If Jesus was the author; are these lies?
- Thread starter Bishadi
- Start date
if all of existence works ONE way
then the math is the last word; equal to all mankind/the universe
to theology: vindication defined
to science: self explanitory
to philosophy: the underlying priniciples, confirmed
Puerile.
No answers?
Mathematics won't vindicate theology.
And will have little to help philosophy.
You're spouting rubbish again.
Lots' of them; you don't read! (comprehend)
as are noted in the below comments
yu dont' have much depth in knowledge and why your comprehension of the terms and combining is so distant.
Perhaps go back to Roger Bacon of the 13th century.......... OLD folks knew before you ever did. Can everyone see how the ignorance of the dywyddr is focused on just ranting, rather than actually observing and pursuing comprehension.
the punk like to just rant; "NO, your wrong" but unworthy of asking why.....
philosophy offers analogies tot he human experience; comprehensing how and why it works is hugenormous. (who likes the new 'creation' of a word?)
this is kind of cool
seems like my learning is on a roll
Oh but I do read - you STILL haven't answered:
What spark?
Which individual?
But no mathematics.
Mathematics and theology?
Yeah right.
Specious links based on a priori belief...
No, your inane waffling is on a roll.
Last edited:
if you read the thread; you would already know that.
You are proving your stupidity with that inquiry!
the underlying principles of life are found within a variety of philosophical approaches. (disciplines) ie.... what is life?
again; you do not have enough comprehensible knowledge to understand that.
And for a philosphy to have merit, equally, it must be grounded to reality.
Did you look into Roger Bacon? Of course the answer is; No...................
Combine your comments and it is really easy to see; you DO NOT have enough math, theology, philosophy or science to maintain a conversation or debate.
perhaps you should step away from the forum and learn something beyond your degreed education? (perhaps try common sense for a change; then maybe you could walk and chew bubble gum at the same time)
Newton was just as bad as Roger but you won't comprehend that either.
in short; he was a friar who spend over a decade under house arrest pursuing the truth within the 3 branches of knowledge.
HE knew there was a combining frame.
And if you read this WHOLE thread and actually used a brain; then each line item i wrote would be easy to understand.
but as oooosual, the moderation here in sciforum allows trolls and bigots like you to continue.....
i copy most everything and even find the people like you just for my records
some think it is OK for people to be like you; i don't!
it is people like you that hinder the progression and i will remember that enabling others to judge will allow each of them to both impose and maintain the absolute in truth!
people like you will be extinct soon enough
ps.... have you even read the OP?
Well let's see: so far we've mentioned Jesus, Francis Bacon (as Shakespeare! WTF?), Thoth, Roger Bacon and maybe a couple of others...
Since you simply dropped the comment into the thread (with no reference as to who or what the "spark" is) I'd say the stupidity is all yours.
Nope, philosophy can talk a lot but it can't discern what's truly factual.
Especially as far as "what is life" goes.
But not necessarily mathematics.
Wrong again.
Neither do you: you simply look stuff up and somehow assume that you know what it means.
As witness your nonsense about the second law of thermodynamics being wrong.
Ah, resorting to ad homs again?
Evidence?
Wrong again.
Bishadi, one thing that is virtually guaranteed is that your posts are never easy to understand.
I'm still trying to work out what "fasod" means.
Ah, I see your problem: you don't understand that you're the troll and bigot.
People who think?
Thanks.
Again thanks.
I like to hinder the progression of stupidity.
You and truth merely have a passing acquaintance.
Sure.
More of your nonsense and misinterpretation.
again, another post that shares the lack of comprehension
dah.............!
If you comprehended 'what life is' then you could perhaps have a clue.
To comprehend anything of science, then to realize that 'life' must be undertood to mathematically define it, is more than just an idea.
Science and the medical field live on the math of science so comprehending how it works is a universal quest within the fields.
Just as to represent anything philosophically, must be grounded to the base principles of how existence and life works otherwise, they are opinions rather than facts.
To have enough depth in philosophy, you would know that many truths within have been proven rationally before scientifically.
The perfection of comprehension combines the objective to the rational within knowledge, that is conveyable in words and math.
Meaning: for the absolute in natural truth to exist, it must be verifiable in math.
(that is what Roger was so intent on (the math) and he and Newton were extremely involved with bringing 'light' into the arena as being of extreme relevance to that universal frame)
Newton did not have the 'evidence' of entanglement (a property of light) otherwise, gravity would have been defined a long time ago. (my opinion)
this is what i hate about punks like you; Do you have any idea why i contest the 2LoT?
Directly asked; can you define what the argument is?
Or do you not have the depth to articulate a debate!
principle underlying 'how it works'
dah.............!
If you comprehended 'what life is' then you could perhaps have a clue.
and you prove your ignorance with them comments.
To comprehend anything of science, then to realize that 'life' must be undertood to mathematically define it, is more than just an idea.
Science and the medical field live on the math of science so comprehending how it works is a universal quest within the fields.
Just as to represent anything philosophically, must be grounded to the base principles of how existence and life works otherwise, they are opinions rather than facts.
To have enough depth in philosophy, you would know that many truths within have been proven rationally before scientifically.
The perfection of comprehension combines the objective to the rational within knowledge, that is conveyable in words and math.
Meaning: for the absolute in natural truth to exist, it must be verifiable in math.
(that is what Roger was so intent on (the math) and he and Newton were extremely involved with bringing 'light' into the arena as being of extreme relevance to that universal frame)
Newton did not have the 'evidence' of entanglement (a property of light) otherwise, gravity would have been defined a long time ago. (my opinion)
this is what i hate about punks like you; Do you have any idea why i contest the 2LoT?
Directly asked; can you define what the argument is?
Or do you not have the depth to articulate a debate!
Wrong again.
You don't "comprehend how life works" either.
And Bacon was working from an a priori belief.
More of your utter nonsense.
Entanglement has nothing to do with it.
Of course I know why you contest the second law of thermodynamics.
I know exactly why you do so.
You're crackpot and have no clue as what it really means.
You misunderstand it and believe it's incorrect because your "thinking" is flawed.
Was. Did you wonder why he was under house arrest for over a decade?
bet ya didn't.
again, that comprehension thing is bugging you
like above on life
you just ain't got no understandin (i will bet you didn't even know what entanglement was until i showed up; it has to do with science. physics, bell labs, mit and what is being defined in todays world)
just say, "no i don't know why of how you contest the 2nd"
then you will have posted something
you are a troll oli
no matter which name you log under
p/s... same sex 'needs' will go extinct too!
Non-sequitur and irrelevant.
You're assuming again.
And you're wrong again.
Well duh.
But not the way you think it does.
But I do know why you contest it.
You're a crackpot.
Assuming again?
Which has what to do with me?
I'm straight.
But you're wrong about it going extinct too.
cop out....
he wrote many items discounting the absolution of the beliefs, rather that reality stands by itself
so you don't know what it is or how the property applies in physics or evidence;
is that what you are saying?
same sex needs; will be extinct along with ignorant beliefs
nature shares exceptions but reality always trumps culture
Wrong again: the subject under discussion was mathematics & theology.
No, I'm saying that YOU don't have a clue.
You don't go by evidence, you work from delusion and misunderstanding.
Supposition based on what?
Your bigotry?
What does culture have to do with homosexuality?
Oh don't tell me: you're ignoring all the examples in the animal kingdom.
Again.
Gonna tell us more lies?