And Einstein, who was not even the inventor of general relativity, and being a Askenazim Jehudi, was a deist. Not a theist. To start an argument with Einstein, being a fraud and perpetuating a fraud, is not helpful.
E=mc² does make predictions, which relate to what happens to a star falling into a blackhole, creating a singularity. Clearly, her Chupa Chup has not been able to give understanding of what a singularity actually is.
And E=mc² is not the end of the physics class or Astronomy class.
The way she is using this argument is pointing to irreducible complexity and therefor it MUST be ..... which is another logical fallacy she employed.
This idea of irreducible complexity has already legally been shown to be unscientific. See Dover schoolboard 2004 court case.
The cause and effect argument, at least the way she uses it, is another logical fallacy concerning the prime mover.
However, if people wish to think like this, that is ok. I just hope to never ever have to be subject to superimposed views just because people have a problem with the uncertainty principle.
Because, all in all, all these arguments blend into one argument: I know what God is and let me tell you.....
Perhaps it is because He reveals Himself to those who seek Him...and once have been the recipient of this divine revelation, it is counted as pure joy to share.
Something bigger than anything we can understand, with the tools we possess exists. Something far far beyond all the intellectual/scientific psychobabble non adherents like to throw at us. Some want to explore that mystery - some don't. Those who do like to explore it also like to congregate in discussion forums to discuss their findings/views. Who do you think God is?
yep, she never seen a bubble.
And Einstein, who was not even the inventor of general relativity, and being a Askenazim Jehudi, was a deist. Not a theist. To start an argument with Einstein, being a fraud and perpetuating a fraud, is not helpful.
E=mc² does make predictions, which relate to what happens to a star falling into a blackhole, creating a singularity. Clearly, her Chupa Chup has not been able to give understanding of what a singularity actually is.
And E=mc² is not the end of the physics class or Astronomy class.
The way she is using this argument is pointing to irreducible complexity and therefor it MUST be ..... which is another logical fallacy she employed.
This idea of irreducible complexity has already legally been shown to be unscientific. See Dover schoolboard 2004 court case.
The cause and effect argument, at least the way she uses it, is another logical fallacy concerning the prime mover.
However, if people wish to think like this, that is ok. I just hope to never ever have to be subject to superimposed views just because people have a problem with the uncertainty principle.
Because, all in all, all these arguments blend into one argument: I know what God is and let me tell you.....
Perhaps it is because He reveals Himself to those who seek Him...and once have been the recipient of this divine revelation, it is counted as pure joy to share.
Something bigger than anything we can understand, with the tools we possess exists. Something far far beyond all the intellectual/scientific psychobabble non adherents like to throw at us. Some want to explore that mystery - some don't. Those who do like to explore it also like to congregate in discussion forums to discuss their findings/views. Who do you think God is?
Yes.