frrostedman wrote:humphreys wrote:Greeney, the story from Kings, remember that? We discussed it quite recently. Well, that was a gang.
That tribal stuff that occurred at the beginning of civilization, they were gangs too. Gangs have always existed.
As far as the American gangs you are talking about specifically, they have been around at least 150 years.
This doesn't sound very supportive of your "look at all the progress we've made" argument.
Yes, we've made lots of progress as far as scientific discovery. The the nature of mankind has not change for the better or worse since the dawn of civilization. And even if it has, science has had nothing to do with it, that's for sure.
It worked out rather well. Now instead of totally rampant evil, human sacrifice, and ceaseless rapes committed upon us by powerful Nephalim, we have humphreys and frosty. I would choose the latter every time.
CodeBlackv2 wrote:Whoa, that is way off base. You are confusing theory with proof.
A scientific theory is "a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment." Scientists create scientific theories from hypotheses that have been corroborated through the scientific method, then gather evidence to test their accuracy.
Island_Girl wrote:Is this off topic? I spend lots of time on and in the
water. Reel me in, if so. Release me back gently tho'.
Surprisingly, observational tests of the multiverse picture may in fact be possible. Anthony Aguirre, Matt Johnson, Matt Kleban and others have pointed out that a collision of our expanding bubble with another bubble in the multiverse would produce an imprint in the cosmic background radiation—a round spot of higher or lower radiation intensity.
There is also another approach that one can follow. The idea is to use our theoretical model of the multiverse to predict the constants of nature that we can expect to measure in our local region. If the constants vary from one bubble universe to another, their local values cannot be predicted with certainty, but we can still make statistical predictions.
Remember: Parallel universes are not a theory—they are predictions of certain theories.
at1with0 wrote:Remember: Parallel universes are not a theory—they are predictions of certain theories.
Now if Tegmark is right about the level IV multiverse, and reality is at least isomorphic to a mathematical structure, then what implications does that have regarding ID? I would think that mathematical structures are discovered and NOT created/designed by anything simply because they always existed (even before the big bang).
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest