Chronovisor Posts

DaViper

December 29, 2000 1:29 pm
Post Count

P. S. Pamela:

By the way, think about this.

Physicists for quite some time now have understood radioactive decay quite well. In fact so well, we’ve been able to construct clocks based of the decay of various elements.

Since these clocks are SO accurate, they are used by NASA to time events in the travel of our space vehicles. The precision involved in sending the Pioneer, Voyager, etc Spacecraft to the outer planets for picture taking is so intricate that only atomic clocks will do.

If our understanding of radioactive decay was flawed, then these clocks would not work as we intend them too, and those planetary fly-by events we all remember NEVER took place since the craft would have missed the targets by millions of miles.

Mr. ‘rgrunt’ has some homework to do.

By the way, Evolution is observable not only in Nature but reproducable in the laboratory. Those who claim it doesn’t exist are either too afraid to admit they are wrong, or just plain too stubborn to accept reality.

It’s a scary thing to be proven wrong. Once one realizes it, one is stuck with the idea that other things one believes in MAY be wrong also. This is hard for some people to accept since it shakes the foundation of their whole belief system.

But an open mind and a willingness to actually learn will always get one through the tough spots.

I have no idea how or why the Universe came into existence, but I’m not going to worry about it. And I’m for sure NOT going to buy into ideas of how it happened that simply are not so, and can be proven to BE not so.

I bid you a good day.

DaViper

December 29, 2000 1:15 pm
Post Count

Pamela:

I’m not sensitive about it at all. And I also respect the religious beliefs of others. (I get a kick out of some of the stories I see preffered from time to time.) 🙂 But when hypothesis are profferred to suport religious belief that can be proven to be scientifically incorrect, one needs to realize that while religion is a personal matter, one cannot cancel the laws of physics in order to cling to beliefs that simply are not true.

The only people that see conflict between religion and science are staunch religionists. Sagan, Einstein et al were both believers in God. Hawking is a pure Agnostic. Which means that while he does not firmly accept the existence of God, he doesn’t reject it either.

Science is not attempting to disprove God (some scientists MAY be atheistic) but Science itself takes no stand on the existence of God. He either is, or He isn’t. To science, it matters not either way.

Hey, maybe God DID create the Earth. But it’s a simple fact that He did not create it in what WE refer to as “6 days” as is metaphorically described in Genesis.

If one’s faith is truly strong, all the scientific FACT in the world shouldn’t be able to shake it. Even when preposterous claims are made but such as ‘rgrunt’ above.

His story is an old one and is without basis in fact. It has been circulated by the “Creationists” for many years. If ‘rgrunt’ did just a little research, he would find that CARBON dating is not used in Paleontology for dating things from MILLIONS of years ago. Other radio-isotope methods are used. There are 5 all in all. Each has it’s own period of effectiviness depending on the half-life or decay rate of the isotope involved.

No scientist would even TRY to date a 50 million year old sample with Carbon dating. And any story that claims someone did is pure fabrication and bunk since no scientist would ever claim that he has.

By all means, please keep searching for the truth. But don’t take someone else’s word for anything. Do the research. The web is full of good science and “snake oil” salesmen like ‘rgrunt’.

I wish you peace and success in your search for truth.

pamela

December 29, 2000 8:44 am
Post Count

Timetraveler_0~

When it is beginning to rain….
it is time to go rainbow gazing.

~pamela

tomboy

December 28, 2000 5:50 pm
Post Count

Hey TT_0

Can u take some photos’ of the future while ur there?

rgrunt

December 28, 2000 11:36 am
Post Count

Not to create dissention for I am a man of science but in my own town there were discovered dinosuar bones that were carbon dated to be 80 million years old. The bones were discovered in a farming area close to bisbee AZ. Now a christian farmer went home slaughtered one of his cows took a bone from it and snuck into the escavation site one that night and buried the cow bone so that the scientists would discover it the following day. And the scientists did. They carbon dated the cow bone and their results stated that the bone was over 50 million years old. Further more the scientist identified the cow bone as being from a dinosuar. They presented their findings that week and the farmer came publicly to dispute them pointing at his cow bone saying that the bone was not 50 million years old that and preached creation. Thge scientists debated claiming that they carbon dated the bone and this evidence proved them wrong. The farmer stated that the evidence couldn’t be right. The scientists argued with the man. And finally the man stated “that bone can’t be 50 million years old, I snuck that bone in yesterday it’s my cow bone My cow ain’t 50 million years old.” everyone laughed and the story spread throughout our town and the scientist left our town in shame and completely humiliated and bewildered. They could no longer use their arguements to sustain the hoax of evolution for in one fowl swoop by a genius farmer their entire arguement was broaght to ruins.

pamela

December 28, 2000 3:08 am
Post Count

“They are what they are whether one believes them or not. All the old belief that the world was flat didn’t make it so.”

Isnt that amazing? but yet thousands of years before they came to the conclusion that the earth was flat it was already stated that it was indeed round!
Isaiah 40:22 “…the circle of the Earth..” heheh :smile.gif:

For some reason this subject is an offense to you so I will not discuss it with you any longer.
All science also agreed that nothing could go faster than the speed of light. Scientists beleived and accepted this theory as true for years even based other theories on it. but in the light of new evidence the theory was proved wrong.(Just this year)
I want to think beyond the current theories. For I see them for what they are..theories only, not concrete facts.Thats why I like to research many different theories and maybe even come up with some of my own.
I respect your beleifs and theorys as I do all others.
peace.
In search of truth always,

pamela

[This message has been edited by pamela (edited 28 December 2000).]

DaViper

December 28, 2000 2:11 am
Post Count

The laws of physics have nothing to do with a belief system.

They are what they are whether one believes them or not. All the old belief that the world was flat didn’t make it so.

All the belief that the earth was the center of the Solar System and Universe couldn’t make it so.

And all the belief in the world that a “universal flood” EVER existed can’t change the laws of physics that make such an event utterly impossible.

Where did all the water go when this “flood” was over? Evaporate into space? Sorry not possible under the laws of physics that are governed by the very gravity of the earth itself. Water which is heavier than air, evaporated into the vacume of space and left the earth’s atmosphere behind? Sorry no dice. It just doesn’t work like that as any meteorologist can tell you.

The story is based on local phenomenae at the time it originated. It probably looked to the inhabitants at the time that the “whole world” was flooded but the reality of physics is that it is not, never was, and can never be possible. (Barring collisions with several thousand Comets that is. Which would wipe out all life, change the entire structure of the mantle itself and cause evolution to start all over again.)

There is NO evidence this has ever happened in this manner.

The belief stems from the desire to insist on a literal interpretation of the Bible that the earth is but 6-8 thousand years old.

But it isn’t just that meteorology, geology, palentology, astronomy, biology, physics, quantum mechanics or cosmology each show that this is impossible, it’s that ALL these sciences agree thru related and intertwined studies that the aforementioned is simply not possible.

If one wants to toss aside ALL of these studies and the verifiable evidence they produce in favor of a mytology based on a single text that has NO proof, than I guess one is free to do so.

But an Ostrich is free to stick his head in the sand also.

Peace.

pamela

December 27, 2000 6:52 pm
Post Count

Shadow,
p.s. I cant get your tomato-wizard link to work! And I wanted to see it!
sincerely,
pamela

pamela

December 27, 2000 6:41 pm
Post Count

Shadow,

Then he will get VERY DIZZY! hehehehehe :smile.gif:
I am not here to defend or prove anything. I simply mentioned one theory out of many I had heard.

I dont immediately disregard a theory because it may clash with any beleif system I may or may not have. he’s just plain silly! heheheeh. but it was fun! :smile.gif: :smile.gif: :smile.gif:

Shadow

December 27, 2000 5:06 pm
Post Count

Pamela

Nine out of ten theories are eventually proven false. Let the people who make them up defend them. The Earths history is unimaginably long and complex. It may indeed be harder to find something that has NOT happened over its 5 billion years.

There a million ways to be wrong and only one way to be right. Daviper will run circles around you because he’s got this million to one rule on his side.

Shadow

December 27, 2000 4:35 pm
Post Count

to rgrunt

a computer sim ain’t going to predict ancient earth geologic changes any better than it can predict next years weather

go to the library, open a textbook on geology and all your answers will there, indexed and catagorized

alternatively there is a cool website on the subject, I believe it is http://www.tomato-wizzard.com(ic)

[email protected]

December 27, 2000 2:00 pm
Post Count

Sorry I have been out for a while. Does anyone no whether the forces exerted by a universal flooding could produce the force needed to seperate all the continents in in a period of a couple of months. Given the amount of water on the earth now if the land masses were but one land mass and there was one huge earth quake that cause all the land masses to spread at a constant velocity to their present location in a period of three months or so would the kenetic force mediated through the water cause universal flooding by generating huge waves of water covering the land. How fast would a land mass have to travel accross the earth for there in order to cause the ocean in the direction of travel flow up and over the entire continent of the united states from east coast to west coast? How hi would the wall of water be? Does the needed velocity match the biblical time period for the flood? If the continents were to have traveled at the nessecary velocity to cause the water to wave over from the pacific ocean to the atlantic ocean for period of time that Noah’s flood was stated to have lasted in the bible could the continents have reached their present location from the pangea in that period of time at the calculated velocity. If not how far could the continents have traveled. How much heat would have been generated by the friction of the water over the continents surface if the water flowed over the earth. Would it have been enough to produce steem at the calculated pressure? If all the above proves true then is it possible find evidence in the soil for such events? If anyone is motivated enough to run a computer simulation and plug in all the variables in order to calculate the above hypothesis I would appreciate it. I donnot have enough computer knowlege to run the simulation. Whoever comes up with the answers to the questions above has the write to the discovery naturally so have at it.

God bless you all and Peace,
sincerely,
Edwin G. Schasteen

DaViper

December 27, 2000 12:01 pm
Post Count

Hey Pamela if you want to believe in mythology as opposed to science and fact it’s OK with me. To each his/her own so to speak.

I prefer knowledge however over the fabricated ideas of those who adjust theory to suit ther particulat religous beliefs.

Sure there have been floods. There’s probably one going on right now somewhere. But…

AY NO TIME was there ever a flood that covered the entire Earth. There isn’t enough water for there to ever have been. And no hocus pocus “vapor cloud” that could ever contain the amount of water needed to produce a rainfall of that proportion has EVER covered the earth.

But if you choose to believe this, fine. All the belief in the world cannot make it so.

The whole comment was an analogy in the first place.

I thought we were discussing time travel paradoxes. That’s the title of the board anyway.

Peace.

pamela

December 26, 2000 8:01 am
Post Count

DaViper,
I thought I already answered the questions you posed on this particular theory to me in my last posting. I apologize I didnt have more time to post more info on it. It was only one theory out of many that I have heard. I mentioned this one because of the article I read two years ago in the city newspaper.
The book the info came from was “A scientific approach to biblical mysteries.”by Robert W. Faid.I have another book called “Beyond Star Wars.”which I cannot locate at this moment. which is a scientifically based book discussing the many theories of ancient mysteries around the world. and it also mentions the water vapor canopy. both of them mention the rain falling for forty days and nights from the canopy and the rest of the water coming from the fountains of the earth being broken up.
I have never heard of the “young earth creationists.” what is their web site? I would like to check out their theories.
One thing is certain though, DaViper, there was a flood for the evidence was left in the Earth. How it happened rests now in theories because noone knows for sure.
You know when it comes to Ancient Events most of the time all you ever have are theories because none of us were there at the time. and many things are not in existance at this time that were there in their time.Theories are formed and based on evidence found at the time and from piecing together writings or anything else found from the time period.or things found in the Earth.
someday we shall all know the truth. Maybe someday somebody will go back and “check it out” and see for themself. I am not afraid to study anything or research any theory. I piece it all together as I go keeping everything in mind. I see things from many different angles. and eventually the truth will be known. :smile.gif:
Peace to you always.
-Pamela

(Robert W. Faid-a nuclear scientist and consultant to the nuclear power industry, has developed patented processes which have been used to protect nuclear power plants around the world against earthquakes and flooding.)

[This message has been edited by pamela (edited 26 December 2000).]

DaViper

December 26, 2000 12:00 am
Post Count

Timetravel_0:

I think we’re probably closer than you think here. I’ll certainly buy your explanation of time travel as purely relative to the observer. I’m also not sure we’re that far apart on the reason there are no paradoxes. (Your Dictionary definition is of course the correct one, I was merely making a simplification of it for my own purposes.)

As to the possibility of multiple universes, well, it gets used a lot to try to explain things that can’t be explained but to me it’s a cop out due to lack of evidence and the very fact that it GETS used so much as a way to explain that which is otherwise currently un-explainable. I need more evidence. The existence of multiple universes leads me to believe that if there is more than one of them, there must therefore be an infinite number of them. If there are an infinite number of them, then everything that can happen, has already. I dislike this theory for two reasons. 1. It destroys the necessity for free will thereby making all descisions made by choice inherently moot. 2. It goes against “Occam’s Razor”. The principle that the simplest explaination is probably the best one. I really don’t see the Universe needing to be so complicated as to require infinite universes just to solve the concept of paradoxes.

Peace.

I thought it interesting that my little “Flood” analogy sparked such conversation.

By all means many cultures refer to “Great Floods” in their history. And Local phenomenea ARE the reason these persist in mythology.

Pamela, you’ve been reading the propaganda of the “Young Earth Creationists” I see. Their web sites are all over the place. Unfortunately, these theories they propound are not only NOT POSSIBLE, but have long since proven to be so.

Unfortunately many of these, like the so-called “Dr.” Kent Hovind have fabricated their own “degrees” in higher education. Hovind for instance, started a “University” in his living room, awarded himself a “Doctorate” in Theology, and uses this to tout his self professed “expertise” in geological and biologocal matters.

The “Vapor Cloud” myth is a fairly old one trotted out to answer the “Where did the water come from?” question. But YOUR explainations are right out of the Creationists handbook 101. And equally mythological as they are without foundation or acceptance by the Scientific Community at large.

Think about it. If it never rained before the flood, what did plants live on? As to the Vapor Cloud it self, it’s already been calculated that to produce the water necessary for world wide full deluge, the cloud would be so thick as to block out the sun entirely. Meaning it MUST have been dark always before the so called “Great Flood”. Preposterous. Every Creationists argument on this issue is totally debunk-able. Not just because it isn’t so, but because it can be PROVEN to be not so.

May I suggest you do some browsing around the various Talk Origins websites where the real scientists hang out and you’ll begin to see how truly silly some of these Literal Scripture interpretations really are.

Not that I’m arguing against (or for) the existence of God, just that if you want to view the Bible as an informative and inspirational document, may I suggest that you at least study the differences where metaphor is used instead of an intended depiction of reality.

Genesis has TWO depictions or accounts of Creation. The Creationsts won’t tell you about the second one because it is contradictory to THEIR view. And supports the concept of Evolution. It’s called selective intepretation. And they engage in it all the time.

Or as the old song goes,

“Some Things That You Libel,
To Read In The Bible,
It Ain’t necessarily So.”

Good luck, and

Peace.

Shadow

December 25, 2000 6:27 pm
Post Count

TT-O
I’m surprised that they haven’t cought you yet. I’d give dollars-to-donuts that the US military is into time travel already….since the mid sixties I’d guess. Not that its any of my business, nor do I want it to be. Maybe they don’t care. Maybe there is already intertime treaties of noninterference.

If it doesn’t make it less convient for the rich to ripp-off the masses it could well remain a non-issue.

pamela

December 24, 2000 1:52 pm
Post Count

Hi djayr42!
Actually there was another man who answered all of the questions and sent them to me to forward to timetravler_0 in private.
which I did.
wether you beleived he was real or not,
I think it was only common curtesy to answer the questions after he answered ours. and that had to take a lot of his time to answer all of our questions and debating on how much he wanted to share. when every word you say can have consequences.
Its no big deal ,he was just curious about how we feel about things as we are about him.
Maybe people are just too paranoid.
It is kind of interesting though…is this how we would treat a person from another world if we ever met one?

Well anyway..hope everyone has a great Christmas!!!!!! :smile.gif:
sincerely,
Pamela

djayr42

December 24, 2000 12:12 pm
Post Count

Well as far as I can tell, it seems that only two of us here are willing to answer TT_0’s questions. (Three – Shadow answered at least one question.) What’s wrong? Are you afraid of being judged in some way? Most of the people who post here on this forum seem to enjoy playing around (and sometimes bickering and putting each other down). So what is the problem? It seems as though when you find out someone is observing you and says so, you clam up. Yes I know that implies that you believe his claims or you don’t think he is worth responding to. Yet most of you will take the time to bicker. You could just tell him that you don’t want to answer any of his questions. You can’t even do that instead you will ignore those questions and write a lengthy reply to someone else just to get your point of view across. Well that is what TT_0 is asking for. Why do you find so hard to answer him? It implies that you believe him more then your willing to admit. And you don’t like the idea of being classified by an observer from a future time. I think he is right, on the whole, “sheep” – bickering sheep. Ok, you can blast me by being honest in answering TT_0 questions. (That is the only basting that is acceptable.)

mokrie dela

December 24, 2000 9:14 am
Post Count

Shadow, Don’t feel bad, I live on shakey ground myself. As they used to say, you threw a hissy fit. HAHA We take turns on this board. Your always interesting with or without hairs; and your opinion in always important wether provable or not. Heck, I never shut up and I can’t prove anything myself.

Shadow

December 23, 2000 5:08 pm
Post Count

Morkie!

Hair extracted. I’m much better now. Thank you.

Hear no evil. see no evil, speak no evil. WHEN will I EVER learn?

WE do digress from time travel don’t we. The earth is going to fall over any minute now……..scratch that………any TIME now.

My theory on Earth Changes was dismissed because it “rested on shakey ground”. I too will wait for a time.