Sorry your browser is not supported!

You are using an outdated browser that does not support modern web technologies, in order to use this site please update to a new browser.

Browsers supported include Chrome, FireFox, Safari, Opera, Internet Explorer 10+ or Microsoft Edge.

Geek Culture / Stars?

Author
Message
The Real 87
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Mar 2004
Location: somewhere between 86 and 88
Posted: 11th Aug 2004 06:16
Are stars mathimatically posible?

I don\'t think they are, my theory is that they would burn out all of their gas. Think about it no matter how massive the fuel is it would all be burned in just a matter of hours. Try it with any flamable substance you can (legaly and safely) they all burn out.

So how do stars keep burning for so long (millions of years)?

Check out my RPG at
www.stickz.tk
Damokles
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 28th May 2003
Location: Belgium
Posted: 11th Aug 2004 06:23
Well, I don't know how old you are, but you shall know that a star is not "burning matter". there are nuclear reaction in in (fusion)

- Mind the gap -
OSX Using Happy Dude
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Aug 2003
Location: At home
Posted: 11th Aug 2004 06:24
Quote: "Are stars mathimatically posible?"

In what way ? Positioning ? Degree of decay ?


Come to the UK Convention on the 23rd & 24th of October
zircher
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Dec 2002
Location: Oklahoma
Posted: 11th Aug 2004 06:33
Actually, they burn for billions of years. You'll have to do some homework, but stars are very very massive. You can drop the whole solar system into one and have plenty of room left over.
--
TAZ

"Do you think it is wise to provoke him?" "It's what I do." -- Stargate SG-1
Major Payn
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Dec 2003
Location: United States of America
Posted: 11th Aug 2004 07:19 Edited at: 11th Aug 2004 07:19
Yeah, think of stars as huge nuclear reactors gone wild, they dont burn out because they are producing an ongoing nuclear reaction. Im not insulting you, but im 15 and I knew that, then again I watch the descovery channel way more than I should.

Guns arnt the problem, people are the problems, shoot all the people and guns arnt a problems anymore.
The Real 87
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Mar 2004
Location: somewhere between 86 and 88
Posted: 11th Aug 2004 07:40
Quote: "Actually, they burn for billions of years. You'll have to do some homework, but stars are very very massive. You can drop the whole solar system into one and have plenty of room left over.
"


Isn't the sun a star AND part of the solar system?

Quote: "there are nuclear reaction in in (fusion)"


So man can't make fusion happen but random gravity can?

@The coding area I mean is it mathamaticly possible for stars to exist?

@Major Payne the last time I checked ALL matter capable of a nuclear reaction has to be replaced with new matter capable of nuclear reacion.

Check out my RPG at
www.stickz.tk
DrakeX
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Location:
Posted: 11th Aug 2004 10:02
"So man can't make fusion happen but random gravity can?"

well that's what we're working on

perhaps you don't quite realize how massive the sun is, and how much fuel it has. our sun contributes 99.9999% of the matter in our solar system. the planets, asteroids and comets are absolutely nothing in comparison. the sun is also EXTREMELY compact, and there is an insane amount of fuel in it. you see it's the compaction that causes the fusion - there is just so much force squeeeeezing the atoms together that they just start fusing together.

mathematically they are nearly a balanced equation - the force of the fusion pushes the sun outward, while the immense gravity holds it all in. it remains in this nice balance for billions of years, until it runs out of hydrogen. then it starts fusing heavier and heavier fuels - helium, oxygen, carbon - until it gets to iron, which it runs out of fairly quickly (about 1 day for our size star). then it runs out of fuel, blasts away its outer shell, and the inner shell shrinks into a white dwarf. bigger stars will nova - big explosion - and turn into something like a neutron star, and MASSIVE stars will supernova - HUGE explosion - and they might turn into black holes.

space is a fun place.

OK enough of that damn DBP fanboy banner. i'm NOT a DBP fanboy in any way. i haven't used DBP in over a year, and i don't really plan on using it again.
Peter H
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Feb 2004
Location: Witness Protection Program
Posted: 11th Aug 2004 10:11
Quote: ""So man can't make fusion happen but random gravity can?""

who said random gravity made the sun? you can't prove that random gravity made the sun so don't say it...


"We make the worst games in the world."
zircher
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Dec 2002
Location: Oklahoma
Posted: 11th Aug 2004 15:35 Edited at: 11th Aug 2004 15:36
Quote: "Isn't the sun a star AND part of the solar system?"


Sure it is, but you know I was referring to the inner and outer worlds around the sun.

Quote: "So man can't make fusion happen but random gravity can?"


Ever hear of a fusion bomb? Old school ass kicking hardware. Sustained and controlled fusion is another animal. BTW, gravity is NEVER random. There are very specific rules for it. Read up on dust accretion modelling of the solar system. There are several programs that will run simulations for you or you can pick up World-Building by Gillette and Bova.
--
TAZ

"Do you think it is wise to provoke him?" "It's what I do." -- Stargate SG-1
The Real 87
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Mar 2004
Location: somewhere between 86 and 88
Posted: 11th Aug 2004 16:40
You said that fusion and gravity make it balanced, but where does all the gravity come from?

Inorder for there to be gravity there has to be matter, in order for there to be matter there must be gravity!

Check out my RPG at
www.stickz.tk
The Real 87
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Mar 2004
Location: somewhere between 86 and 88
Posted: 11th Aug 2004 16:41
cyrcular logic OWNS!!!

Check out my RPG at
www.stickz.tk
The Real 87
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Mar 2004
Location: somewhere between 86 and 88
Posted: 11th Aug 2004 16:52
Technicaly nothing is possible and I would argue that matter it self is not possible (matter can not be created nor destroyed).

I belive in creationism (God for all the ignorant people out there) and I belive that God created the stars to help convince the non faithful that there is a higher power.

And just so you know, all belives about how stars work are only theories, untill we go inside a star and see for our selves it will only be a theory.

Check out my RPG at
www.stickz.tk
Damokles
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 28th May 2003
Location: Belgium
Posted: 11th Aug 2004 17:17
First of all, you have to know that you can not understand the mathematical laws of gravitaion with what you learned in secundary school. You will have to know about tensorial calculations.


And for man-made fusion, you never heard about Mr. Fusion ? It's some home energy reactor, that you can use for many purposes.


Even if you believe in God .... can you tell me what created God ?


- Mind the gap -
Peter H
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Feb 2004
Location: Witness Protection Program
Posted: 11th Aug 2004 23:02 Edited at: 11th Aug 2004 23:02
Quote: "Even if you believe in God .... can you tell me what created God ?"

nobody...

it's one of those things that's hard for humans to understand...(i know it i just don't fully understand it...)

he has no begining...
and he has no end...

this is one of those things that gives you a headache if you think about it too long

"We make the worst games in the universe."
Killswitch
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 2nd Oct 2002
Location: School damnit!! Let me go!! PLEASE!!!
Posted: 11th Aug 2004 23:16
Gravity is there because of mass, the mass of any object actualy warps space. Einstiens (can't spell his name properly - sorry) was this:

Imagine a sheet streched out so that it's tense and level. Now plonk a bowling ball in the midde, the sheet sags around the bowling ball. Now if you flick a marble accross the sheet, it won't go accross in a straight line it will follow the curve of the bowling ball. Bowling balls, in this example, could be a star, or a planet with a moon(s).

~It's a common mistake to make, the rules of the English langauge do not apply to insanity~
Sparda
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 13th Jan 2004
Location: Pacifica
Posted: 12th Aug 2004 00:49
Go read "An Old Man's Toy". Kinda old, but it's pretty interesting

Quote: "Inorder for there to be gravity there has to be matter, in order for there to be matter there must be gravity!"


Gravity is only one of the forces that attracts matter, so why would matter not exist without gravity?


Zero Blitzt
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 18th Jan 2004
Location: Different Stages
Posted: 12th Aug 2004 00:57
I like stars... like Pamela Anderson and Carmen Electra.

GiggityGiggityGiggityGiggity!

[center]
Rush owns--> www.Rush.com ---> I'm going to see them Aug. 7
Come to #coding. We promise we wont kick you!
Ian T
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th Sep 2002
Location: Around
Posted: 12th Aug 2004 02:12
Quote: "Technicaly nothing is possible and I would argue that matter it self is not possible (matter can not be created nor destroyed)."


Yeah, that's why we're here right now.

No, stars aren't possible at all. That's why the sun's up in the sky!




It's this proof by lack of evidence crap that starts things like flat earth societies...

Ian T
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th Sep 2002
Location: Around
Posted: 12th Aug 2004 02:38
IanM
Retired Moderator
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 11th Sep 2002
Location: In my moon base
Posted: 12th Aug 2004 03:28
Quote: "I'm sure there's more but I'd be here all day."


How about every scientist (maybe I should say 'true' scientist). Observe, theorise, test, repeat and refine ... that's basically how it goes

*** Coming soon - Network Plug-in - Check my site for info ***
For free Plug-ins, source and the Interface library for Visual C++ 6, .NET and now for Dev-C++ http://www.matrix1.demon.co.uk
OSX Using Happy Dude
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Aug 2003
Location: At home
Posted: 12th Aug 2004 03:37
Quote: "@The coding area I mean is it mathamaticly possible for stars to exist?"

Ah - in that case, I put to you, is there any mathematical reason why they shouldn't exist ?


Come to the UK Convention on the 23rd & 24th of October
Dazzag
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Location: Cyprus
Posted: 12th Aug 2004 03:57
Quote: "Are stars mathimatically posible?"
You reckon not? So you are basically saying all our physics/ mathematics are wrong? Fair enough. You don't happen be one of those people who reckon we've only been around for a few hundred years, and dinosaur bones are fakes planted by God, by any chance?

Quote: "Ah - in that case, I put to you, is there any mathematical reason why they shouldn't exist ?"
Rats. That's what I was going to say. Still, 10 thousand page thesis ASAP disproving stars please.

Cheers

I am 99% probably lying in bed right now... so don't blame me for crappy typing
zircher
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Dec 2002
Location: Oklahoma
Posted: 12th Aug 2004 05:32
Here's one for the creationists and is something that I generally subscribe to: God created the universe for us to explore, to admire his greatness, to see and understand the depth of his power and the complexity of all things. He did not create the universe so we could sit on our ass and only use blind faith.
--
TAZ

"Do you think it is wise to provoke him?" "It's what I do." -- Stargate SG-1
Andy Igoe
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Oct 2002
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 12th Aug 2004 05:38
Quote: "And just so you know, all belives about how stars work are only theories, untill we go inside a star and see for our selves it will only be a theory."


Quote: "@The coding area I mean is it mathamaticly possible for stars to exist?"


Now if I may I would like to quote Stephen Hawking (italics and bolds added, typo fixed):

These [singularity theorums] showed that if General Relativity were correct, the universe would have begun with a singularity. Of course, we would expect classical General Relativity to break down near a singularity, when quantum gravitational effects have to be taken into account. So what the singularity theorems are really telling us, is that the universe had a quantum origin, and that we need a theory of quantum cosmology, if we are to predict the present state of the universe.

Do you understand quantum cosmology? If the answer is no, then dont worry about whethers stars can exist or not, just get on with your life and be happy that stars are there .


Which is the biggest tool? The computer, or the muppet who invented it?
mm0zct
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 18th Nov 2003
Location: scotland-uk
Posted: 12th Aug 2004 05:40
"matter cannot be created or destroyed"

someone needs to brush up their physics:

ENERGY cannot be created or destroyed, ony changed state, matter is a state of energy.

http://www.larinar.tk
AMD athlon thoroughbred 2200, 512Mb ram, 40Gb HD, ati saphire radeon 9600 atlantis w/128mb ddr ram, good creative-labs soundcard, cd-rw + dvd drives.
The Real 87
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Mar 2004
Location: somewhere between 86 and 88
Posted: 12th Aug 2004 16:17
Quote: "You reckon not? So you are basically saying all our physics/ mathematics are wrong? Fair enough. You don't happen be one of those people who reckon we've only been around for a few hundred years, and dinosaur bones are fakes planted by God, by any chance?"


I belive that humans have lived on earth for about 4000 years. I belive that dinosaurs were the beta test for humans (go programming) and existed no more then 6000 years ago. If my belife is true then it would mean that fossile fules acctually do not come from fossels, and that fossels take MUCH less time to be created then people think now ( I think it takes about 2000 years)

Quote: "ENERGY cannot be created or destroyed, ony changed state, matter is a state of energy.
"


That been said where'd the energy come from to make all matter?

Quote: "Do you understand quantum cosmology? If the answer is no, then dont worry about whethers stars can exist or not, just get on with your life and be happy that stars are there ."


No, and I don't have to understand that man made BS, that was only created in a sad attempt to disprove the existance of god.

Quote: "Ah - in that case, I put to you, is there any mathematical reason why they shouldn't exist ?"


All energy sources burn out, even fusion based energy sources (although they take longer they do not last for much more then a year or two), there for a star would burn out after only a year of life. Also there is no method to begin the fusion, there is simply not enough gravity on a star pre fusion to create fusion.

Quote: "For any referance to scientists/what ever the space people are called pre modern technology"


With out modern technology there was no way to test these theories, and even now they are but random guesses, which will in a short while (5 or 6 hundred years) be tested and many disproven.

Quote: "No, stars aren't possible at all. That's why the sun's up in the sky!"


I belive that stars are only possible if there is a higher power (God) and therefor proves that God exists. I like to think of the Earth as a program, the programer can do what ever he wants, however by the equasions with in the program (the worlds gravity ect.) not everything he does is possible.

Quote: "Even if you believe in God .... can you tell me what created God ?"


Say there where no God, what created us?
I will disprove evelution if need be.

Quote: "First of all, you have to know that you can not understand the mathematical laws of gravitaion with what you learned in secundary school. You will have to know about tensorial calculations."


Secondary being 7/8th grade or 9-12th grades? I am confused, for once some one on a forum has managed to confuse me.

Like I said before any equiations (calculations) that attemt to explain the universe are mear sad attempts to disprove God. They use really big names and hard to understand (man made) functions to make the general masses belive them.

Quote: "Be aware though that matter itself causes space-time curvature, the more matter the greater the curvature.. possibly even to the point of curving space & time back onto itself creating an infinite loop so you could theoretically see yourself in the future before you even attempt it. Add to this that every possiblity exists in parallel universes along with the 11 dimensions in each one and things start getting interesting
"


Two things, how does matter make the universe possible, shouldn't it be the other way around?

And Last parallel universes Right...., In order for that there would have to be several [insert the largest real number here] universes for each and every action. Even if it was possible it would be too large.

Quote: "You reckon not? So you are basically saying all our physics/ mathematics are wrong? Fair enough. You don't happen be one of those people who reckon we've only been around for a few hundred years, and dinosaur bones are fakes planted by God, by any chance?"


i just have to re visit this one. Back about 20 years ago Creationists were called Christions. And evelutionarioneists (I don't know the real word so I made one up) where called crackpots (or crackheads, what ever floats your boat as long as it doesn't involve me).

I do not belive that all math is wrong I only belive that it is 'rigged'.

Quote: "Here's one for the creationists and is something that I generally subscribe to: God created the universe for us to explore, to admire his greatness, to see and understand the depth of his power and the complexity of all things. He did not create the universe so we could sit on our ass and only use blind faith."


I do not use blind faith and I described my faith with the program example. I have no problem with trying to figure out anything, but I do not agree with preaching (teaching) unprovable, impossable (by math and science, well 'True' math and science) phemominon (I can't spell) to younger generations, with out atleast noting the possability of God. This is what I call brainwashing. I was taught to belive in evelution in elementary school. I know know that evelution is a load of BS and I am researching to discover other phenominon that I was taught to belive, but that are impossable (including matter, thought, dreams, and that only humans can think).

I know I will always be the 'crazy kid' because I do not belive that dreams and thought are possable however I am willing to live with that so that I may know the ultimate truth and not be blind of it like most others (most because of the possablity of other 'crazy kids')

With that I end my input to the debate, post and I will read howver I will not reply.

Check out my RPG at
www.stickz.tk
The Real 87
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Mar 2004
Location: somewhere between 86 and 88
Posted: 12th Aug 2004 16:18
Oh, that is unless I need to disprove evelution!

Check out my RPG at
www.stickz.tk
JeBuS
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Jul 2004
Location: Undisclosed Location, Dominion of JeBuS
Posted: 12th Aug 2004 16:34 Edited at: 12th Aug 2004 17:13
Ignotum per ignotius.

To explain something not understood by something even less understood.

I believe this latin phrases sum up rogue the camper's posts.

Well, my response in latin:

Odi profanum vulgus et arceo.

I loathe the uneducated masses.

And as we all know:

Religionis medicamen plebis est.

Religion is the opiate of the masses.
The Lynx
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th May 2004
Location: Pluto!
Posted: 12th Aug 2004 16:53 Edited at: 12th Aug 2004 16:56
@rogue- Good job, have God give you a high five. Is your life goal complete now?

If you think God put the stars there as proof of his existance, wouldn't we be proof enough? Wow, don't you think God would put the sun there for a better reason, like say, to keep us alive? Nice one.

Oh no! Chrissy had used her powers to turn herself into a hideous man-eating giant!
IanM
Retired Moderator
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 11th Sep 2002
Location: In my moon base
Posted: 12th Aug 2004 21:41
Of course it goes without saying that there is no such thing as a Christian scientist either ... they are just saying that they are Christian to fool everyone

Science is *not* aimed at proving or disproving the existance of God. It can only attempt to explain what can be observed and tested.

If you feel that you have to disprove a theory over 150 years old, then go ahead ... but that's not where the theories are now. Besides, that wouldn't prove anything on either side. If someone claims to be able to prove evolution, do you really expect that to prove the non-existance of God? All that it proves is that the theory is wrong and needs revising or needs another theory.

Quote: "I do not belive that all math is wrong I only belive that it is 'rigged'."


That goes without saying really - maths is driven purely by logic and takes no account of the real world except in specific subsets.

Any attempts to use mathematics to show how the universe functions will never prove the non-existance of God - they just explain the function, not the prime motivation.


Too many people seem to see science as an attack on religion. Nothing could be further from the truth.

*** Coming soon - Network Plug-in - Check my site for info ***
For free Plug-ins, source and the Interface library for Visual C++ 6, .NET and now for Dev-C++ http://www.matrix1.demon.co.uk
Killswitch
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 2nd Oct 2002
Location: School damnit!! Let me go!! PLEASE!!!
Posted: 12th Aug 2004 22:43
Uh fossils only take 2000 years to create? that'd be totally impossbile it takes millions of years for sediment to cover bones and then replac the material within them. Then it takes an even longer time for the environment to change so the fossils are no longer under water.

We are just the result of a random chain of events! And before you say thats impossible (which it would be in 4000 years) quite simply the universe is infintly large (how did anyone ever come up with this? Can it be proved), and so there are almost infinite places for possiblities to occur and so its very likely that seemingly impossible events happen and probally moe than once.

~It's a common mistake to make, the rules of the English langauge do not apply to insanity~
Peter H
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Feb 2004
Location: Witness Protection Program
Posted: 12th Aug 2004 23:13 Edited at: 12th Aug 2004 23:14
@rogue- please stop misconveying creationism!

Quote: "If you feel that you have to disprove a theory over 150 years old, then go ahead ..."

the theory of evolution has changed alot since it started 150 years ago, stop trying to make it sound like nobody has proved it wrong since it was thought up...

i believe in Micro evolution...which is a species adapting to a circumstance by changing...but not changing so much that it evolves into another species(that's macro evolution)

you see, god gave all the species some "elbow space". He gave them built in systems that allow them to change over time-within limits a species cannot change into another species(if you study DNA you will learn this...it's a proven fact)

"We make the worst games in the universe."
Ian T
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th Sep 2002
Location: Around
Posted: 13th Aug 2004 00:55 Edited at: 13th Aug 2004 00:56
rogue the camper, people like you give us creationists a bad name... aarrghh !

the_winch
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 1st Feb 2003
Location: Oxford, UK
Posted: 13th Aug 2004 01:42 Edited at: 13th Aug 2004 01:43
Quote: "a species cannot change into another species(if you study DNA you will learn this...it's a proven fact)"


Perhaps you could explain what properties of DNA prevent the formation of new species.

http://users.rcn.com/jkimball.ma.ultranet/BiologyPages/P/Polyploidy.html

Quote: "In 1928, the Russian plant geneticist Karpechenko produced a new species by crossing a cabbage with a radish. Although belonging to different genera (Brassica and Raphanus respectively), both parents have a diploid number of 18. Fusion of their respective gametes (n=9) produced mostly infertile hybrids.
However, a few fertile plants were formed, probably by the spontaneous doubling of the chromosome number in somatic cells that went on to form gametes (by meiosis). Thus these contained 18 chromosomes - a complete set of both cabbage (n=9) and radish (n=9) chromosomes.
Fusion of these gametes produced vigorous, fully-fertile, polyploid plants with 36 chromosomes. (Unfortunately, they had the roots of the cabbage and the leaves of the radish.)

These plants could breed with each other but not with either the cabbage or radish ancestors, so Karpechenko had produced a new species. "


PII 300 : 64mb ram : voodoo II 12mb : Win98
zircher
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Dec 2002
Location: Oklahoma
Posted: 13th Aug 2004 01:57
I'll second that. I may not be an evangelist, but I do know that some things can only be taken on faith and that you can't measure God. Even if they bothered to try, scientists can not prove or disprove divinity. But, that's not the purpose of science either.
--
TAZ

Here's a kicker, is rogue's rant the will of God, free will, or another of the big guy's mysterious ways?

"Do you think it is wise to provoke him?" "It's what I do." -- Stargate SG-1
Ian T
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th Sep 2002
Location: Around
Posted: 13th Aug 2004 02:37
the_winch-> That's created, not came about naturally, no? While it may be evidence to your point, I don't believe it supports macroevolution .

Peter H
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Feb 2004
Location: Witness Protection Program
Posted: 13th Aug 2004 02:41
okay fine if you really want to get nit picky i'll rephrase that...
"a species cannot change into another species that is significantly different"

"We make the worst games in the universe."
Damokles
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 28th May 2003
Location: Belgium
Posted: 13th Aug 2004 02:43
Quote: "I belive that humans have lived on earth for about 4000 years"

Oh my god, I love this thread.

Quote: "Say there where no God, what created us?"

As said before, we are just the result of a random chain of events. And it's really a wonder we're here.

Quote: "I will disprove evelution if need be."

If you succeed to convince me, you can be proud to have converted a biology-teacher. Please disprove it. (but not the old one from Darwin and Lamark, I want you to disprove the new one)

Quote: "Secondary being 7/8th grade or 9-12th grades? I am confused, for once some one on a forum has managed to confuse me."

Sorry to show you, that everything is not going like in your world ... on the globe we have different education-systems. Secundary school in Belgium is for pupils from 12 to 18 years.

Quote: "i just have to re visit this one. Back about 20 years ago Creationists were called Christions. And evelutionarioneists (I don't know the real word so I made one up) where called crackpots (or crackheads, what ever floats your boat as long as it doesn't involve me)."

20 years ? Oh really ? You learned me something. Don't forget to really disprove the new theories of evolution.

- Mind the gap -
Ian T
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th Sep 2002
Location: Around
Posted: 13th Aug 2004 02:44
As I said... giving creationists a bad name. I'll also make another thing clear: I'm not Christian and I don't like being called such. But I am a creationist. Now please, camper, never come back.

Killswitch
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 2nd Oct 2002
Location: School damnit!! Let me go!! PLEASE!!!
Posted: 13th Aug 2004 02:56
My favourite is the selfish gene theory, basically all life exists in order for DNA/genes to survive and that adapt in order to do so!

~It's a common mistake to make, the rules of the English langauge do not apply to insanity~
Peter H
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Feb 2004
Location: Witness Protection Program
Posted: 13th Aug 2004 05:55
@killswitch-huh..now that's interesting

"We make the worst games in the universe."
QuothTheRaven
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 2nd Oct 2002
Location: United States
Posted: 13th Aug 2004 06:57
This thread, specifically camper's replys, make me very angry and annoyed. He's trying to create an argument with concepts that he doesn't understand and read off of websites, and the worst part is that it's already reached two pages.

The Real 87
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Mar 2004
Location: somewhere between 86 and 88
Posted: 13th Aug 2004 07:58 Edited at: 13th Aug 2004 08:02
This is acctualy kinda sad.

I just wanted to see how many people would insult (or attack) me personally if I made a debate that was so stupid it couldn't even be real.

Thanks, and I will record that as everyone but the moderators (and QuothTheRaven) as they were nice and always debated and never simply said 'You don't understand so STFU'.

Check out my RPG at
www.stickz.tk
The Real 87
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Mar 2004
Location: somewhere between 86 and 88
Posted: 13th Aug 2004 07:59 Edited at: 13th Aug 2004 08:01
I am going to make the exact same arguments again on buddypic.com next week, I hope more people choose logic over 'you are dumb'!

Thank you for participating!

P.S. Mouse, I prefur rogue!

Check out my RPG at
www.stickz.tk
Peter H
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Feb 2004
Location: Witness Protection Program
Posted: 13th Aug 2004 08:05 Edited at: 13th Aug 2004 08:06
suuuuuuuure

P.S. please try not to make a fool of yourself so much...

"We make the worst games in the universe."
The Real 87
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Mar 2004
Location: somewhere between 86 and 88
Posted: 13th Aug 2004 08:11
peter h, are you a buddypics member? If you are then next monday watch the debate forums this argumant will be made again almost word for word!

Check out my RPG at
www.stickz.tk
Peter H
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Feb 2004
Location: Witness Protection Program
Posted: 13th Aug 2004 08:12 Edited at: 13th Aug 2004 08:12
no, i'm not

"We make the worst games in the universe."
lcfcfan
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Feb 2003
Location: North East, UK
Posted: 13th Aug 2004 08:15
Do you like starting arguments or something? and people are gonna attack you if you call them ignorant and say things that are not true, when you obviously know nothing about the subject you are talking about.

The Real 87
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Mar 2004
Location: somewhere between 86 and 88
Posted: 13th Aug 2004 08:17
I will admit that and that is why I chose this subject. I only called people ignorant AFTER they insulted me and my task was complete.

Check out my RPG at
www.stickz.tk
Ian T
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th Sep 2002
Location: Around
Posted: 13th Aug 2004 08:17
Arguments that stupid don't deserve logic. They don't deserve the time it takes us to make up logical arguments. And if you do think that they deserve it, then it was pretty thoughtless of you to waste people's precious time with a bogus argument. People will start treating you with respect when you start deserving it.

Login to post a reply

Server time is: 2024-11-25 21:54:48
Your offset time is: 2024-11-25 21:54:48