Skip navigation
Sidebar -

Advanced search options →

Welcome

Welcome to CEMB forum.
Please login or register. Did you miss your activation email?

Donations

Help keep the Forum going!
Click on Kitty to donate:

Kitty is lost

Recent Posts


What music are you listen...
by zeca
Today at 12:57 AM

Qur'anic studies today
by zeca
Today at 12:43 AM

Random Islamic History Po...
by zeca
November 26, 2021, 01:52 PM

NayaPakistan...New Pakist...
November 26, 2021, 11:02 AM

Do humans have needed kno...
November 25, 2021, 01:57 PM

مدهش----- لماذا؟؟؟؟
November 24, 2021, 01:36 PM

AMRIKAAA Land of Free .....
November 24, 2021, 12:57 PM

Muhammad's illiteracy, po...
November 23, 2021, 03:09 PM

The essence of the facts
by akay
November 22, 2021, 07:16 PM

Coronavirus crisis
November 22, 2021, 03:06 PM

Apostasy in the UK with I...
November 20, 2021, 12:39 PM

MP murdered
November 20, 2021, 11:27 AM

Theme Changer

 Topic: Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves

 (Read 112691 times)
  • Previous page 1 ... 30 31 3233 34 ... 37 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #930 - November 11, 2015, 02:01 PM

    I'm still waiting for your explanation on what this has to do with atheists.


    `But I don't want to go among mad people,' Alice remarked.
     `Oh, you can't help that,' said the Cat: `we're all mad here. I'm mad.  You're mad.'
     `How do you know I'm mad?' said Alice.
     `You must be,' said the Cat, `or you wouldn't have come here.'
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #931 - November 12, 2015, 11:14 AM

    Contradictions, Ted. Lots of it.

    So do you know the truth or not? Are there natural explanations of this phenomena?

    Excuse me but what facts support geocentrism?


    It's a fact that the Sun rises and sets. It's a fact that the Earth feels stationary.

    You don't even understand the meaning of natural phenomena. Have you figured out what the natural phenomena is that causes planets and stars to form? It's not gravity. Problem with people like yourself is that you look for a natural explanation then when you don't find one you'll simply say scientists haven't figured it out yet.

  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #932 - November 12, 2015, 11:15 AM

    I'm still waiting for your explanation on what this has to do with atheists.


    Sorry but if I have to explain this to you then this just proves that you're not worth having a discussion with.
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #933 - November 12, 2015, 12:48 PM

    Hmm  Ted says something without taxing his brain... I guess Ted doesn't want to waste oxygen.. let me read few words from him..

    Quote from: CallMeTed  to Quod  link=topic=29151.msg840480#msg840480 date=1447326956
    ............you're not worth having a discussion with.............

     
    It's a fact that the Sun rises and sets. It's a fact that the Earth feels stationary.

    You don't even understand the meaning of natural phenomena.  .  


    what is happening Ted?  Stomach acidity causing you to use acid words or what??

    So your fact is  " the Sun rises and sets."??

    So where does it rise and where does it set??

    Oh! let me read that 18:86
    Quote
     
    YUSUFALI: Until, when he reached the setting of the sun, he found it set in a spring of murky water: Near it he found a People: We said: "O Zul-qarnain! (thou hast authority,) either to punish them, or to treat them with kindness."

    PICKTHAL: Till, when he reached the setting-place of the sun, he found it setting in a muddy spring, and found a people thereabout. We said: O Dhu'l-Qarneyn! Either punish or show them kindness.

    SHAKIR: Until when he reached the place where the sun set, he found it going down into a black sea, and found by it a people. We said: O Zulqarnain! either give them a chastisement or do them a benefit.


    Ha!    Sun sets in muddy springs or black Sea...good.... This link is for you Ted

    Fools write nonsense out of silly Arabic poets of some nomads that roamed around caves  and now they sell it as Modern science of 21st century... .

    Do not let silence become your legacy.. Question everything   
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #934 - November 13, 2015, 03:06 PM

    You do realise that if the distance to the Sun is wrong and it is in fact found to be a lot closer to the Earth then the distances to the planets and stars are wrong. Then the mass of the stars and planets are wrong as well. I don't think you realise how a lot of modern scientific is dependent on a few theoretical calculations/assumptions. If those change then so does everything that relies upon it.




    If this, if that. You speculate as if that is an argument. Good thing NASA has been sending probes to other planets for decades.

    I guess it was expected for you guys to not understand the discovery. There is no natural explanation for the observations. It's just a matter of time before geocentrism is proven. Please don't ignore it.  Come back and join the side of truth.


    Argument from ignorance. The inability to understand why this happens, lets keep in mind this a recent discovery while the heliocentric model is centuries old, does not make your view correct. Try again Ted.

    Helaine,

    Sorry but you don't even understand what science is. Try looking it up in Wikipedia and understanding it. I shall try to explain something to you althought I doubt you will understand.


    Maybe enroll in a university class Ted. Your reliance on Wiki shows you have no formal education at all. Otherwise you would know Wiki is not a credible source for any credible university 

    Quote
    Ptolemy used science to determine motions of the planets and stars. Based on what he observed he made the assumption that the earth was at that the center of the universe. Today scientists use other observations to make the assumption that the earth is a planet orbitting in a heliocentric model. New observatations different assumptions. Important thing to understand is that at the moment we simply don't KNOW what the truth is. We need more information.


    No it used observation and mathematics. The difference is Ptolemy couldn't send objects to direct observation while NASA confirms the heliocentric model every time it launches probes and receives data transmissions from these probes. The Heliocentric model has been confirmed repeatedly while your model has been refuted.

    Quote
    The Pluto phenomena is pointing out that some things in teh solar system are just not behaving the way SCIENTISTS assume them to. Scientists use the current knowledge at hand to make assumptions. When those assumptions don't explain a new phenomena then they look for a new explanation. Who knows, it could be that some of Ptolemy's work/ideas might actually be relevant and it could be the beginning of the end for the heliocentric model.


    Argument from ignorance

    It's a fact that the Sun rises and sets. It's a fact that the Earth feels stationary.

    You don't even understand the meaning of natural phenomena. Have you figured out what the natural phenomena is that causes planets and stars to form? It's not gravity. Problem with people like yourself is that you look for a natural explanation then when you don't find one you'll simply say scientists haven't figured it out yet.




    Semantics and word games. You are using phrases as if phrases are evidence of anything. Yes natural explanations for observations is the primary basis of science. You have attempted to do use science yourself. You project a facade to either cover your reliance on outdated science for your views or, as I believe, a religious ideaology

    Wrong gravity forms stars and planets. Even your weak Wiki says as much...

    http://abyss.uoregon.edu/~js/ast122/lectures/lec13.html
    http://lasp.colorado.edu/education/outerplanets/solsys_star.php
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_formation

    Quote
    Accusing people of trolling is one sign that you just don't understand what's been said. Try thinking differently. Believers/Non believers have the same facts yet different conclusions.


    Nope. Since many people have directly linked your work from science, which you ignore, suggests you are either a troll or are ignorant on a level most of us have never seen. You have zero facts on your side since the geocentric model has been refuted repeatedly. You have a book from a period of ignorance compared to modern times.
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #935 - November 13, 2015, 05:30 PM

    CallMeTed  says to  Helaine,  on November 11, 2015, 01:34 PM

    Quote
    Sorry but you don't even understand what science is. Try looking it up in Wikipedia and understanding it. I shall try to explain something to you althought I doubt you will understand.

      and


    Maybe enroll in a university class Ted. Your reliance on Wiki shows you have no formal education at all. Otherwise you would know Wiki is not a credible source for any credible university 

    bogart ...... terrible...terrible  I too rely on wiki ..  Huh? Huh?  It is hard to remember everything so to start with  I go to wiki ., for example    List of fallacies

    Ted let us read that wiki link.. it is a good one..

    Do not let silence become your legacy.. Question everything   
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #936 - November 13, 2015, 06:26 PM

    Wiki is unreliable as anyone an edit it. You can find a list of fallacies from any university website or it's programs in philosophy and logic. Just look at the list of edits for your page alone. Take a look at people injecting pictures for laughs into the article.

    "(cur | prev) 20:48, 9 September 2012‎ 24.104.15.132 (talk)‎ . . (33,990 bytes) (-176)‎ . . (I removed a picture of Bill O'Reilly with the caption "Bill O'Reilly has often been accused of making logical fallacies in The O'Reilly Factor." This added nothing to the article and gave no example of a fallacy.) (undo)"

    Wiki only shows how lazy one is with their research. Never mind that it is rejected as an academic sources for student let alone for professionals. Sorry.

  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #937 - November 16, 2015, 11:32 AM

    bogart,

    Seems like you don't even understand Wikipedia. No wonder you're so confused.
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #938 - November 16, 2015, 12:23 PM

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZmInkxbvlCs
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #939 - November 16, 2015, 03:58 PM

    bogart,

    Seems like you don't even understand Wikipedia. No wonder you're so confused.


    Sorry son but I understand Wiki and how to do proper research. Try enrolling in a university to get an education rather than using an unreliable source you find on the web.
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #940 - November 19, 2015, 10:31 AM

    Lol. I have actually 2 degrees and spent 5 years at university. But having a university education or any other doesn't compensate for not having any common sense.

    It seems as though you need to learn what education is, what it's roots are and how to think critically. You seem to be the type of person who would blindly accept a paper from a university and accept it without question whereas someone who has some common sense would not blindly accept it without understanding it.

    The reason you don't accept Wikipedia is because you simply don't understand it. Many people use it a source for discussion because it provides an explanation/references of the idea they are trying to get across and is easy to look up. It may well be that explanation is wrong but then that should become apparent as the dicussion progresses.

    My humble advice to you is to learn to understand education.
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #941 - November 19, 2015, 10:46 AM

    ........................

    My humble advice to you is to learn to understand education.

    Ted . that doesn't make sense..  I don't get it .. let us rewrite it..

    So did you read about

    if not let us read and teach these people about fallacies...

    http://www.triviumeducation.com/texts/42Fallacies.pdf
    https://web.cn.edu/kwheeler/documents/Logic_Fallacies_List.pdf
    http://www.unb.ca/fredericton/studentservices/_resources/pdfs/wss/fallacies.pdf

     

    Do not let silence become your legacy.. Question everything   
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #942 - November 19, 2015, 10:49 AM

    But having a university education or any other doesn't compensate for not having any common sense.


    First sensible thing he's said, it's just a shame he doesn't have either. (As for the claim to have 2 degrees--are these from Oral Roberts University or from BJU?)

    Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for I have a sonic screwdriver, a tricorder, and a Type 2 phaser.
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #943 - November 19, 2015, 10:54 AM

    ..........are these from Oral  Roberts University .........?)

    that doesn't sound good  let me rewrite that..

    Are These from Oral  University ??



    Do not let silence become your legacy.. Question everything   
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #944 - November 20, 2015, 09:36 AM

    that doesn't sound good  let me rewrite that..

    Are These from Oral  University ??





    Oral Roberts University and BJU (Bob Jones University) are both real schools, here in the grand ol' U.S. of A. And not surprisingly, they specialize in pseudoscience and religious indoctrination, with a side of sexuality policing. Oral Roberts University will expel you for being gay, and Bob Jones University will too--and god forbid you're in an interracial abomination of a relationship, that shit would get you expelled from BJU until they lifted that policy, way back in....2000. Seriously, until just 15 years ago, you'd be expelled for having an interracial marriage. Meaning the kids there now were born while that rule was still in effect.

    Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for I have a sonic screwdriver, a tricorder, and a Type 2 phaser.
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #945 - November 20, 2015, 10:23 AM

    Oral University and BJU (Bob Jones University) are both real schools, here in the grand ol' U.S. of A. And not surprisingly, they specialize in pseudoscience and religious indoctrination, with a side of sexuality policing. Oral University will expel you for being gay, and Bob Jones University will too--and god forbid you're in an interracial abomination of a relationship, that shit would get you expelled from BJU until they lifted that policy, way back in....2000. Seriously, until just 15 years ago, you'd be expelled for having an interracial marriage. Meaning the kids there now were born while that rule was still in effect.

    well what do we expect?  all such religious rubbish places are based upon some 1000 year old ORAL DIARRHEA  of some cave dwellers..

    crooks make money    play politics and ruin humanity in 21st century by brainwashing people with that ORAL DIARRHEA .... Irrational idiots..

    Do not let silence become your legacy.. Question everything   
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #946 - November 20, 2015, 10:34 AM

    In some parallel universe, there is probably a CallMeTed who hasn't graduated with honours from the Shitheel School for Master Debaters, and a forum where sincere people don't rise to that sort of thing, no matter how entertaining it is.

    Then again, in some parallel universe, there's probably an Anal Johnson University, so.. who cares?
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #947 - November 20, 2015, 11:41 AM

    Lol. I have actually 2 degrees and spent 5 years at university. But having a university education or any other doesn't compensate for not having any common sense.

    It seems as though you need to learn what education is, what it's roots are and how to think critically. You seem to be the type of person who would blindly accept a paper from a university and accept it without question whereas someone who has some common sense would not blindly accept it without understanding it.

    The reason you don't accept Wikipedia is because you simply don't understand it. Many people use it a source for discussion because it provides an explanation/references of the idea they are trying to get across and is easy to look up. It may well be that explanation is wrong but then that should become apparent as the dicussion progresses.

    My humble advice to you is to learn to understand education.


    I highly doubt your claims as universities do not look highly upon wiki. Beside the discussion has progressed to the point it is painful obvious you have no such education due to your numerous errors and mistakes.
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #948 - November 20, 2015, 12:58 PM

    I highly doubt your claims as universities do not look highly upon wiki. ............

    well there is no reason to doubt on Ted's double degrees bogart.. May be he got his degrees before the wiki was born ...before the age of computers.. ..

    So we have to keep the options open and dialogue with Ted & Ted likes now and then..

    Do not let silence become your legacy.. Question everything   
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #949 - November 20, 2015, 10:56 PM

    I highly doubt your claims as universities do not look highly upon wiki. Beside the discussion has progressed to the point it is painful obvious you have no such education due to your numerous errors and mistakes.


    Only an uneducated fool would say such a thing.
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #950 - November 20, 2015, 11:15 PM

    Say the one that rejects repeated evidence of the heliocentric model.
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #951 - November 20, 2015, 11:19 PM

    well there is no reason to doubt on Ted's double degrees bogart.. May be he got his degrees before the wiki was born ...before the age of computers.. ..

    So we have to keep the options open and dialogue with Ted & Ted likes now and then..


    Sure there is. First off he rejects evidence when it repeatedly shows him to be wrong. Every credible university has programs required outside one's major which includes courses in the sciences thus he knows full well the heliocentric models is a fact and repeatedly shown to be a fact by NASA. Second, he uses wiki as a source rather than citing any valid text books. My high school education was complete before wiki was started yet I have no issues with the fact of the heliocentric model nor do I need to reply on it as the single source.
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #952 - November 21, 2015, 06:14 PM

    bogart,

    Please stop showing how flawed your understanding of science and education is.

    You weren't even able to do a simple mathematical calculation yet here you are making references to thing you don't fully understand. You're just another product of brainwashing by the media and educational institutions. Learn to use your intellect to see the truth. The truth will set you free.  Afro

    The reality you exist in is a lot more bizarre than you think and science is showing this. I know why you and the other billions of people consider the heliocentric model to be fact. If you can't be bothered to look at the problems with it then just be patient. The truth can't be hidden for long. The question for you is what are you going to do/believe when you do discover the geocentric model is true and modern science accepts it.

    Will you consider it as evidence of God or will you simply wait for other evidence or more evidence?

  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #953 - November 21, 2015, 07:17 PM

    How is geocentricism evidence for your god specifically? If it is evidence, which it's not, surely it's evidence for thousands of gods from your point of view.

    `But I don't want to go among mad people,' Alice remarked.
     `Oh, you can't help that,' said the Cat: `we're all mad here. I'm mad.  You're mad.'
     `How do you know I'm mad?' said Alice.
     `You must be,' said the Cat, `or you wouldn't have come here.'
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #954 - November 21, 2015, 10:18 PM

    How is geocentrism not evidence of God?
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #955 - November 22, 2015, 01:05 AM

    I've told you this before Ted. The only way to establish the credibility of a religion is via the scripture.

    `But I don't want to go among mad people,' Alice remarked.
     `Oh, you can't help that,' said the Cat: `we're all mad here. I'm mad.  You're mad.'
     `How do you know I'm mad?' said Alice.
     `You must be,' said the Cat, `or you wouldn't have come here.'
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #956 - November 22, 2015, 01:18 AM

    How is geocentrism not evidence of God?

    what kind of question is that Ted.. How this concept of  geocentrism is  evidence of God dear Ted...

    don't you want to question that?  didn't you read wiki?  let me put a bit of it from wiki

    Quote
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geocentric_model

     the geocentric model (also known as geocentrism, or the Ptolemaic system) is a description of the cosmos where Earth is at the orbital center of all celestial bodies. This model served as the predominant cosmological system in many ancient civilizations such as ancient Greece including the noteworthy systems of Aristotle (see Aristotelian physics) and Ptolemy. As such, they believed that the Sun, Moon, stars, and naked eye planets circled Earth

    ...

    Ancient Roman and medieval philosophers usually combined the geocentric model with a spherical Earth. It is not the same as the older flat Earth model implied in some mythology, as was the case with the biblical and postbiblical Latin cosmology.[n 1][n 2][5] The ancient Jewish Babylonian uranography pictured a flat Earth with a dome-shaped rigid canopy named firmament placed over it. (רקיע- rāqîa').

    ...........However, the ancient Greeks believed that the motions of the planets were circular and not elliptical, a view that was not challenged in Western culture until the 17th century through the synthesis of theories by Copernicus and Kepler........

    .......Morris Berman quotes survey results that show currently some 20% of the U.S. population believe that the sun goes around the Earth (geocentricism) rather than the Earth goes around the sun (heliocentricism), while a further 9% claimed not to know.[52] Polls conducted by Gallup in the 1990s found that 16% of Germans, 18% of Americans and 19% of Britons hold that the Sun revolves around the Earth.[53] A study conducted in 2005 by Jon D. Miller of Northwestern University, an expert in the public understanding of science and technology,[54] found that about 20%, or one in five, of American adults believe that the Sun orbits the Earth.[55] According to 2011 VTSIOM poll, 32% of Russians believe that the Sun orbits the Earth.[56]....


    Can you read more from that wiki link??  that is your favorite reference..

    http://www.slideshare.net/jundel3/chapter-13-43936904

    and let me give you this slide link which will help you to understand the origin of geocentric model

    Do not let silence become your legacy.. Question everything   
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #957 - November 22, 2015, 04:28 AM

    The truth can't be hidden for long. The question for you is what are you going to do/believe when you do discover the geocentric model is true and modern science accepts it.


    You always write with the assumption that you are the only one who knows the truth. What do you know that NASA scientists don't?

    If you have some secret evidence that scientists don't have, feel free to bring it forward.

    You don't, you have nothing.

    Quote
    It's a fact that the Sun rises and sets. It's a fact that the Earth feels stationary.


    I mean just look at how pathetic this is. I asked what facts you have, and you have nothing.

    Funny that you mentioned about bogart approving papers he doesn't understand, considering you give links to evolution-denier videos without even understanding what genus means. That means you don't even know what the nutter was rambling about and yet you believed it anyway.

    Heck, you don't even understand the articles you linked (which according to you, disproves atheism and heliocentrism). Funny that the scientists who are doing all the experiments say nothing about it supporting geocentrism, only you did because you fall hard for confirmation bias. To you, the world only exist in accordance to your mental conditions, and people who don't approve your feelings are too stupid for you.

    If you already have proofs for geocentrism AND you know how education works, you would've exposed yourself to actual scientific battleground, not rambling about it, trying to take credits from somebody else' experiments to further your own goals. Go ahead and submit papers to peer-reviewed journals about your geocentrism if you actually "know" it's true.

    Go ahead and scream louder about "ze truth", your words are empty. Too bad science won't align to your feelings.
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #958 - November 22, 2015, 04:57 AM

    anyone who believes in religion, specifically islam, should look up "the peripheral route to persuasion"

    "If you don't like your religion's fundamentalists, then maybe there's something wrong with your religion's fundamentals."
    "Demanding blind respect but not offering any respect in reciprocation is laughable."
    "Let all the people in all the worlds be in peace."
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #959 - November 22, 2015, 09:24 AM

    I've told you this before Ted. The only way to establish the credibility of a religion is via the scripture.


    Sorry but as usual you are not making much sense.
  • Previous page 1 ... 30 31 3233 34 ... 37 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »