I only steal wooden spoons.
……- and this is Tucker. He steals wooden spoons. I hope you have a few in the house, if not we brought some with us. Can you put them somewhere for him?
- Oh, don’t worry, Jim was cleaning our attick yesterday, and he found about 4 wooden spoons. He was going to put them in dumpster tomorrow. I will ask him to rinse them for Tucker.
Tucker, I apologize that I could sound somewhat mentoring in my last reply to you, it was not an intention, I was tired, was thinking about something else and just did not want to play games around.
I think you may have some self-identity problem, - atheists are not those who collect wooden spoons, - atheists are those who cannot understand 2 simple sentences whoever long you try to explain to them, those who gather in groups attracted to each other and who exhibit indecent and repulsive behavior and whose ignorance is not excusable but aggressive. Since you keep on failing these checks I am not going to call you an atheist anymore and I apologize for previous cases. I was confused by your self-identification.
P.S. To justone: I forgot that you had asked for a source for my Einstein quotes from way back and just remembered while I was posting this. They come from Einstein's Eulogy to Isaac Newton in the Smithsonian Annual Report for 1927.
Thank you. It did sound very close to the meaning of the quote from the Appendix. I had to take a university exam which was including the TOR. I have not been doing any reading lately, and I am not planning, even if it causes some sweet memories.
Originally Posted by Tucker Case said:
More accurately, Einstein said that Relativity "Quantitatively... made little modification in Newton's theory, but qualitatively a deep-seated one." And that Relativity "may be conceived as an organic development of Newton's thought." .
Originally Posted by justone said:
Would an evolutionist understand what does mean "Quantitatively... made little modification in Newton's theory, but qualitatively a deep-seated one."? No way.
OK. You tried. And?
How do you feel? Still in the shower spraying deodorant around?
Just for you, Tucker:
Einstein exactly says that the TOR follows rules of science and is not anything exotic is not anything like evolution. Einstein exactly says that the deductions from Newton’s theory (or mathematical formulas) give positions of the planets, and allow pre-calculate other observed phenomena, and the deductions from the TOR give practically the same positions, only more accurate (exactly as it is worded in Rule IV) Thus it checks out to be valid on the day arrival, which is totally opposite to evolution which neither checks out nor has a day of arrival.
As simple as that.
The TOR makes Newton’s theory liable to exceptions in cases of new occurrences of phenomena of movement of light and electromagnetic waves which were not observed by Newton and thus couldn’t be explained/ included in Newton’s consideration. Einstein points in the TOR that the deductions = formulas are also result of Maxwell’s observations of electromagnetism and the TOR confirms to them as it confirms to the motions of the planets in the paragraph above. Thus the TOR checks out to be valid on the day arrival, and that is totally opposite to evolution which neither checks out nor has a day of arrival.
Einstein points there are only very few things in the Theory that are “”new” and don’t have observations but only evidence behind them.
Like Newton couldn’t mention or think how the discovery of Neptune on a piece of paper will be made possible by his theory in the same way Hubble’s suggestions or Cosmology have nothing to do to the few investigations mentioned. The particular reference of Einstein to observations of the Doppler effect in the TOR is a reference to observations, and the Doppler effect caused Hubble’s suggestions, too.
Both theories are inducted by observations of phenomena, by occurrences observed and produced and reproduced in experiments. (Take their deductions, calculate – we need such an acceptation to lift the body of such a weight from the earth and transport it to the orbit. Theoretically. It will take so much time for the body then to reach the moon. Theoretically. Experiment. Confirmed. We are very close.) This is their fundamental difference from evolution which makes no such deductions and refers to no occurrences observed, which is a pure speculation. Both TOR and Newton’s theories satisfy the main task of science – they produce equations which describe the occurrences and predict the same occurrences of the same bodies in the universe. Moreover they are used for development of such useful theories as the theory of structural materials, or rocket science, astronomic calculations of a comet hitting /not hitting the earth etc; they predict and explain appearances of Cosmic events, - we pre-calculate the events. Evolution does not satisfy the main task of science it produces no equations and it has not been having any use.
So you are quite close in your consideration and you are absolutely correct about evolutionists, - it is quite clear they are totally misread the basic text, which is another proof that they cannot comprehend a simple sentence. It is quite clear they have never read the TOR or any texts related to Hubble and Big bang, it is quite clear that they are not capable of reading. On your own experience you have seen the aggressive and violent ignorance of evolutionists.
Now for everyone else:
No decent man – however he understands or does not understand Einstein, quotes, etc would not see clearly that evolutionists all over suddenly came up with blaming me for denial of the TOR when it is quite clear that I am basing my statements on the TOR and I know what I am talking about. It is quite clear that they cannot understand a simple sentence.
Switching back to Tucker:
It should be proven for you now that there is no blame you can put on me for spraying loads of deodorant when an evolutionist shows up in the room. It should be proven for you that there is no sense to exercise sweetness with them, - you can see I tried for you - it makes no difference.