Peanut Gallery for DarkBishop vs. Pittsburghjoe

[TheRedneckProfessor]

.

[Joshpantera]

Joe broke rank and tried to start without allowing DB the first word as the debate was determined by moderation. We have Joe's post hidden until DB initiates the debate. 

 

Here's a teaser from the hidden post for peanuts to analyze over here outside of the debate: 

 

If we are NOT in a fallen reality, why does something have to be wave collapsed to decay? Locality and Decoherence is the name of the game we are in. Locality allows uniqueness. Physical uniqueness allows us to be about ourselves ..sin.

 

Our brains are physical but we are using our soul to operate it for thinking. A physical brain by itself is only good for animal instincts.

 

Shouldn't Satan originally having a claim on everyone tell you he is a bigger deal than you care to admit to? Jesus takes that away from him, but not for those that don't see the light. Unbelievers need to understand that this beast owns them.

1 Corinthians 15:50
Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.
God's Kingdom doesn't want anything to do with this fallen place.

2 Corinthians 5:21
Does "For our sake he made him to be sin" mean Jesus was made in a way that could interact with this fallen reality?

'Fallen, fallen is Babylon the great!' (Rev. 18:2).
Does God/angel call this physical fallen reality "Babylon" at the end before Judgment Day?

2 Corinthians 4:18
For the things which are seen are temporal, but the things which are not seen are eternal. 
Is this talking about wave-particle duality?

 

[Joshpantera]

1) If there is decay in the material universe, then that means the universe is a fallen reality. 

 

That is a massive logic leap. For all we know we exist within one of an infinite number of universes called a multiverse. And that labels every single physical universe, which are potentially infinite, as an infinite number of "fallen universes." Who's to say that decay equals fallen in the first place? Why is it not simply 'the natural order of existence', exactly the way it's always been and always will be? Universes will always decay, and new universes will continuously arise, forever. Over and over again. Not a one off event like the "fall of man" in the bible.  

 

2) If the bible speaks about a theology of the 'fall of man', that means that it's referring to the scientific issue of 'decay in the universe.' 

 

The massive logic leap widens! As mentioned, claim or premise number 1 isn't established as true. There's good reason to call it false or not conclusion at best. It doesn't automatically follow that the universe is a fallen reality or that it operates any differently than any number of other universes out there. The whole thing, including my evaluation, is SPECULATION and OPINION!!!

 

Joe starts off building his castle on a foundation of unproven, and unsupported speculation and opinion as his first building blocks for his belief system. Not good. Not smart. And not very convincing. 

 

We're off to a horribly framed and illegal start to this debate....

 

[Joshpantera]

25 minutes ago, Joshpantera said:

2 Corinthians 4:18
For the things which are seen are temporal, but the things which are not seen are eternal. 
Is this talking about wave-particle duality?

 

Highly doubtful. For myriad reasons. 

 

But mainly because the bible was written in a pre-scientific setting. The cosmology of Genesis was that of a round, flat disc shaped earth with a multilayered "heavens" above the earth. Which was the contemporary cosmology of the near east at the time. Paul speak of going up to through the heavens, revealing it's presence through the NT writing periods. The creation myth and the NT literally were written by people who didn't even know the truth about about our own solar system, let alone the galaxy, let alone the local cluster and beyond. The were scientifically illiterate in that way. 

 

How then do they suddenly write cryptic passages about the particle - wave duality which wasn't discovered until the 20th century????

 

If they had 20th century knowledge of physics, why didn't they have 20th century knowledge of cosmology????

 

The only "Babylon" going on here is the confusion going on in Joe's mind where he lacks the comprehensive ability to apply logic and reason to his own theories. He hasn't bothered to try and weigh out the pro's and con's. 

[TheRedneckProfessor]

1 hour ago, Joshpantera said:

The only "Babylon" going on here is the confusion going on in Joe's mind where he lacks the comprehensive ability to apply logic and reason to his own theories.

Don't confuse Babylon with babbling.

[◊ Weezer ◊]

2 hours ago, Joshpantera said:

 

 confusion going on in Joe's mind where he lacks the comprehensive ability to apply logic and reason to his own theories. 

 

BINGO!  That is exactly what is going on.  He lacks the ability.

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

I'm gonna be pissed if he does one of his patented 2 sentence rebuttals. 

[TheRedneckProfessor]

8 hours ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

.

Wait a minute... I never said that!

[sdelsolray]

3 hours ago, DarkBishop said:

I'm gonna be pissed if he does one of his patented 2 sentence rebuttals. 

The evidence (e.g., over 500 posts from Joe) strongly indicates Joe is not capable of rational discourse.

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

1 minute ago, sdelsolray said:

The evidence (e.g., over 500 posts from Joe) strongly indicates Joe is not capable of rational discourse.

Yep. There is obviously something wrong with Joe. 

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

Ok @TheRedneckProfessor,

 

This debate is over. I was really hoping Joe would put up more of a fight. You can shut it down now. 

[sdelsolray]

7 minutes ago, DarkBishop said:

Yep. There is obviously something wrong with Joe. 

 

Well, his inability to participate in rational discourse could (for the most part) simply be due to religious indoctrination coupled with little, if any, education in or experience with critical thinking.

 

On another point, your posts in the actual debate thread with Joe are quite good...thorough, rational and instructive.  Joe doesn't address them but simply bleats another assertion.

 

Also, in your discussion of "major flaws" in Genesis 5 eq seq, there's an earlier one that is quite significant.  It deals with water and timing.  Water contains oxygen, which is only formed in stars and only expelled to other parts of space in supernova explosions (small amounts are expelled by other star end-of-life events).  In the first several chapters of Genesis, water exists before the stars are created.  This is incorrect.

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

Thanks @sdelsolray,

 

I didn't know that. I will have to look into it. 

[TheRedneckProfessor]

17 minutes ago, DarkBishop said:

Ok @TheRedneckProfessor,

 

This debate is over. I was really hoping Joe would put up more of a fight. You can shut it down now. 

My wish is your command.  Let me know if there's anything else you can do for me.

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

1 minute ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

My wish is your command.  Let me know if there's anything else you can do for me.

 

Sure   I could bring ya a beer for the super bowl just DM me lmao. 

[sdelsolray]

11 minutes ago, DarkBishop said:

Thanks @sdelsolray,

 

I didn't know that. I will have to look into it. 

 

You don't have to look far.  According to the myth, the stars are not created until the fourth day, yet water exists on the first day.

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

2 minutes ago, sdelsolray said:

 

You don't have to look far.  According to the myth, the stars are not created until the fourth day, yet water exists on the first day.

 

I mean I didn't know stars expelled oxygen. Thats what I was going to look up. 

[Joshpantera]

10 minutes ago, sdelsolray said:

 

You don't have to look far.  According to the myth, the stars are not created until the fourth day, yet water exists on the first day.

 

All of these atoms, H20 and all, are obviously matter. Material existing before the fall of man. The fall of man apparently creating matter when waves become particles. This guy is far gone. 

[sdelsolray]

21 minutes ago, DarkBishop said:

 

I mean I didn't know stars expelled oxygen. Thats what I was going to look up. 

 

Oxygen is formed via nucleosynthesis within stars.  Indeed, all atomic elements (except hydrogen, some helium and some lithium) were formed (i) within a star's normal life, (ii) by reason of a supernova (iii) when neutron stars merge.

 

Added:  These processes occurred for about 9 billion years before out solar system was formed.  This is why all 92 natural elements exist in our solar system, including Earth.  This was a necessary prerequisite for the development of carbon based life on Earth.

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

3 minutes ago, Joshpantera said:

 

All of these atoms, H20 and all, are obviously matter. Material existing before the fall of man. The fall of man apparently creating matter when waves become particles. This guy is far gone. 

Hopefully Joe is reading the peanut gallery. Good points!!

[sdelsolray]

1 minute ago, DarkBishop said:

Hopefully Joe is reading the peanut gallery. Good points!!

 

I suspect Joe doesn't do facts.

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

3 minutes ago, sdelsolray said:

 

I suspect Joe doesn't do facts.

 

From my experience trying to debate him i guarantee he doesn't do facts. Lol  

[Joshpantera]

All these apologists who look for ways of trying to read modern science into ancient creation myth fail. It's not possible that their theories will ever work out because the writers had literally zero knowledge of 20th and 21st century cosmology or physics. And if it's said that a god inspired them to write it down, the god apparently didn't understand 20th and 21st century cosmology and physics either. Because the order of events NEVER lines up. It doesn't work as symbolic of the literal universe. It doesn't work as literal of the literal universe. It doesn't work out at all. 

 

Hence my previous debate position that Genesis is demonstrably false. All of this adds more depth to that previous debate. It reveals more contradictions. 

[LogicalFallacy]

Well folks, looks like I missed the best week of it. Ah well.

 

@sdelsolray Thanks for that gem about water appearing before stars. I did not know about it forming in stars. Something else to add when I debate folks about a literal interpretation of Genesis.

[WalterP]

Transferring this over from the Hierophant vs Pittsburgh peanut gallery...

 

Hmmm... I have a further thought about the term and conditions you've outlined above Josh, but since I've committed myself to yielding, watching and waiting, I'll keep my counsel until afterward. Walter.

 

Here's my thought, Josh. (Not so much of a thought, as a concern.)

 

As you know I'm concerned about the following scenario.  Before people register here they usually spend some time lurking and carefully reading what's on offer here.  This means that they can read everything and anything posted by people like Brothermario and PittsburghJoe.  As I mentioned before, it would be both tragic and bitterly ironic if these vulnerable and fragile lurkers were deflected from registering by what they read from these bozos.  We want the lurkers to make the next step and register here so that they can share and get help, right?

 

So, how can we balance the right of the Joe's (Mello & Pittsburgh) to post here against protecting the lurkers from them?

 

I'm currently stumped.

 

Any ideas?

 

Thank you.

 

Walter.