Freethought & Rationalism ArchiveThe archives are read only. |
10-27-2005, 05:31 PM | #121 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 687
|
Quote:
Code:
"So there I was, it was a beautiful day. The sun was shining clear and the skies were a clear blue. I was taking a mid-day stroll through the park and I wanted to go by the old well. There was a small child playing around the well, his name escapes my memory now, but I know he was acosting me and berating me. I asked him kindly to cease in his insults. He refused, as you may know children are very indignant. I became increasingly annoyed with his antics and decided to put an end to it myself. I ran towards him with my arms streched out in front of me. I made contact with his chest, and with a heavy thud, he flew back. He hit the outer wall of the well and fell to the bottom. It felt as if it took twenty minutes for him to hit the stale, standing water at the bottom. But when he did, there was a great splash. So great in fact, that droplets of water came all the way to the top and danced on my cheeks like dew on a lily in the morn. I guffawed at my deed and proceeded to walk to the lemonade stand to quench my mighty thirst. And that's how Timmy fell down the well. " |
|
10-27-2005, 07:33 PM | #122 |
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,281
|
Can I too make a groundbreaking discovery? Please? Please?
OK, here goes. We take the numbers of English alphabet and code them similarly to the traditional Hebrew coding: A = 1, B = 2, ..., J = 10, K = 20, ... Now take the letters of some word and calculate their root mean square using the above numerical code. That's specified complexity, according to the famous mathematician William Dembsky. Well, it turns out that The word NONOPERATIVE evaluates to the inverse of the Cosmological constant (137.036...) with the accuracy of 0.003%! But what does this mean?! |
10-27-2005, 07:41 PM | #123 |
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,281
|
And another:
The word CHURLISHNESS also evaluates to the inverse of the Cosmological constant with the accuracy of 0.003% if you take the third moment of its letters! |
10-27-2005, 07:48 PM | #124 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 5,826
|
Quote:
You must predict an improbability for it to be interesting. Otherwise, it's just the case that happened. Give us a general theory about precisely which specific "improbabilities" we should see in the Bible and that we should see nowhere else, and you might be on to something. Otherwise, you're engaging in entirely fallacious reasoning. |
|
10-27-2005, 11:52 PM | #125 | |
Regular Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 100
|
Quote:
Edit: Wow I read some of his replies. I can't believe that someone would actually believe the crap he spews... it's sad. |
|
10-28-2005, 12:21 AM | #126 | |
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Rome, Italy
Posts: 75
|
Quote:
but first we have to analyze well the sentence that I have proposed as example “Everyone has the right to life liberty and security of person� |
|
10-28-2005, 12:27 AM | #127 | |
Regular Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 122
|
So Pmarra at some point are you ever going to answer reddish's post?
Quote:
|
|
10-28-2005, 12:42 AM | #128 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Delft, The Netherlands
Posts: 1,015
|
Quote:
- specify very precisely what you would consider extremely unlikely. - agree to admit defeat if I meet your requirement. These are not unreasonable rules, would you agree? |
|
10-28-2005, 01:24 AM | #129 | |
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Rome, Italy
Posts: 75
|
Quote:
certainly these are not unreasonable rules if we consider again my demonstration on the Biblical Pi (with two simple multiplications and a division we are able “to discover� a value of the Pi hidden inside the First Verse of Genesis which is so precise in comparison to the value known at biblical times, that it allows us to exclude any human intervention in its "insertion".) using the same technique with this sentence “Everyone has the right to life liberty and security of person� and with other famous sentences we can see if we find a meaningful value of Pi or no if not we don't find any meaningful value of Pi this result means that the value of Pi that we have found in Gen1.1 is "extremely unlikely". |
|
10-28-2005, 01:46 AM | #130 |
Junior Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 93
|
I'm still wondering if Pmarra will answer my prevous questions, or continue adding more irrelevancies to the trainwreck...
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|