| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
romans120
Resident Theist
Joined: 14 Aug 2007
Posts: 1605
Local time: 5:42 AM
Location: mid-west
|
 Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2008 12:39 am Post subject: |
  |
|
| Raskolnikov wrote: | | Ouch munky ;P |
O it doesn't bother me. he is just jealous of my awsomeness
_________________
For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. 20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. Romans 1:19-20
Check out my weblog at http://romans120.wordpress.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
|
munky99999
Provisional moralist.
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
Posts: 4078
Local time: 5:42 AM
Location: Ontario, Canada
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2008 12:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| romans120 wrote: | | Raskolnikov wrote: | | Ouch munky ;P |
O it doesn't bother me. he is just jealous of my awsomeness |
oh yes I'm sure that's it.
_________________
A cosmic Jewish Zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his fleshand drink his blood; while telepathically tell him you accept him as your master so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree.
Creationism is not the alternative to Evolution - ignorance is." Ironically creationism is ignorance. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nimitz
The Admiral has retired. Bravo Zulu
Joined: 09 May 2004
Posts: 7198
Local time: 5:42 AM
Location: OKC, OK U.S.A.
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2008 12:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
BRRRRRRRRRRR That is one cold wind blowing across the border!
_________________
Do not rotate or radiate any antennas. Observe radio silence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
munky99999
Provisional moralist.
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
Posts: 4078
Local time: 5:42 AM
Location: Ontario, Canada
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2008 12:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Nimitz wrote: | | BRRRRRRRRRRR That is one cold wind blowing across the border! |
Ya friggen it was like -25c 2 days ago... today it snowed a bunch. Bah I want to go outside more.
_________________
A cosmic Jewish Zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his fleshand drink his blood; while telepathically tell him you accept him as your master so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree.
Creationism is not the alternative to Evolution - ignorance is." Ironically creationism is ignorance. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
romans120
Resident Theist
Joined: 14 Aug 2007
Posts: 1605
Local time: 5:42 AM
Location: mid-west
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 07, 2008 10:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
Romans
| Quote: |
#14. Nothing in Leviticus 20:10 says that the sentence must be carried by the government. Therefore your argument is refuted, and the contradiction still stands.
|
joe
| Quote: | No but the is quite detailed that a man can not take the law into his own hands but must provide wittneses and go before the council before enacting justice. It was for this reason cities of refuge were established to give the accused this opportunity go before the council. In the case of the adultrous women her accusers left without accusing her. (no contradiction)
|
joe
| Quote: | a) Leviticus 20:10
And the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.
b) John 8:3-8
And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst, They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act. Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou? This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not. So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.
Sorry, but read it again. Leviticus says what should happen in case of adultey. It does not say who should carry the sentence, just what it should be. Jesus was asked the same, no one asked him to carry the sentence, just what it should be, and his answer is different.
Contradiction remains. |
Jesus didn't answer at all. The accusers left without condeming her. If Jesus was God He had authority to forgive her if He chose to and the condemers didn't stick aound to get an answer. Sorry doesn't matter how you look at this is no contradiction
joe
| Quote: |
#70. You completely missed that one. If Adam is an outcast, all the living people during his life time are offsprings of Adam and Eve and would all know he is an outcast, where does Cain gets his wife? Was she brought in from outer space? Did God created specifically for her? The contradiction still stands.
|
Romans
| Quote: |
How do you know he wasn't already married and had a family? (no contradiction |
joe
| Quote: | You're not thinking right. God created Adam and Eve, then came Abel and Cain as their offsprings. All other people that came afterwards must be offsprings of Adam and Eve. When Cain is outcast, all the other people being one big family had to know that Cain was an outcast. So where does Cain find his wife????
Contradiction still stands. |
He was already married to a relative before he became an outcast (why is that so hard to accept?)
Joe
| Quote: |
#81. How can you say that Jesus said, yes, then said, no to the same question. If it was badly reported then the Bible, which people claim is the word of God, then where was God when this badly reporting took place? Was he asleep? Was it done without his knowledge, which would contradict his omni-science status???
|
Romans
| Quote: | Jesus's answer was always yes - It was not badly reprted because the report in each case was Jesus said yes and gist of what Jesus said was conveyed similiarly in each case.
|
joe
| Quote: |
Nope, in one case he says, "you (the High priest) says I am". In the other case, he says, "I am". Those answers are different.
Contradiction still stands. |
only because your reading into them an inflection that isn't in the context. You say that I am = it is as you say according to the context. every answer Jesus is affirming He is the Messiah (no contadiction)
joe
| Quote: |
#224. Yes, but even if you account with this error, still it doesn't jive with the claim that the bible is the word of God. Why the confusion? The Evangelists were supposed to have been revealed all that from God. And God let this error passed??
|
Romans
| Quote: |
What error? The town I grew up in used to be called "space city" some people got together and said the name was stupid so they changed it to "Lochbuie" but in the paper before the name change it was still "space city" also some people still refered to the town as space city. It doesn't these people were in error it just means they identify the town differantly. (no contradiction or confusion) |
joe
| Quote: |
That argument is irrelevant. This is the bible, it should not contain geographical error, after all, God knows everything.
Contradiction still stands. |
There isn't a geographical error God is under no obligation to release Bible updates every few hundred years to make sure town designations are updated. (no contradiction)
_________________
For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. 20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. Romans 1:19-20
Check out my weblog at http://romans120.wordpress.com/
Last edited by romans120 on Thu Feb 07, 2008 11:00 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
josephpalazzo
Forum Master
Joined: 30 Aug 2006
Posts: 6656
Local time: 5:42 AM
Location: D-brane
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 07, 2008 10:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yikes... Romans120, you better fix your tags for me to make sense of your answers...
_________________
Mankind cannot bear much reality.
-- T.S. Eliot |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
josephpalazzo
Forum Master
Joined: 30 Aug 2006
Posts: 6656
Local time: 5:42 AM
Location: D-brane
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 07, 2008 10:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="romans120"] | josephpalazzo wrote: | | romans120 wrote: |
| Quote: |
#14. Nothing in Leviticus 20:10 says that the sentence must be carried by the government. Therefore your argument is refuted, and the contradiction still stands.
|
No but the is quite detailed that a man can not take the law into his own hands but must provide wittneses and go before the council before enacting justice. It was for this reason cities of refuge were established to give the accused this opportunity go before the council. In the case of the adultrous women her accusers left without accusing her. (no contradiction)
|
joe
| Quote: | a) Leviticus 20:10
And the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.
b) John 8:3-8
And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst, They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act. Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou? This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not. So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.
Sorry, but read it again. Leviticus says what should happen in case of adultey. It does not say who should carry the sentence, just what it should be. Jesus was asked the same, no one asked him to carry the sentence, just what it should be, and his answer is different.
Contradiction remains. |
Jesus didn't answer at all. The accusers left without condeming her. If Jesus was God He had authority to forgive her if He chose to and the condemers didn't stick aound to get an answer. Sorry doesn't matter how you look at this is no contradiction
| romans120 wrote: |
joe
| Quote: |
#70. You completely missed that one. If Adam is an outcast, all the living people during his life time are offsprings of Adam and Eve and would all know he is an outcast, where does Cain gets his wife? Was she brought in from outer space? Did God created specifically for her? The contradiction still stands.
|
How do you know he wasn't already married and had a family? (no contradiction)
|
joe
| Quote: | You're not thinking right. God created Adam and Eve, then came Abel and Cain as their offsprings. All other people that came afterwards must be offsprings of Adam and Eve. When Cain is outcast, all the other people being one big family had to know that Cain was an outcast. So where does Cain find his wife????
Contradiction still stands. |
He was already married to a relative before he became an outcast (why is that so hard to accept?)
| romans120 wrote: |
| Quote: |
#81. How can you say that Jesus said, yes, then said, no to the same question. If it was badly reported then the Bible, which people claim is the word of God, then where was God when this badly reporting took place? Was he asleep? Was it done without his knowledge, which would contradict his omni-science status???
|
Jesus's answer was always yes - It was not badly reprted because the report in each case was Jesus said yes and gist of what Jesus said was conveyed similiarly in each case.
|
joe
| Quote: |
Nope, in one case he says, "you (the High priest) says I am". In the other case, he says, "I am". Those answers are different.
Contradiction still stands. |
only because your reading into them an inflection that isn't in the context. You say that I am = it is as you say according to the context. every answer Jesus is affirming He is the Messiah (no contadiction)
| romans120 wrote: |
joe
| Quote: |
#224. Yes, but even if you account with this error, still it doesn't jive with the claim that the bible is the word of God. Why the confusion? The Evangelists were supposed to have been revealed all that from God. And God let this error passed??
|
What error? The town I grew up in used to be called "space city" some people got together and said the name was stupid so they changed it to "Lochbuie" but in the paper before the name change it was still "space city" also some people still refered to the town as space city. It doesn't these people were in error it just means they identify the town differantly. (no contradiction or confusion)
|
joe
| Quote: |
That argument is irrelevant. This is the bible, it should not contain geographical error, after all, God knows everything.
Contradiction still stands. |
There isn't a geographical error God is under no obligation to release Bible updates every few hundred years to make sure town designations are updated. (no contradiction) |
I`ll give it a shot without your tags fixed...
14. a) Leviticus 20:10
And the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.
b) John 8:3-8
And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst, They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act. Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou? This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not. So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.
Leviticus says death for the adulterer; Jesus says, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. There no question of the need of witnesses in establishing guilt here. Jesus did not say, But is she guilty? If her guilt was in doubt, he would have pointed that out. But he didn`t, so we must assume that Jesus knows she is guilty. If she is innocent, then why didn't he speak accordingly? By answering as he did, knowing there would be NO one without sin, and therefore no one would cast the first stone, he was definitely saying he`s against the death penalty for adulterers.
Contradiction remains.
Will get back on the other contradictions... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
romans120
Resident Theist
Joined: 14 Aug 2007
Posts: 1605
Local time: 5:42 AM
Location: mid-west
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 07, 2008 11:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
| josephpalazzo wrote: | | Yikes... Romans120, you better fix your tags for me to make sense of your answers... |
Is that better?
_________________
For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. 20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. Romans 1:19-20
Check out my weblog at http://romans120.wordpress.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
josephpalazzo
Forum Master
Joined: 30 Aug 2006
Posts: 6656
Local time: 5:42 AM
Location: D-brane
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 07, 2008 11:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| romans120 wrote: | | josephpalazzo wrote: | | Yikes... Romans120, you better fix your tags for me to make sense of your answers... |
Is that better? |
Not really, but I`ve answered to point number 14. Let`s keep it to one contradiction at a time, if you don`t mind. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
romans120
Resident Theist
Joined: 14 Aug 2007
Posts: 1605
Local time: 5:42 AM
Location: mid-west
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2008 3:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Josephpaloozo wrote
| Quote: | I`ll give it a shot without your tags fixed...
14. a) Leviticus 20:10
And the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.
b) John 8:3-8
And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst, They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act. Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou? This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not. So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.
Leviticus says death for the adulterer; Jesus says, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. There no question of the need of witnesses in establishing guilt here. Jesus did not say, But is she guilty? If her guilt was in doubt, he would have pointed that out. But he didn`t, so we must assume that Jesus knows she is guilty. If she is innocent, then why didn't he speak accordingly? By answering as he did, knowing there would be NO one without sin, and therefore no one would cast the first stone, he was definitely saying he`s against the death penalty for adulterers.
Contradiction remains.
Will get back on the other contradictions... |
How was she to be condemned if all the eye witnesses left with out condemning her. Jesus was in a different position. It is internally consistent that Jesus is unique in that He had authority to forgive her sin so he had two options forgive her or not forgive her and deliver her back to the authorities to be stoned. (if he chose the second option He would have gone back said "hey guys all that stuff I wrote in the sand back there is just between you and me here she is again go ahead and stone her)
_________________
For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. 20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. Romans 1:19-20
Check out my weblog at http://romans120.wordpress.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
josephpalazzo
Forum Master
Joined: 30 Aug 2006
Posts: 6656
Local time: 5:42 AM
Location: D-brane
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2008 3:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| romans120 wrote: | Josephpaloozo wrote
| Quote: | I`ll give it a shot without your tags fixed...
14. a) Leviticus 20:10
And the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.
b) John 8:3-8
And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst, They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act. Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou? This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not. So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.
Leviticus says death for the adulterer; Jesus says, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. There no question of the need of witnesses in establishing guilt here. Jesus did not say, But is she guilty? If her guilt was in doubt, he would have pointed that out. But he didn`t, so we must assume that Jesus knows she is guilty. If she is innocent, then why didn't he speak accordingly? By answering as he did, knowing there would be NO one without sin, and therefore no one would cast the first stone, he was definitely saying he`s against the death penalty for adulterers.
Contradiction remains.
Will get back on the other contradictions... |
How was she to be condemned if all the eye witnesses left with out condemning her. Jesus was in a different position. It is internally consistent that Jesus is unique in that He had authority to forgive her sin so he had two options not forgive her and deliver her back to the authorities to be stoned. (if he chose the second option He would have gone back said "hey guys all that stuff I wrote in the sand back there is just between you and me here she is again go ahead and stone her) |
Fine, but there is still a contradiction. The OT says without any room to maneuvre: death to an adulterer. Jesus backs away from that. He did not say, I forgive her. He could have, but he didn't. He says, whoever is without sin casts the first stone. He is addressing the crowd, not her. That is, he puts everyone in that crowd in a position that no one will throw the first stone, regardless if she is guilty or not, regardless whether he forgave her or not. This is pretty much an indication that Jesus is going against the OT. As such, Jesus contradicts the OT. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
romans120
Resident Theist
Joined: 14 Aug 2007
Posts: 1605
Local time: 5:42 AM
Location: mid-west
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2008 3:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| josephpalazzo wrote: | | romans120 wrote: | Josephpaloozo wrote
| Quote: | I`ll give it a shot without your tags fixed...
14. a) Leviticus 20:10
And the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.
b) John 8:3-8
And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst, They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act. Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou? This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not. So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.
Leviticus says death for the adulterer; Jesus says, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. There no question of the need of witnesses in establishing guilt here. Jesus did not say, But is she guilty? If her guilt was in doubt, he would have pointed that out. But he didn`t, so we must assume that Jesus knows she is guilty. If she is innocent, then why didn't he speak accordingly? By answering as he did, knowing there would be NO one without sin, and therefore no one would cast the first stone, he was definitely saying he`s against the death penalty for adulterers.
Contradiction remains.
Will get back on the other contradictions... |
How was she to be condemned if all the eye witnesses left with out condemning her. Jesus was in a different position. It is internally consistent that Jesus is unique in that He had authority to forgive her sin so he had two options not forgive her and deliver her back to the authorities to be stoned. (if he chose the second option He would have gone back said "hey guys all that stuff I wrote in the sand back there is just between you and me here she is again go ahead and stone her) |
Fine, but there is still a contradiction. The OT says without any room to maneuvre: death to an adulterer. Jesus backs away from that. He did not say, I forgive her. He could have, but he didn't. He says, whoever is without sin casts the first stone. He is addressing the crowd, not her. That is, he puts everyone in that crowd in a position that no one will throw the first stone, regardless if she is guilty or not, regardless whether he forgave her or not. This is pretty much an indication that Jesus is going against the OT. As such, Jesus contradicts the OT. |
John 8:10 Jesus stood up and said to her, "Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?" 11 She said, "No one, Lord." And Jesus said, "Neither do I condemn you; go, and from now on sin no more." this passage is the key to this whole thing. It wasn't just that He didn't enforce the penalty He wiped her slate clean. She stood before Him un-condemed.
_________________
For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. 20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. Romans 1:19-20
Check out my weblog at http://romans120.wordpress.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
josephpalazzo
Forum Master
Joined: 30 Aug 2006
Posts: 6656
Local time: 5:42 AM
Location: D-brane
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2008 3:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| romans120 wrote: | | josephpalazzo wrote: | | romans120 wrote: | Josephpaloozo wrote
| Quote: | I`ll give it a shot without your tags fixed...
14. a) Leviticus 20:10
And the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.
b) John 8:3-8
And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst, They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act. Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou? This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not. So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.
Leviticus says death for the adulterer; Jesus says, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. There no question of the need of witnesses in establishing guilt here. Jesus did not say, But is she guilty? If her guilt was in doubt, he would have pointed that out. But he didn`t, so we must assume that Jesus knows she is guilty. If she is innocent, then why didn't he speak accordingly? By answering as he did, knowing there would be NO one without sin, and therefore no one would cast the first stone, he was definitely saying he`s against the death penalty for adulterers.
Contradiction remains.
Will get back on the other contradictions... |
How was she to be condemned if all the eye witnesses left with out condemning her. Jesus was in a different position. It is internally consistent that Jesus is unique in that He had authority to forgive her sin so he had two options not forgive her and deliver her back to the authorities to be stoned. (if he chose the second option He would have gone back said "hey guys all that stuff I wrote in the sand back there is just between you and me here she is again go ahead and stone her) |
Fine, but there is still a contradiction. The OT says without any room to maneuvre: death to an adulterer. Jesus backs away from that. He did not say, I forgive her. He could have, but he didn't. He says, whoever is without sin casts the first stone. He is addressing the crowd, not her. That is, he puts everyone in that crowd in a position that no one will throw the first stone, regardless if she is guilty or not, regardless whether he forgave her or not. This is pretty much an indication that Jesus is going against the OT. As such, Jesus contradicts the OT. |
John 8:10 Jesus stood up and said to her, "Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?" 11 She said, "No one, Lord." And Jesus said, "Neither do I condemn you; go, and from now on sin no more." this passage is the key to this whole thing. It wasn't just that He didn't enforce the penalty He wiped her slate clean. She stood before Him un-condemed. |
But that's after everyone had left. Jesus got what he wanted when he said, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. No one threw, exactly what Jesus had counted on. So for him to forgive her was just to show his apostles and admirers still standing there that he was merciful. BUT THAT STILL CONTRADICTS THE OT. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mr_C
Moderator
Joined: 26 Jun 2006
Posts: 5390
Local time: 4:42 AM
Location: Pale Blue Dot
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2008 3:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ugh. Give it a rest. That entire story is a friggin' interpolation and you've been arguing about nothing!! Nothing I tell you! Nooooooothing!!
_________________
"If we long to believe that the stars rise and set for us, that we are the reason there is a Universe, does science do us a disservice in deflating our conceits?"
Carl Sagan
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
josephpalazzo
Forum Master
Joined: 30 Aug 2006
Posts: 6656
Local time: 5:42 AM
Location: D-brane
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2008 3:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Mr_C wrote: | | Ugh. Give it a rest. That entire story is a friggin' interpolation and you've been arguing about nothing!! Nothing I tell you! Nooooooothing!! |
In QM, nothing amounts to a lot... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Live Video and Chat Room
Freethought Videos
FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Register
