Wind doesn't exist except in the same way that gravity exists.
And respect as well...hehe.
Boy is this thread off track...when this hijacked airliner sets down in Pakistan I'm outta here.
irrational naturalism (#201) .
by henry morris, ph.d. .
abstract .
Wind doesn't exist except in the same way that gravity exists.
And respect as well...hehe.
Boy is this thread off track...when this hijacked airliner sets down in Pakistan I'm outta here.
irrational naturalism (#201) .
by henry morris, ph.d. .
abstract .
Yes, yes, its a smiple argument. My point is that you were quick to call a foul on Leolayla's post regarding borons, etc. It seemed that you were saying that because scientists cannot directly observe borons that the data was invalid. Many things like "gasses and particulates in the atmosphere (air)" are not directly observed but you agree they exist. I was just wondering what the difference was?
irrational naturalism (#201) .
by henry morris, ph.d. .
abstract .
"Great discussion" I was about to type before my post posted itself. Who knew such great phiosophical discussion could be found on an ex-JW website.
irrational naturalism (#201) .
by henry morris, ph.d. .
abstract .
Nah, we know what wind is.
But we can not observe wind or air for that matter.
And not just by its effects.
Then how?
Great
follow this link and scroll down to the article, "solid ground".
it explains the faulty logic of 'genetic fallacy'.
learn from this site how to defend your belief against the logical errors typically used to dismiss christianity.
Learn away captain!
If you are going to point out a fallacy in an argument then please do me a favor (for I am uneducated) and tell me what fallacy he is guilty of specifically. If you need a list you can find one here : http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/. You can't just run around screaming "fallacy, fallacy" without explaining why it is so.
PS. Not to throw fuel on the fire but the act of being derisive by putting things in quotes is getting absurd. e.g. so called 'scientists' , 'logical and enlightened' , 'science', 'enviromentalists', 'logic' , you and your 'reasoning'. It is a great BS indicator when this tactic is used in an argument.
irrational naturalism (#201) .
by henry morris, ph.d. .
abstract .
And wind?
follow this link and scroll down to the article, "solid ground".
it explains the faulty logic of 'genetic fallacy'.
learn from this site how to defend your belief against the logical errors typically used to dismiss christianity.
Im still laughing at the fact that Rex is calling people out on logical fallacies.
irrational naturalism (#201) .
by henry morris, ph.d. .
abstract .
determination of cause by observed effect is not observation of cause.
Like gravity?
what would your views be on mormons?.
was there much incidences where jw's and mormons would ever catch eachother while going door-to-door?.
just curious cause both of you do it and wondered if there was ever any conflict between the two..... evanescence
Well, since I live in the capitol of Zion as they call it, I tend to have mixed feelings. I have met the full spectrum range of Mormon types. Yes, they can be easily categorized due to years of genetic restriction. Do you not believe me? Well come spend some time here and you will see for yourself.
I play basketball once a week at a Mormon church with a very nice group of guys. Some of the most amazing people I have met are LDS, some are downright evil. Most of the time they do not bother you but there are times one just wants to scream and slap that goofy smile off their face and say "ARE YOU F*CKING KIDDING ME!" But we don't.
Mormons in groups are very annoying. Therefore if you work somewhere with a high percentage of Mormons you will be in for some aggravation, especially if those in charge are Mormons. Church hierarchy will take over in the workplace.
Yes when I was a JW publisher we ran into Mormons about say, every other house on average. In some neighborhoods more, some less. Few wanted to argue with us most were very nice and just didn't want to be bothered (like everyone else who's doorbell we rang). If you run across the missionaries while in door to door work they probably would not engage you in a dogmatic debate. They would be kind, exchange pleasantries, ask a few questions and smile that goofy smile, then be off on their way. Most are much kinder and far less depressed than JW's. But then, a mission is only 2 years long whereas door to door goes on and on and on and on and...well you get my point.
Little known fact: Mormons from outside Utah behave much differently than Mormons raised in Utah. I generally prefer Mormans who were not raised in Utah. Perhaps its the "Mormons in groups are annoying" axiom at work here.
irrational naturalism (#201) .
by henry morris, ph.d. .
abstract .
What if hyperspace theory is correct and reality actually has a construction of many more dimensions of space and time than 3 of space and 1 of time? Can we then pretend there are things we can't study with Science?
What if? Yes, if it is correct then we can stop pretending...and begin to study hyperspace theory as well. Maybe God will be there, and respect too.
<chirp, chirp, chirp (crickets in the distance)>
<impatiently tapping fingers>
So when do we get to find out if hyperspace theory is correct, I'm dying to know?
BTW, my walls are "not enough information to answer" colored. And I do know there are walls because I am in a room and it by definition has walls.