Quote:
Originally posted by RPKESQ
Mulhollanddose wrote:
Funny coming from a plagiarist that never would have admitted he plagiarized, off a lying propagandist no less, unless I caught him red-handed in the plagiarism.
Null, this is your same sad pitiful response. Your one note song. How sad. Most people here know your infantile attacks are just the emotional crying of an underdeveloped child. You attempts at logic and rational thought are pathetic. Go on; sing your little one note whine. You couldn’t catch your ass with both hands and a native guide. Try rebuttals to the points, or is that too much effort for your clearly overtaxed brain.
|
The exchange of words shows the typical lack of respect people like RPKESQ tend to show for anyone who disagrees with them. The holier than thou, put down, without anything to back it up. What the response also shows is the total lack of respect for the other peoples beliefs’. They claim to understand logic, science, yet display a genuine lack of understanding of science. They cannot see that all the partial differential equations and Laplace transforms in the world do nothing to explain why we are here.
Psudo science, like evolution (I call it a psudo science because it cannot be tested in ways that a true science can be tested, i.e. its sort of like political science or an oxymoron) is totally consistent with most Christian religions. Creationism assumes that an intelligence (not necessarily a god) used his understanding of science to create the life on this planet. Creationism, given the order of nature and the complexity of the life, is far more believable than just evolution by itself. No religion is required to believe in creationism.
Nothing in the advanced nuclear physics courses I took ever pretended to explain Why anything works, only how. I have stated this several times now, the HOW of science vs the WHY of religion but it apparently has gone over the heads of these master so called scientists. The fact that they are still looking for the WHY in science shows their immaturity, kind of like the 7 year old asks the questions, The 18 year old knows all the answers, but the much older and more mature finally understand what science really is, and is not.
By the way, what method is used to solve the typical differential equation, want to take a GUESS? I use the same method to solve non mathematical problems. Sometimes it works, sometimes not. But I will never be impressed by the solution(s).