Welcome to
Science a GoGo's
Discussion Forums
Please keep your postings on-topic or they will be moved to a galaxy far, far away.
Your use of this forum indicates your agreement to our terms of use.
So that we remain spam-free, please note that all posts by new users are moderated.


The Forums
General Science Talk        Not-Quite-Science        Climate Change Discussion        Physics Forum        Science Fiction

Who's Online
0 registered (), 404 Guests and 0 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
Top Posters (30 Days)
Page 7 of 9 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 >
Topic Options
#47215 - 01/01/13 12:33 AM Re: Creationists and People [Re: Bill S.]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
Originally Posted By: Bill S.
Suggested New Year resolution: Acknowledge when you are wasting your time, and stop it.


The only way to argue with Paul is to get him to make all the definitions and follow his argument.

The problem he is going to have is the bible as a literal work is interesting from the evolution perspective.

I must say I read the old testament very close to jewish beliefs which should probably come as no surprise. The jewish have sort of resolved evolution although there is limited resistance

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_views_on_evolution

How they did that is interesting


Biblical "kinds" is the hebrew word "miyn" is pronounced "meen".

No human authority is higher than the Biblical text. And so you look up all the verses in context in the Torah.

Kinds is very important to the jewish because of the need to identify Kosher and non Kosher animals

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kosher_animals

Thus animal "Kinds" had to be dealt with throughout history rigorously.

Knowing the jewish history and background it is going to be very interesting to see Paul dance his way thru the minefield of literal translation of the bible to say evolution doesn't exist.

My observation of Paul and many fundementalist christians is the same as the jewish have that they are clearly reading a different bible to us because thats not what it says.


Edited by Orac (01/01/13 12:52 AM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
.
#47217 - 01/01/13 04:10 AM Re: Creationists and People [Re: Orac]
paul Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/21/06
Posts: 4136
http://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons/hebrew/nas/miyn.html

Miyn

Quote:
kind, sometimes a species (usually of animals) ++ Groups of living organisms belong in the same created "kind" if they have descended from the same ancestral gene pool. This does not preclude new species because this represents a partitioning of the original gene pool. Information is lost or conserved not gained. A new species could arise when a population is isolated and inbreeding occurs. By this definition a new species is not a new "kind" but a further partitioning of an existing "kind".


that definition say's pretty much or exactly what I have
been saying.

you based your entire post on the word
"KIND" in Genesis , and really never said anything
except how the word is pronounced in Hebrew
that pertains to this discussion. LOL

_________________________
3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.

Top
#47218 - 01/01/13 04:32 AM Re: Creationists and People [Re: Orac]
paul Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/21/06
Posts: 4136
Quote:
My observation of Paul and many fundementalist christians


actually , your observation doesn't really mean very much.

you don't really want me to post up my observation of orac.

I have been nice in the past.
_________________________
3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.

Top
#47219 - 01/01/13 04:35 AM Re: Creationists and People [Re: Bill]
paul Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/21/06
Posts: 4136
thanks Bill

I didn't think that the data was about the actual surface.

it must be a highly guarded secret because its nowhere to be
found.

I didn't think that science hid thing's ROFL shocked
_________________________
3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.

Top
#47220 - 01/01/13 04:41 AM Re: Creationists and People [Re: paul]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
Paul you would also be wrong in thinking I care what you make of me or say of me, I don't care if you are nice or not. As I said I am sure many students have said far worse than what you could.

I am not here to be popular but I am ever so logical and questioning and I try to be honest in my evaluations of those two traits sometimes brutally so.

So back to the task at hand the jewish definition is interesting I have no problem with the bits you have highlighted but what about the bits you haven't highlighted agree of diasagree?

You may not think it is important but I will show you why it is .. the jewish have it in there for a reason.

The other question still unanswered is what is the roll of being able to breed in your answer. The answer above does not really answer that do species have to be able to breed with each other or doesn't that matter?

If you look carefully at the jewish answer they arrive at

=>God does allow some interbreeding within the kinds, they are not always able to propagate

Hence the mules in Genesis 36:24 were not a problem to the jewish but they were a problem to some christian fundementalist.

So I guess the question to you is mule, donkey and horse all the same "kind" or not?

Miyn says they are not the same "kind" what say you.


Edited by Orac (01/01/13 04:56 AM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#47221 - 01/01/13 05:04 AM Re: Creationists and People [Re: Orac]
paul Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/21/06
Posts: 4136
Quote:
If you look carefully at the jewish answer they arrive at


but you haven't posted something that could be called the Jewish answer.

or the question asked of the Jewish.

in your next post just ask question's , I am here to help.

I will reply in 2013.
_________________________
3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.

Top
#47222 - 01/01/13 05:09 AM Re: Creationists and People [Re: paul]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
See this is where you start to lose people you start avoiding answering questions. If you are going to convert us to your belief and convince us we must be able to ask questions.

I am making no claim of truth or otherwise of what I believe here I am simply asking you to walk thru your beliefs. I have also put in considerable effort in reading the bible so you can't say I am not trying to understand you.

I can't take what it says in the bible literally because as we saw with pork eating you take some things literally not others hence I must ask you.

So if you want direct questions:

1.) mule, donkey and horse all the same "KIND" or not?
2.) If two animals can't even cross breed they are wider than "KINDS".


Edited by Orac (01/01/13 05:16 AM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#47223 - 01/01/13 03:21 PM Re: Creationists and People [Re: Orac]
Tutor Turtle Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/19/08
Posts: 1249
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere
Originally Posted By: Orac
See this is where you start to lose people you start avoiding answering questions.
He hasn't lost you!
And Paul has a point.
If the questions are delusional, and you expect a reasonable answer to a delusional question, you're going to continue to rally your army of 1 against the delusional issues.
_________________________
I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!





Top
#47224 - 01/01/13 03:50 PM Re: Creationists and People [Re: Tutor Turtle]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
Rally against 1 ... ????

TT you are the only one delussional I have no idea what crap you are dribbling ... please stay off the drugs.

For a pratt who is so brother lee love and won't judge people you do love to jump to conclusions. Yet strangely by miracles upon miracles you find offense with me ... wonder why that is?

I am sure I have a pretty good idea why. Seriously I have had very clever and smart arse students for many years do you think I haven't seen all this before?

I like FF he was far more amusing than you TT.

Oh please stop the bad man on the internet is picking on me ... LOL .

Seriously get a life if Paul doesn't want to discuss things he simply has to say he doesn't we have respected that when he has said that on other threads.

Queue incoming wall of bullshit which means everything and nothing but will no doubt make me the badie but like I give a toss what you think ... yes thats called deliberately provoking you to see if you have a spine. I do that sort of thing because I am a scary bad man of SAGG some even say I am the devil or mad or gay or maybe all at once.

3
2
1


Edited by Orac (01/01/13 04:19 PM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#47225 - 01/01/13 04:19 PM Re: Creationists and People [Re: Orac]
paul Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/21/06
Posts: 4136
Quote:
If you are going to convert us to your belief and convince us we must be able to ask questions.


first off , I'm not trying to convert anyone's belief's !

and I did ask you to ask question's.

and you did ask question's.

Quote:
pork eating


yes I eat pork , what this discussion is about has nothing do
do with what we eat.
I suppose your intentions are to obfuscate the discussion with
all the laws contained in the bible to try and gain momentum in
the discussion , but the laws are for people to follow and the
laws are like a set of rules for guidance for people , the laws do not control what animals will do in the wild.

and what we are discussing is what animals can do in the wild
as far as breeding is concerned.

by trying to vector the discussion in the direction you seem to be vectoring it into you extrapolate the discussion.

Quote:
So if you want direct questions:

1.) mule, donkey and horse all the same "KIND" or not?


mule, donkey and horse all the same "KIND" or not?

from the definiion of miyn (KIND)

Quote:
By this definition a new species is not a new "kind" but a further partitioning of an existing "kind".


mule , donkey , horse are all the same KIND.

the mule is a partition from the donkey and the horse.

a mule is not a new KIND or new species.

a mule is a breed.

Quote:
2.) If two animals can't even cross breed they are wider than "KINDS".


I cant answer that question because I don't know what your asking!

and it's not a question it's a statement.
_________________________
3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.

Top
#47226 - 01/01/13 04:36 PM Re: Creationists and People [Re: Orac]
paul Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/21/06
Posts: 4136
I think your an idiot , that's just my honest opinion , and it
is a nice one because I am holding back what I would really like to
say.

but that's beside the point , I'm also going to call you a whimp
and a chicken who hide's behind a fence and pecks at the toes of
people's feet.

the pecking really does no harm , its just annoying.

you respond with your supposedly harmful reply to TT
as if your somebody someone should be afraid of.
someone like you remind's me of a little punk hiding behind
a wall throwing rocks over the wall at people.

don't forget people can pick up those rock's you throw over the
wall and throw them at the wall.

eventually you will not have a wall to hide behind.
_________________________
3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.

Top
#47227 - 01/01/13 04:49 PM Re: Creationists and People [Re: paul]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
Originally Posted By: paul

yes I eat pork , what this discussion is about has nothing do
do with what we eat.
I suppose your intentions are to obfuscate the discussion with
all the laws contained in the bible to try and gain momentum in
the discussion , but the laws are for people to follow and the
laws are like a set of rules for guidance for people , the laws do not control what animals will do in the wild.


This time Paul it is you who jumping to conclusions which are actually totally wrong.

I am actually trying and doing my best to interact with you in an open an honest discussion because you are not trolling. I can't discuss it in science terms because your definitions are all over the shop for science.

At the end of the discussion I would hope to understand your beliefs or at least the logic they are built on.


I understand and respect the logic the jewish religion is built on, I understand and respect the logic Rev K religion is built on.

I am not saying that I will be converted but hopefully I get where you are coming from since you are actually interacting.

See nice Orac comes out when we are discussing not trolling.

My problems with you is there is obvious inconsistancies with you and your beliefs and I am trying to get to the bottom of why that is. I am often on a knife edge with you as whether you are just trolling or you actually believe what you say because the inconsistancies are very large.

The pork issue was obvious to me because you went so hard at me about genesis being literal it stunned me that you ate pork because it literally says not to. So in my defence I am still not sure how to reconcile this other than say you view genesis as literal by leviticus as not ?????


Originally Posted By: paul

and what we are discussing is what animals can do in the wild
as far as breeding is concerned.


Ok I need you to explain that one ... are you saying there is a difference between wild and ?????? (domestic or perhaps man captive) animals


Originally Posted By: paul

by trying to vector the discussion in the direction you seem to be vectoring it into you extrapolate the discussion.


You are answering the questions I can only go to whatever answers you are willing to provide. I am not sure what you think I could be vectoring. I am not trying to trap you or anything if that is what you think ... I am not sure you can trap people in there beliefs .. they believe what they believe?

Having done reading on the bible and resolving how the jews resolve the minefield of evolution vs the bible I do know there are some classic logic problems. The jewish Rabbis have been struggling with the issue as well if you read the link above and it is interesting the issues it brings up.


Originally Posted By: paul

mule , donkey , horse are all the same KIND.
the mule is a partition from the donkey and the horse.
a mule is not a new KIND or new species.
a mule is a breed.



Yep okay that makes sense to me I see how you are defining it I think. Now the check which yes I put in the form of a statement.


So Tigers and Lions can produce a liger so Tiger and Lion are same "kind"?

I guess I should also check the negative of that so if two animals can't produce an offspring are they necessarilly different "kinds" or are there exceptions to this. So can we have two of a "kind" that can't produce offspring?


Edited by Orac (01/01/13 05:16 PM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#47228 - 01/01/13 04:59 PM Re: Creationists and People [Re: paul]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
Originally Posted By: paul
I think your an idiot , that's just my honest opinion , and itis a nice one because I am holding back what I would really like to say.


I may well be an idiot or worse who can tell?

You do have the option of ceasing discussion if you so chose for my part if you don't troll and want to discuss I am happy to discuss and I will even be polite to you. I believe this was the sort of truce agreement we have.

Originally Posted By: paul

but that's beside the point , I'm also going to call you a whimp and a chicken who hide's behind a fence and pecks at the toes of people's feet.

the pecking really does no harm , its just annoying.


Again possibly true who can say.


Originally Posted By: paul

you respond with your supposedly harmful reply to TT
as if your somebody someone should be afraid of.
someone like you remind's me of a little punk hiding behind
a wall throwing rocks over the wall at people.

don't forget people can pick up those rock's you throw over the
wall and throw them at the wall.

eventually you will not have a wall to hide behind.


I have reasons for everything I do and ask ... I thought you would have worked that out by now.

I am not sure it's harmful I am just a weird gay guy according to TT with mental issues ... I could be just playing a part or confirming it smile

As I think I stated in the post it was a deliberate provocation I am therefore guilty as charged of a deliberate provoking post ... see I told you I am honest.

Sometimes playing the mad dog is useful to test if things react the way you would expect, call it a form of science experiment. Scientists do these sorts of things to see reactions.

You will note Paul although I am quite sure you would like to throttle me and abuse the hell out of me you realise the consequences as you sort of stated above. Thus although we are never going to be friends we can continue discussing things without it descending into chaos and the forum does not suffer. I think you were very controlled in your response above and it was noted and I respect you for that.


Edited by Orac (01/01/13 06:29 PM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#47229 - 01/01/13 05:29 PM Re: Creationists and People [Re: Orac]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
Originally Posted By: paul

mule , donkey , horse are all the same KIND.
the mule is a partition from the donkey and the horse.
a mule is not a new KIND or new species.
a mule is a breed.


As an aside Paul science says Horse and Donkey are different species because at a genetic level Horse has 64 chromosones and Donkey has 62 chromosones and so they have to be different species according to science.

Just so we are clear I am not saying you are wrong or there is anything wrong with you definition of "kind" it just isn't the same as a science species. Classification is a very subjective thing and science and you differ which is fine. I am trying to keep everything honest and open so you don't misunderstand.

It does however illustrate the issue that we aren't going to be able to discuss things in science terms we will need to use your terms.



Edited by Orac (01/01/13 05:30 PM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#47230 - 01/01/13 06:39 PM Re: Creationists and People [Re: Orac]
paul Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/21/06
Posts: 4136
I have enjoyed reading your last 3 post , Orac.

you surprised me , would describe my reaction to your reaction to my post.

I was expecting ranting and raving , and recieved nothing but
calm , cool , and seemingly well adjusted behavior.

I am in the middle of pig cooking at the moment , and I think
I will find a tree to sit under to eat the pigs flesh.

BRB...
_________________________
3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.

Top
#47231 - 01/01/13 08:44 PM Re: Creationists and People [Re: redewenur]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
Originally Posted By: redewenur
... The odd thing about it all is, I myself am not entirely opposed to the concept that we live in an intelligently designed universe. Maybe it is a Matrix smile
Matrix. Rede? You mean womb-like? This is what I have in mind when, in my signature, I use the acronym GD~.

As I understand it, and I make no claim to having expert knowledge, Rede, it was at the moment of conception in my mother's womb, that a seed and an egg came together.

Then the pattern, or design, of the one I became as a modern child was set.

The same was true for my mother, and her mother, and so on ... back to the beginning of time. Let us imagine that, since the beginning of time, all umbilical chords have been 1 metre long.
===================

It boggles the mind to think of how many metres long an unbroken chord, back to our first mother, would be.
===============
Questions I ask myself in 2013--my 83rd year, as of Jan.14: What role did physical, mental and spiritual factors--soma, psyche and pneuma factors--play in designing the persons we became? And will become in the future? Or are we but creatures of accident?

HAPPY MIND-STRETCHING YEAR 2013
_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
#47234 - 01/01/13 09:30 PM Re: Creationists and People [Re: Orac]
Tutor Turtle Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/19/08
Posts: 1249
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere
Originally Posted By: Orac
Rally against 1 ... ????
That was Rally an army of one. I see you have trouble with your comprehension of the English language.
Originally Posted By: Orac

TT you are the only one delussional I have no idea what crap you are dribbling.

Would agree that you don't seem to have any idea. By the way I think there's just one "s" in delusional. Must be that second language thing.
Originally Posted By: Orac

For a pratt who is so brother lee love and won't judge people you do love to jump to conclusions.

Brotherly love is inclusive of observation and communication.
Obviously you have an idea about brother like love, and how I should fit into your belief of it.
Originally Posted By: Orac
Yet strangely by miracles upon miracles you find offense with me ... wonder why that is?

Far from anything offensive, intriguing maybe.

I mostly have an interest in your definitions and beliefs, and why you would assume others would hold to your beliefs.

Your ideas about religion, brotherly love, spirituality etc. They're... interesting.. for lack of a better word.
Originally Posted By: Orac

I am sure I have a pretty good idea why.

I'm sure you do, however your comprehensive history of the conversations, suggests that what ever idea you have, might be a stretch from the reality of the conversation.
Originally Posted By: Orac
Seriously I have had very clever and smart arse students for many years do you think I haven't seen all this before?

I'm pretty sure making assumptions on your part is inclusive of all sorts of historic memories of personal trials and tribulations. Anyone can self determine, and self justify. Why should you be any different?
Originally Posted By: Orac

I like FF he was far more amusing than you TT.

You must be heartbroken.
Originally Posted By: Orac

Oh please stop the bad man on the internet is picking on me ... LOL .
Not nearly as ferociously as you seem to acknowledge your veracity with others. I would never claim to keep up with you.

Originally Posted By: Orac

Seriously get a life if Paul doesn't want to discuss things he simply has to say he doesn't we have respected that when he has said that on other threads.
The inference I made had nothing to do with Paul. It was towards the beliefs and definitions you use in general.
It just happens to be a convenience that your latest and greatest reference to your beliefs, was within your post to Paul.
Originally Posted By: Orac

Queue incoming wall of bullshit which means everything and nothing but will no doubt make me the badie but like I give a toss what you think ... yes thats called deliberately provoking you to see if you have a spine.

You seem to revel in the idea of provoking others.

Originally Posted By: Orac
I do that sort of thing because I am a scary bad man of SAGG some even say I am the devil or mad or gay or maybe all at once.

Poor you.
Perhaps you can gain some more sympathy for feeling victimized so, by bringing up the whole holocaust thing again.

We can all get serious about who is moral and righteous.

Look at all the sympathy you got last time someone brought it up and threatened to leave. I think at least a couple of people believed you were truly offended.
_________________________
I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!





Top
#47235 - 01/01/13 10:26 PM Re: Creationists and People [Re: Revlgking]
redewenur Offline
Megastar

Registered: 02/14/07
Posts: 1840
Originally Posted By: Revlgking
Originally Posted By: redewenur
... The odd thing about it all is, I myself am not entirely opposed to the concept that we live in an intelligently designed universe. Maybe it is a Matrix smile
Matrix. Rede? You mean womb-like? This is what I have in mind when, in my signature, I use the acronym GD~...

...Questions I ask myself in 2013--my 83rd year, as of Jan.14: What role did physical, mental and spiritual factors--soma, psyche and pneuma factors--play in designing the persons we became? And will become in the future? Or are we but creatures of accident?

The Matrix, with the capital M, is the name of a cyberpunk sci-fi movie, in which reality is actually a simulated reality or cyberspace (called the Matrix).

Here's information about some very recent mathematical physics research which has revealed (according to Prof S James Gates Jr) error-correcting computer code built into the fabric of the cosmos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3BMYtnv_OnI&feature=player_detailpage
_________________________
"Time is what prevents everything from happening at once" - John Wheeler

Top
#47236 - 01/01/13 11:05 PM Re: Creationists and People [Re: redewenur]
Ellis Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/08/07
Posts: 1490
Loc: Australia
That is thoroughly disconcerting stuff rede!

Is it, as it seems to me, important that the 'code' is self-correcting? Would not this mean that the 'code' could therefore be everlasting? Would the correcting process change it's destination, or result? (Plus lots of other questions that I would love to ask if I knew how to frame them! I have virtually no mathematical language being very challenged in that area!)

I probably have therefore got the wrong end of the stick here, but the concept is intriguing, and Dr Gates is a very interesting speaker. I shall have to learn more about this challenging idea.


P S I really didn't like 'The Matrix' - though I liked the bits of Sydney that were in it! I was astonished to find that some people regard it as a documentary. Should I apologise to them!


Edited by Ellis (01/01/13 11:09 PM)

Top
#47237 - 01/01/13 11:06 PM Re: Creationists and People [Re: paul]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
Originally Posted By: paul

I was expecting ranting and raving , and recieved nothing but
calm , cool , and seemingly well adjusted behavior.


See we are definitely getting places. I now aspire to show the same tolerance as you did on your reaction and we have all made progress and the forum benefits.

I am actually interested in what you have to say when you are not just trolling.

TT has got one thing right about me which if I am honest I have to acknowledge

Originally Posted By: TT

You seem to revel in the idea of provoking others.


I do but probably not in the way he thinks and it is why I enjoy science and teaching.

I am not here to be popular or even liked I have friends for that. I am not here to teach or push mainstream science I have a job for that. I am here to discuss science or other topics that interest me with people from around the world.

I have no view or agenda to push but this is the internet and trolls abound and I am quite good if somewhat brutal on attacking them.

I do so because trolls only agenda is to disrupt discussion between people which is the only reason I come here so to me they are public enemy number 1.

I have a few personal morals such as a dislikes of pornography, human rights abuses and animal cruelty. This stuff does offend me for a rather obvious reason given my refugee background that it involves the degredation of a victim.

I once got asked by a troll how I reconcile my rather brutal attack on it with my personal morals of human rights. My answer is simple trolls are not a victim they are in control of there actions and noone is forcing them to troll.

Whether you believe what I have said here I leave for you to decide it really doesn't need discussion.

I do however leave a blunt warning to trolls as Rev K might say "reap as you sow".
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
Page 7 of 9 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 >



Newest Members
debbieevans, bkhj, jackk, Johnmattison, RacerGT
865 Registered Users
Sponsor
Facebook

We're on Facebook
Join Our Group

Science a GoGo's Home Page | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
Features | News | Books | Physics | Space | Climate Change | Health | Technology | Natural World

Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Science a GoGo and its licensors. All rights reserved.