|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sat Jul 18, 2009 5:12 am
Blessed Blade Darnit, you got to it before I made the edits to my post. But either way, I'll make one last argument. I think it's against the scientific method to immediately assume that there's no way to explain it. That encourages you to not form a testable hypothesis. If every scientist's view was "God did it", then we would never learn anything. That's what's wrong with those "Intelligent Design" chaps. I agree, but I'm not a scientist. I'll leave that work for them. It is their job after all.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 18, 2009 5:13 am
Alamoria See, this is information I like. This points one way or another. Though...by 'inside' do you mean in the molten rock...or just near it? What are the temperatures there? And another thing. Is it possible they're converting the heat to energy at a very high rate, making it hospitable?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 18, 2009 5:14 am
Alamoria Lash Tamaron As an addendum, there are kinds of bacteria that can only exist inside active volcanoes. Our ideal conditions are not universally ideal conditions. See, this is information I like. This points one way or another. Though...by 'inside' do you mean in the molten rock...or just near it? What are the temperatures there? When I updated my previous post, I mentioned this. Your argument about temperature is irrelevant. In the current hypothesis of the Big Bang, all of the matter within that singularity was hydrogen. Life is not made out of pure hydrogen. Therefor life could not have existed before the big bang. Therefor the temperature issues are irrelevant, because there wouldn't have been any life to kill.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 18, 2009 5:19 am
Blessed Blade When I updated my previous post, I mentioned this. Your argument about temperature is irrelevant. In the current hypothesis of the Big Bang, all of the matter within that singularity was hydrogen. Life is not made out of pure hydrogen. Therefor life could not have existed before the big bang. Therefor the temperature issues are irrelevant, because there wouldn't have been any life to kill. I see. So if everything in the universe was hydrogen. What cause the other 100+ elements? or even the violent eruption to begin with for that sake. And I'm open to new ideas, unlike what you suggested in your posts...but have 'facts' to back them up. And I quote facts....because I do realize that we know nothing. Everything we know is based off of theories. If major supporting theory fails...everything we know is out the window.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 18, 2009 5:24 am
Alamoria I see. So if everything in the universe was hydrogen. What cause the other 100+ elements? or even the violent eruption to begin with for that sake. And I'm open to new ideas, unlike what you suggested in your posts...but have 'facts' to back them up. And I quote facts....because I do realize that we know nothing. Everything we know is based off of theories. If major supporting theory fails...everything we know is out the window. And what this post means. Is...I don't care what crazy ideas you have are. They're just ideas to me. That's great and all. If you can't prove it. It doesn't mean anything to me. Until then. I'm going to fill in the gaps with whatever my unimaginative mind decides. Which...it tends to make stuff up, and replace it with it's own reality...as of the last few years. :< And this all should be in the debate thread. But since we've got like...2 pages of stuff....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 18, 2009 5:25 am
Alamoria Blessed Blade When I updated my previous post, I mentioned this. Your argument about temperature is irrelevant. In the current hypothesis of the Big Bang, all of the matter within that singularity was hydrogen. Life is not made out of pure hydrogen. Therefor life could not have existed before the big bang. Therefor the temperature issues are irrelevant, because there wouldn't have been any life to kill. I see. So if everything in the universe was hydrogen. What cause the other 100+ elements? or even the violent eruption to begin with for that sake. And I'm open to new ideas, unlike what you suggested in your posts...but have 'facts' to back them up. And I quote facts....because I do realize that we know nothing. Everything we know is based off of theories. If major supporting theory fails...everything we know is out the window. Hydrogen is the most basic element. Only one proton. If one hydrogen atom has one too few electrons, and another has one too many (many forces can cause atoms to gain and lose electrons), thenthose two hydrogen atoms, if they come into contact, can form and electron sharing circle, and thus become a new element with two protons. It has new properties and is called Helium. This process continues many times over creating all the known elements. The classification of an element and its properties are determined by its number of protons.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 18, 2009 5:26 am
Alamoria Lash Tamaron As an addendum, there are kinds of bacteria that can only exist inside active volcanoes. Our ideal conditions are not universally ideal conditions. See, this is information I like. This points one way or another. Though...by 'inside' do you mean in the molten rock...or just near it? What are the temperatures there? In the lava itself, as I understand it. I suspect the temperature to be something around 4000 degrees F, though I don't really know. Molten rock would need to be somewhat hot, I think. Regardless, you can't be apathetic and argumentative at the same time, No one argues a topic that they have no interest in, there's no motivation to do so. Apathy would be a lack thereof.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 18, 2009 5:29 am
Lash Tamaron In the lava itself, as I understand it. I suspect the temperature to be something around 4000 degrees F, though I don't really know. Molten rock would need to be somewhat hot, I think. Regardless, you can't be apathetic and argumentative at the same time, No one argues a topic that they have no interest in, there's no motivation to do so. Apathy would be a lack thereof. It's quite easy to argue for the sake of arguing. In fact. I do it quite often. I don't care if I'm wrong or right. I normally can argue either side and still win. And...it seems I have a few very distinct personalities. ninja
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 18, 2009 5:33 am
Blessed Blade Hydrogen is the most basic element. Only one proton. If one hydrogen atom has one too few electrons, and another has one too many (many forces can cause atoms to gain and lose electrons), thenthose two hydrogen atoms, if they come into contact, can form and electron sharing circle, and thus become a new element with two protons. It has new properties and is called Helium. This process continues many times over creating all the known elements. The classification of an element and its properties are determined by its number of protons. Huh. I knew that. I supposed I just forgot at the time of asking the question. neutral
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 18, 2009 5:40 am
Alamoria Lash Tamaron In the lava itself, as I understand it. I suspect the temperature to be something around 4000 degrees F, though I don't really know. Molten rock would need to be somewhat hot, I think. Regardless, you can't be apathetic and argumentative at the same time, No one argues a topic that they have no interest in, there's no motivation to do so. Apathy would be a lack thereof. It's quite easy to argue for the sake of arguing. In fact. I do it quite often. I don't care if I'm wrong or right. I normally can argue either side and still win. And...it seems I have a few very distinct personalities. ninja argument for argument's sake is the same myth as evil for evil's sake. There's always a causation beyond that, even if the impetus is simply "enjoyment". An interest in one's own enjoyment of an act, regardless of any conviction beyond that, is enough to give lie to any claims of "apathy" that the youth of today so desperately cleave to, as if their abdication of responsibility was somehow something more than the illusion of "rising above the sheep" that it really is. In short, if something looks like a contradiction, it usually is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 18, 2009 5:44 am
The science argument was least somewhat related to religion. Take it to the debate thread, boys. wink
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 18, 2009 5:45 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 18, 2009 5:47 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 18, 2009 5:47 am
[ Message temporarily off-line ]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 08, 2009 12:03 am
I'm Pagan. I got,
1. Neo-Pagan (100%)
2. Unitarian Universalism (97%)
3. New Age (88%)
4. Mahayana Buddhism (82%)
5. Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (81%)
6. Hinduism (77%)
7. Liberal Quakers (75%)
8. Theravada Buddhism (73%)
9. New Thought (68%)
10. Scientology (67%)
11. Orthodox Quaker (65%)
12. Secular Humanism (60%)
13. Reform Judaism (60%)
14. Jainism (58%)
15. Taoism (54%)
16. Christian Science (Church of Christ, Scientist) (48%)
17. Sikhism (47%)
18. Nontheist (45%)
19. Mainline to Conservative Christian/Protestant (45%)
20. Seventh Day Adventist (41%)
21. Baha'i Faith (40%)
22. Orthodox Judaism (36%)
23. Eastern Orthodox (28%)
24. Roman Catholic (28%)
25. Islam (25%)
26. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) (21%)
27. Jehovah's Witness (8%)
By the by, what the heck is Unitarian Universalism?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
