zapatos
-
Posts
7295 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
84
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by zapatos
-
-
17 minutes ago, mar_mar said:
The world is amount of something, and human mind literally creates the world. If there's no human mind, there is nothing.
Of course there is. Dinosaurs existed even though no humans were there at the same time. How did the human mind come to be if there was nothing there from which they could have developed?
1 -
1 hour ago, Chris Sawatsky said:
Then all the info I have found over 20 years based on Einstein's Theory of Relativity and many others in the scientific community are wrong and should stop the use of The Big Bang Theory that literally states "Everything started as a ultra small and dense point that expanded outward in all directions in less than a millisecond". And why did the scientific community recently state that they have observed the Universe still expanding? Physics is physics and when something explodes in a vacuum the energy goes outward in all directions. Regardless I feel that we should be focused on the planet and our behaviour.
It's a shame you chose to ignore everything that everyone had to say.
3 -
26 minutes ago, geordief said:
Some kind of a book,play or collection (?) about her later years coming out I think.
They played this version of Pete Seeger's song whilst discussing her on the radio with the author.
I have this song on my iPhone, albeit a somewhat peppier version she did.
0 -
Soldiers deal with this issue all the time. They know there are foes out there heading in their direction who will try to kill them. They also know there are friends out there heading in their direction who will not try to kill them. I'm hopeful the soldiers are smart enough to identify their potential targets before pulling the trigger.
0 -
1 hour ago, tmdarkmatter said:
What kind of answers should I expect for the questions "Where does dark energy come from?" or "Is it possible that the redshift of the furthest galaxies is not related to expansion?"
Answers based on science.
0 -
39 minutes ago, tmdarkmatter said:
If there can be no incredulity, there is no science, only fundamentalism.
Nice straw man. When you don't at least pretend to contemplate the responses you receive you paint yourself a troll.
0 -
It gets very confusing when people edit out their mistakes after 10 people have already discussed the mistakes.
1 -
48 minutes ago, tmdarkmatter said:
What experiment can I do to get that evidence?
I suppose you could get a radar gun or a doppler radar system and use that as the basis of your test.
0 -
7 minutes ago, tmdarkmatter said:
What proof do we have that expansion of the universe creates red shift?
There is no 'proof'. There is evidence that receding light sources redshift.
0 -
1 hour ago, tmdarkmatter said:
...we cannot say "Sometimes the cause of red shift is expansion of the universe and sometimes the cause of red shift is gravitational pull (according to need)."
Why not? We have evidence of both.
0 -
23 minutes ago, tmdarkmatter said:
Why would light that changed its direction millions of times have the same energy than light that never changed its direction?
Good question. Can you show evidence that when light changes direction its energy changes?
0 -
8 minutes ago, tmdarkmatter said:
In that case why should we still think that the universe is expanding, if all the redshift can just be because of this "getting tired" effect?
Um, because there is no evidence of a "getting tired" effect?
0 -
19 hours ago, Chris Sawatsky said:
Our duty is to decide which of our behavior will have a negative effect of the future of Life on this planet.
Then doing our duty kind of sucks given all the war, genocide, global warming, pollution, nuclear weapons, etc.
1 -
1 hour ago, mistermack said:
Israel has been striking Gaza, killing women and children on a weekly, sometimes daily basis. Not a peep from you lot.
Bullshit.
Only you and perhaps one other are suggesting their side is justified in killing innocents. The rest of us are condemning the atrocities on both sides.
0 -
20 minutes ago, mistermack said:
If a few hundred Jews broke out of Auschwitz and went on the rampage, killing Nazis, they would get plenty of understanding now.
Sure they would. But not if they broke out of Auschwitz and went on the rampage, killing women and children.
0 -
18 minutes ago, mistermack said:
No, your question includes inherent false assumptions, and your understanding of how the world operates appears to be badly lacking.
Maybe you've heard of WW2 ? Harry S Truman ordered that about 200,000 mostly civilians, women and children included, should be blasted or horribly burnt to death. With the consent of Winston Churchill. You can still find their statues all over the place. It doesn't say immoral on the plinth.
Quit trolling. It's unbecoming.
0 -
31 minutes ago, mistermack said:
Do you have any idea of how politics works? Do you think it's all done by public pronouncements? You seem to have a very simplistic view of the world. Israel knows how far it can go. It's all done behind the scenes.
Can you answer my questions please? And if you can do so without belittling my knowledge I'd appreciate it.
33 minutes ago, mistermack said:Absolutely morally superior. They are fighting for the freedom of their people. They are freedom fighters. Israel is fighting to keep what's been stolen. If you suffer a house invasion, you have the right to fight. So do they.
So if one are fighting for the freedom of their people, then the targeted killing of women, children and civilians is not immoral? Or is it just a little bit immoral?
2 -
7 minutes ago, mistermack said:
It's the US government that calls the real shots.
Are you saying they called for an invasion of Gaza? If not, what shots do you believe they have 'called' during this current situation?
8 minutes ago, mistermack said:Maybe not, but the moral depths are firmly occupied by the state of Israel and it's US backers.
But not Hamas? Do you feel Hamas is in some way superior morally to Israel in this exchange?
0 -
9 minutes ago, AIkonoklazt said:0
-
Quote
Design refers to something that is or has been intentionally created by a thinking agent, though it is sometimes used to refer to the nature of something.
0 -
2 hours ago, Endy0816 said:
I'm thinking chances are low that it would have been stored in ideal conditions and not lost due to fire in all this time.
A fire would simply burn the hell out of it.
1 -
1 hour ago, MPMin said:
If that falsifies my hypothesis then doesn’t that also contradict the bbt as well?
No
0 -
12 minutes ago, MPMin said:
Perhaps for the same reason that the dispersion of matter throughout the universe is not completely smooth and uniform either.
Why is the CMBR not completely smooth and uniform, in contrast to red-shifted light from distant galaxies, given that as you said "my hypothesis would have the same effect on all electromagnetic radiation including the CMBR."
0 -
3 hours ago, MPMin said:
My proposed hypothesis describes the effect on electromagnetic radiation, therefore, my hypothesis would have the same effect on all electromagnetic radiation including the CMBR.
Then why is the CMBR not completely smooth and uniform?
0
Colour
in Speculations
Posted
I fear you lack a base level understanding of how the physical world works. Objective Permanence usually begins at about 8 months.
https://www.whattoexpect.com/first-year/playtime/object-permanence-in-babies/