Blind chance or god

[SilentVoice]

You believe this garbage.

 

The thickness of the cabin material was 12/1000 of an inch thick. Yeah, dude, and it went straight through those deadly radiation belts, and protected you through -350degree temperatures.

 

 

You are all adults with normal brains. What is wrong with you?

[WalterP]

You're supposed to be arguing against my points, not making them for me.

 

Or to put it a way you can understand;

If a satellite is in orbit in space like you believe they are supposed to, why would it need any gas or balloon? Why are engineers and scientists attaching balloons to satellites, that supposedly don't need any assistance to stay up in the air?

 

The satellite balloons were inflated AFTER they were put "in orbit" because "in orbit" does not exist. The balloons are to keep things in the atmosphere, not orbit. Ergo, satellites are in atmosphere, not orbit. Like, imagine you have a little helium balloon in your house right now, you let go of it and it hits your ceiling. That's how satellites are kept stationary above the Earth, they are near the firmament and don't magically float once they reach a certain altitude.

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

The purpose of the gas wasn't to provide lift against gravity but to inflate these satellites so that could become passive reflectors of radio signals beamed up from Earth.

 

https://www.nasa.gov/centers/langley/about/project-echo.html

 

No.  The balloons were above our atmosphere.  They were placed there by rockets.

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/nasa_appel/4919282223/in/album-72157624664515095/

 

There are two photos of the rockets in this link and a photo of Lyndon B Johnson holding some aluminized mylar, which is the radio-reflecting skin of the balloon.

 

It would be impossible to inflate such a fragile thing as a mylar balloon while the rockets engines were still firing and encountering significant atmospheric drag.

 

Therefore, once the rocket achieved orbit, where there is no significant atmospheric drag, it was safe to inflate the balloon fully.

 

The fact that these balloons were inflated at all demonstrates that they were above the Earth's atmosphere and in orbit.

 

Inflation within the atmosphere when the rocket was powered and moving rapidly would destroy the balloon before it could inflate.

 

A mylar balloon carried by a fast-moving rocket cannot be inflated until it is clear of the atmosphere. 

 

 

 

[webmdave]

1 hour ago, SilentVoice said:

I don't believe in a universe. I look at the sky and see a few bright dots and a Sun that occasionally changes size. Some ancient tribes gave names to the dots but modern scientists lie to people to get them to dream about landing on them to escape the Earth. It's all fiction.

 

That is awesome! Thanks so much for fully revealing your anti-intellectualism. With your beliefs,  you would likely have made a wonderful mideavel cleric! Maybe even an Inquisitor!

 

Poor Copernicus and Gallelio. 

 

Fortuantely it is the 21st century, so your mideavel beliefs are held by nearly no one.

 

It was fun playing with you, but I will now step away from this conversation. G-bye. 

 

[WalterP]

You could also find my quote where I said they probably updated the buzzwords and I don't care enough about fictional space magic to update my vocabulary of 'scientific terms'. But sure, the explanation that I gave could just be one of the several theories, or a mishmash of them. I'm not here to leave a trail of perfectly integral statements about science or its claims, I'm here to share truth and to ridicule the stupid claims that get publicized and offer alternatives.

 

Yes, my belief about what the big bang is claimed to be could be wrong.

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

If you are here to share truth, then why is it that you didn't see fit to own up to being in error without my pushing you to do so?

 

If the truth-bearer won't admit to his own errors, why should we believe that what he claims to be true isn't another of his errors?

[midniterider]

Yawn.

[Derek]

Troll

[SilentVoice]

Why is it that when I use Wikipedia, logic, established facts, published science articles, interviews of historical figures quoting things that you don't want to hear, you delete my posts, call me mentally ill, call me a troll and fail to respond?

 

It's not that your brains are damaged, it's because you are trapped by a liar.

[Derek]

I'm going on evidence

[Hierophant]

41 minutes ago, SilentVoice said:

Why is it that when I use Wikipedia, logic, established facts, published science articles, interviews of historical figures quoting things that you don't want to hear, you delete my posts, call me mentally ill, call me a troll and fail to respond?

 

It's not that your brains are damaged, it's because you are trapped by a liar.

 

This is your biggest hang up. You will not listen to anything outside of your preferred narrative because of this ridiculous notion of Satan you have. You give Satan god-like powers. In your head you are drawing these connections and they are completely unfounded.

 

Earlier, I was going to ask you how you thought that all the countries in the world, including the enemies of the United States or UK, were in this giant space conspiracy. But I realized I knew your answer before I even asked. I am convinced you think Satan is so powerful, that he has literally corrupted the minds of everyone, or he is controlling people, however you think about it, so somehow, someway every country with a space program is lying. I wish you could see how absolutely ludicrous the notion is. From a big picture point of view, it is absolutely untenable. You have gone down a rabbit hole so far, I am not sure you could come back.

 

I mean it when I say this, most people want to know the facts. Speaking for myself, I want to believe in as few false things as possible. If something can be shown or demonstrated to be true, awesome, put that in the toolkit of knowledge. Those of us here on Ex-C did not come here because we want to live in sin, or rebel, or give ourselves over to some idiotic adversary of God. I say this because I know that you are sold on the idea that everyone here secretly believes in God but we love darkness or some bogus nonsense you are convinced of because "the Bible Told Me So." That idea in your head is not real. You are attributing false motivations to people who are way more complex than the black and white dichotomy the Bible espouses. If the earth was flat, there is no reason to hide it. Nobody gains anything from hiding it, and it would have been common knowledge a long time ago.

[WalterP]

23 minutes ago, SilentVoice said:

Why is it that when I use Wikipedia, logic, established facts, published science articles, interviews of historical figures quoting things that you don't want to hear, you delete my posts, call me mentally ill, call me a troll and fail to respond?

 

It's not that your brains are damaged, it's because you are trapped by a liar.

 

Come along truth-bearer, stop deflecting and answer the question.

 

If the truth-bearer won't admit to his own errors, why should we believe that what he claims to be true isn't another of his errors?

 

 

[TheRedneckProfessor]

53 minutes ago, SilentVoice said:

you delete my posts

As a point of clarification: the only posts of yours which have been deleted were inappropriate for the forums in which you posted them.  A situation which could have been avoided had you taken heed of my very first response to you on this website.  Don't take your persecution complex so seriously; you'll just end up looking foolish.

[SilentVoice]

33 minutes ago, Hierophant said:

This is your biggest hang up. You will not listen to anything outside of your preferred narrative

I am not interested in science nor do I use it in worship of God. You're essentially saying the opposite of what's true. Probably why you keep defending Satan. Go to hell with it if you must. Why should God choose to listen to you when that happens?

 

34 minutes ago, Hierophant said:

this ridiculous notion of Satan you have. You give Satan god-like powers. In your head you are drawing these connections and they are completely unfounded.

I proved it with scripture but you just say <insert book> is a fraud, Satan is the good guy, Jews say so, etc.

 

Satan, a malicious, lying, demiurge-like spirit, is inflicting harm and deception on the world and taking captive the Christians who aren't close to God. You are one of its victims. I don't care how many Jewish works of mysticism you read, you are not basing your life on any form of truth. You think Christians need to embrace heresies and other religions to have a more complete understanding of God and that's why you're foolish.

[SilentVoice]

1 minute ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

As a point of clarification: the only posts of yours which have been deleted were inappropriate for the forums in which you posted them.  A situation which could have been avoided had you taken heed of my very first response to you on this website.  Don't take your persecution complex so seriously; you'll just end up looking foolish.

No you deleted all my posts about physical evidence of God's supernatural wrath on Sodom in the book of Genesis, in a thread about criticizing the legitimacy of the book of Genesis. You were asspained because you didn't like the scientific paper being debunked. All my posts are relevant. I stopped posting outside the Lion's den because it's full of whiny people looking for excuses to delete my posts.

[WalterP]

Still waiting for a direct answer to a simple question, SV.

 

If the truth-bearer won't admit to his own errors, why should we believe that what he claims to be true isn't another of his errors?

 

 

[Hierophant]

1 minute ago, SilentVoice said:

I am not interested in science nor do I use it in worship of God. You're essentially saying the opposite of what's true. Probably why you keep defending Satan. Go to hell with it if you must. Why should God choose to listen to you when that happens?

 

I proved it with scripture but you just say <insert book> is a fraud, Satan is the good guy, Jews say so, etc.

 

Satan, a malicious, lying, demiurge-like spirit, is inflicting harm and deception on the world and taking captive the Christians who aren't close to God. You are one of its victims. I don't care how many Jewish works of mysticism you read, you are not basing your life on any form of truth. You think Christians need to embrace heresies and other religions to have a more complete understanding of God and that's why you're foolish.

 

I am not sure what you mean by the sentence I placed in bold.

 

Never said Satan was the good guy. Your are placing words in my mouth and misrepresenting what I am saying. Nothing in the OT says Satan was a good guy, humans hated him. He was always demonstrating their faults to God. I never said anything about praising him, I am saying you give him way too much credit.

 

I am glad you brought up Satan grabbing Christians "not close to God" - whatever that means. Why would an all loving God let something like that happen? So if someone is seeking God, trying to figure out his will, his response is to leave them hanging and let his "adversary" have him. Geez, thanks for looking out. Is that how you treat your kids? Just abandon them when they need your help?

[SilentVoice]

36 minutes ago, WalterP said:

Come along truth-bearer, stop deflecting and answer the question.

If the truth-bearer won't admit to his own errors, why should we believe that what he claims to be true isn't another of his errors?

I'm not really sure what you're getting at. I don't have the time to look through scientific papers and wikipedia articles to check if my 'working understanding' of what essentially amounts to nonsense, something I already told you twice now that does not interest me in the slightest, conforms to the current definition (no doubt changed in the last 5 years) that I gave in my initial assertion that I knew more about it than the other guy did. Sure, it was probably a bit arrogant but so what? And I already gave you what you're asking for here "Yes, my belief about what the big bang is claimed to be could be wrong". And you probably missed the post I made earlier where I made a mistake about Neil Armstrong and corrected myself and said it was Buzz Aldrin, clearly demonstrating that I don't have any problems admitting when I'm wrong, or re-stating my points when that happens.

[SilentVoice]

2 minutes ago, Hierophant said:

 

I am not sure what you mean by the sentence I placed in bold.

 

Never said Satan was the good guy. Your are placing words in my mouth and misrepresenting what I am saying. Nothing in the OT says Satan was a good guy, humans hated him. He was always demonstrating their faults to God. I never said anything about praising him, I am saying you give him way too much credit.

 

I am glad you brought up Satan grabbing Christians "not close to God" - whatever that means. Why would an all loving God let something like that happen? So if someone is seeking God, trying to figure out his will, his response is to leave them hanging and let his "adversary" have him. Geez, thanks for looking out. Is that how you treat your kids? Just abandon them when they need your help?

I'll give you a few minutes to go back through all your posts and edit them to make yourself look less foolish. The posts I'm talking about are the ones where you post articles criticizing Christianity for its view of Satan and claiming that Satan was never in the O.T. as any form of adversary and that the Israelites blamed God for all their misfortune because the enemy was just an agent carrying out wrath. Why would humans hate Satan in the O.T. if you're saying that all my understanding is based on a lie because I haven't read into satanic apologetics?

 

In fact, either start making coherent arguments or stop replying to me all together. You're becoming very irritating. I don't even think it's possible for you to make a coherent post. All the scripture that I post you call fake, or make a completely blatant accusation against it. I will post it again and then you will claim that it's incorrect because you studied Jewish satanic apologetics.

 

Ezekiel 28:

The word of the Lord came again unto me, saying,

² Son of man, say unto the prince of Tyrus, Thus saith the Lord God; Because thine heart is lifted up, and thou hast said, I am a God, I sit in the seat of God, in the midst of the seas; yet thou art a man, and not God, though thou set thine heart as the heart of God:

³ Behold, thou art wiser than Daniel; there is no secret that they can hide from thee:

⁴ With thy wisdom and with thine understanding thou hast gotten thee riches, and hast gotten gold and silver into thy treasures:

⁵ By thy great wisdom and by thy traffick hast thou increased thy riches, and thine heart is lifted up because of thy riches:

⁶ Therefore thus saith the Lord God; Because thou hast set thine heart as the heart of God;

⁷ Behold, therefore I will bring strangers upon thee, the terrible of the nations: and they shall draw their swords against the beauty of thy wisdom, and they shall defile thy brightness.

⁸ They shall bring thee down to the pit, and thou shalt die the deaths of them that are slain in the midst of the seas.

⁹ Wilt thou yet say before him that slayeth thee, I am God? but thou shalt be a man, and no God, in the hand of him that slayeth thee.

¹⁰ Thou shalt die the deaths of the uncircumcised by the hand of strangers: for I have spoken it, saith the Lord God.

¹¹ Moreover the word of the Lord came unto me, saying,

¹² Son of man, take up a lamentation upon the king of Tyrus, and say unto him, Thus saith the Lord God; Thou sealest up the sum, full of wisdom, and perfect in beauty.

¹³ Thou hast been in Eden the garden of God; every precious stone was thy covering, the sardius, topaz, and the diamond, the beryl, the onyx, and the jasper, the sapphire, the emerald, and the carbuncle, and gold: the workmanship of thy tabrets and of thy pipes was prepared in thee in the day that thou wast created.

¹⁴ Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth; and I have set thee so: thou wast upon the holy mountain of God; thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire.

¹⁵ Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee.

¹⁶ By the multitude of thy merchandise they have filled the midst of thee with violence, and thou hast sinned: therefore I will cast thee as profane out of the mountain of God: and I will destroy thee, O covering cherub, from the midst of the stones of fire.

¹⁷ Thine heart was lifted up because of thy beauty, thou hast corrupted thy wisdom by reason of thy brightness: I will cast thee to the ground, I will lay thee before kings, that they may behold thee.

¹⁸ Thou hast defiled thy sanctuaries by the multitude of thine iniquities, by the iniquity of thy traffick; therefore will I bring forth a fire from the midst of thee, it shall devour thee, and I will bring thee to ashes upon the earth in the sight of all them that behold thee.

¹⁹ All they that know thee among the people shall be astonished at thee: thou shalt be a terror, and never shalt thou be any more.

 

First, I will admit I don't know why God is using the story of Satan's fall and destruction while addressing the prince of Tyrus. Maybe Satan was literally the prince of that city. A bold claim? Just like Jesus was the king of Salem. Why wouldn't the bible have stories about Salem?

Revelation 2:

¹² And to the angel of the church in Pergamos write; These things saith he which hath the sharp sword with two edges;

¹³ I know thy works, and where thou dwellest, even where Satan's seat is: and thou holdest fast my name, and hast not denied my faith, even in those days wherein Antipas was my faithful martyr, who was slain among you, where Satan dwelleth.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

39 minutes ago, SilentVoice said:

No you deleted all my posts about physical evidence of God's supernatural wrath on Sodom in the book of Genesis, in a thread about criticizing the legitimacy of the book of Genesis. You were asspained because you didn't like the scientific paper being debunked. All my posts are relevant. I stopped posting outside the Lion's den because it's full of whiny people looking for excuses to delete my posts.

Don't take your persecution complex so seriously; you'll just end up looking foolish. 

[Hierophant]

7 minutes ago, SilentVoice said:

I'll give you a few minutes to go back through all your posts and edit them to make yourself look less foolish. The posts I'm talking about are the ones where you post articles criticizing Christianity for its view of Satan and claiming that Satan was never in the O.T. as any form of adversary and that the Israelites blamed God for all their misfortune because the enemy was just an agent carrying out wrath. Why would humans hate Satan in the O.T. if you're saying that all my understanding is based on a lie because I haven't read into satanic apologetics?

 

In fact, either start making coherent arguments or stop replying to me all together. You're becoming very irritating. I don't even think it's possible for you to make a coherent post. All the scripture that I post you call fake, or make a completely blatant accusation against it. I will post it again and then you will claim that it's incorrect because you studied Jewish satanic apologetics.

 

 

You have demonstrated time and again you are unwilling to listen. I studied Jewish Satanic apologetics? Have you completely lost your mind....well, based on your BS, probably. You can quote mine the Bible all you want, but as I have stated before, you are ignorant to the history of the Bible, who wrote it, how the canon was developed, or the demonstrable changing of ideas and theology throughout the whole collection of writing. I am not going to say this again, I think it can be argued that Satan, as modern day Christians define him, is foreign to the earliest theology in the Old Testament. Satan's introduction in the Old Testament was one who tested people and brought their shortcomings before God. He was not in charge of anything! It was not until later theology was being worked out, by humans, to where he got the status he does today. Last I am going to say on it.

 

[WalterP]

1 minute ago, SilentVoice said:

I'm not really sure what you're getting at. I don't have the time to look through scientific papers and wikipedia articles to check if my 'working understanding' of what essentially amounts to nonsense, something I already told you twice now that does not interest me in the slightest, conforms to the current definition (no doubt changed in the last 5 years) that I gave in my initial assertion that I knew more about it than the other guy did. Sure, it was probably a bit arrogant but so what? And I already gave you what you're asking for here "Yes, my belief about what the big bang is claimed to be could be wrong". And you probably missed the post I made earlier where I made a mistake about Neil Armstrong and corrected myself and said it was Buzz Aldrin, clearly demonstrating that I don't have any problems admitting when I'm wrong, or re-stating my points when that happens.

 

No. You have a problem freely admitting you are wrong when others catch you out.

 

Rectifying your own mistakes is fine.

 

But you shouldn't have to be pressed by others to admit when you are wrong.

 

Upon seeing your errors pointed out to you, you should  freely own up to them.

 

Not deflect or blame changing definitions.

 

How can we place our trust in someone who does their best to wriggle out of admitting their errors?

 

Your claims (I know the truth) say one thing, but actions tell us another.

 

 

[Wertbag]

10 hours ago, SilentVoice said:

Sorry, I was mistaken it was Buzz Aldrin that said it.

Oh right, the old already debunked Buzz statement.  When put on the spot he gave a poorly worded reply to a completely different question.  The question was why didn't we go back?  To which he replied that we never did in regards to returning, nothing to do with the original missions.  If you watched the full video he went on to talk about the mission funding and costs, clarifying the point.  Here's a snopes article from 2 years ago: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/buzz-aldrin-moon-admission/

 

But of course you haven't addressed any of the many issues that have been raised about any of the conspiracy theories you are holding to, in brief:

Flat Earth - Why does it fail to explain the phenomena we see that the globe earth model perfectly explains?  Seasons, eclipses, sun rise/set, different night skies to the northern and southern hemispheres, 24hr sun at the poles etc.  Why is there no working flat earth map and yet the globe map works for measurements and travel but you are saying it doesn't correctly reflect the shape of the planet?  Why has no one visited the edge or seen the dome?

Young Earth - Why does it fail to explain the numerous dating techniques such as the 26 different radiometric methods, to the chalk density, to the speed of fossilization, to the depth of the ice cores, to the speed of erosion, to the growth rate of coral, to the human population growth etc.

Moon Landing - Cannot explain the reflectors, the physical moon rock samples given to universities around the world, the fact they repeated the landing 6 times, and how any of this could have been faked using 1960's technology.  This anti-NASA view also leads to denying the ISS exists, even when we can photograph it from the ground.

God - Hiddenness, apparently He wants a personal relationship but can't be bothered to show up.

 

[florduh]

25 minutes ago, Wertbag said:

Oh right, the old already debunked Buzz statement.

Debunking never affects True Believers. Peter Popoff is still running his con. Jim Bakker is still selling fake cures. People still think we didn't go to the moon. Even dumber people think the planet is flat. Facts just don't matter to them and no meaningful dialog is possible.

[webmdave]

[Joshpantera]

6 hours ago, SilentVoice said:

Satan, a malicious, lying, demiurge-like spirit, is inflicting harm and deception on the world and taking captive the Christians who aren't close to God. You are one of its victims. I don't care how many Jewish works of mysticism you read, you are not basing your life on any form of truth. You think Christians need to embrace heresies and other religions to have a more complete understanding of God and that's why you're foolish.

 

Let me tell the reading audience in general what growing up in the Seventh Day Adventist church was like. It was exactly where your mind is right now. Everything is satan!!! All of it!!!

 

All of science, all secularism, the whole of scholarship and academia and even to the extent of all non-SDA christians are under the deceptive influence of satan!!!!!! The entire world is deceived. Only the chosen few, set aside by jesus going into the last days, have the special ability to read and interpret the bible correctly.

 

And I questioned every bit of the claim. I found it lacking through and through, from beginning to end. It's some of the most ill founded subjective thinking that exists in the world.  Objectivity being it's mortal enemy.

 

The problem is that the bible itself doesn't have a leg to stand on. Let alone fast forwarding through centuries and centuries of mythological evolution looking for correct, true, and objective answers. There's no frame of reference to prove it's truth. Not from Genesis. It starts out as contradictory creation myth from the "beginning." Which, doesn't gel with any objective reality. Not the geological and fossil records, not cosmological observation and inquiry, not any of it. 

 

So, I realized that on the one hand we have some crack pots claiming the entire world is deceived by an evil entity fallen from heaven, and everything is a conspiracy. When challenged they have no leg to stand on, because they try and stand on the bible, which, folds immediately. And doesn't provide a firm foundation to stand on. 

 

On the other hand, we have academic speculation based on many objective evidences that have been discovered and observed. The crack pots say, 'no, that's all just satan.' 

 

But they (the same said crack pots) can not substantiate (1) the truth of the bible from the outset or (2) that the very satan they are referring to didn't evolve as a mythical character over many centuries - like a comic book character starting out one away and then growing in detail and depth as people add more and more to the stories. This is the sort of thing that inquisitive christians and questioner's need to start examining if truth is actually their primary concern. An honest devotion to truth seeking and it's path requires working for it. It doesn't just fall in your lap. It's a tough path requiring work on your part! 

 

Who is right or wrong? And how can someone try and find out for themselves? 

 

They have to study with an objective mind, in depth, and take in all of the relevant information available. If not, then they are up against taking someone at their word. You can take the apologist at his word, and you can equally take me at my word. But I'd advise studying this out all the way through for yourselves. And then revisit the question of who is correct about the bible and about satan, in the first place. Someone here is incorrect. And not just a little incorrect, out of the ball park incorrect........

[freshstart]

On 6/26/2020 at 7:23 AM, SilentVoice said:

Yes, basing your life on the "truth" of an ever-changing lie seems very stupid to me.

 

Edit:

- Hey, look how cool this is, apparently light is a particle! Hey everyone look how smart I am, I posted on Facebook about how smart I am because I read a scientific text book, who wants to hear my explanation about [insert mumbo jumbo]?

- Hey, so apparently light is a wave! How cool is that? [insert mumbo jumbo about quantum physics]

- So turns out we were all wrong, it's actually a WAVE-ICLE! Haha! Let me explain how [insert mumbo jumbo metaphysics] happens

Just curious, SV . . .do you trust medical science (which is also ever-changing)? Are you the sort of Christian who only believes certain sciences are to be trusted or do you shun science altogether because all if it is ever-changing as new discoveries are made?