to wonder what you were doing trying to argue about something you haven't read.

List them.

Get back to me after you read Einstein's work, you wouldn't understand them if you haven't grasped the basics.

Your ignorance is truly showing, and augments your smug attitude well.

I would direct your attention to the inflationary model of the early universe.

If I recall correctly, inflation was first proposed in the early 1980s to explain the homogenous appearance of the universe. I definitely recall a problem with monopoles and inflation. Not sure what any of that has to do with the cosmological constant though, want to clue me in on what you think it is?