(May 21, 2025 at 1:09 pm)John 6IX Breezy Wrote:

(May 21, 2025 at 12:52 pm)Sheldon Wrote: ...with vegetation before the sun...

Now comes Sheldon, to flood the thread lol.

I'll give you one more chance to clarify your objection here: Do plants need the sun or do plants need light? It may all just be magic, but surely that's not a reason to get things this wrong?

Only one planet in our solar system has vegetation on it, so if it's "photons all the way down" that cause / enable vegetation, why are planets too close, or too far away from the sun lifeless because they're too hot or too cold? Is that just a coincidence John? 

Talking of flooding, why does the geological record demonstrate unequivocally that no global flood, like the one in the Genesis creation myth, has ever occurred? Did something use magic, then hide it from us?

(May 22, 2025 at 4:50 pm)John 6IX Breezy Wrote:

(May 22, 2025 at 3:06 pm)Sheldon Wrote: ...because photons magically heated it...

Hmmmm. Do photons magically heat things?

Only you are implying magic as a cause John. Or explain how they heated the earth without a sun, or single star in the universe, but can't heat the planets in our solar system that just happen to be farther from our sun than the earth? Given the sun would be a massive source of photons, they'd have more now than without it right? 

Where are we on the earth maintaining a steady orbit without the sun John?

(May 22, 2025 at 4:56 pm)Sheldon Wrote: Or explain how they heated the earth

Deesse gave you the initial answer, E = hv

A molecule absorbs a photon, which can increase it's kinetic energy.

Wrong johnny.

Checkmate @John 6IX Breezy

Do you believe your god put you up to this humiliation?

(May 22, 2025 at 6:09 pm)John 6IX Breezy Wrote:

(May 22, 2025 at 4:56 pm)Sheldon Wrote: Or explain how they heated the earth

Deesse gave you the initial answer, E = hv

A molecule absorbs a photon, which can increase it's kinetic energy.

You seem to be answering straw men, by clipping small pieces of text, while ignoring the context and content of questions John.

(May 22, 2025 at 7:41 pm)Nay_Sayer Wrote: Wrong johnny.

Also irrelevant, as he ignored most of the question and answered a straw man.

(May 23, 2025 at 11:00 am)Sheldon Wrote: ...by clipping small pieces of text....

Right. Because you're a master at packing multiple assumptions and conditionals into every proposition—and then nesting those premises within other propositions.

And I'm trained to isolate variables and examine them one at a time.

(May 23, 2025 at 11:39 am)John 6IX Breezy Wrote:

(May 23, 2025 at 11:00 am)Sheldon Wrote: ...by clipping small pieces of text....

Right. Because you're a master at packing multiple assumptions and conditionals into every proposition—and then nesting those premises within other propositions.

And I'm trained to isolate variables and examine them one at a time.

No, you clearly clipped a tiny part of a question, to remove the context, and evade answering what I'd actually asked. No big deal, I mean I am holding a loaded deck, as you're trying to defend erroneous claims that are at odds with scientific facts, and pretending that science validates them. 

Bottom line, a young earth is as compelling as a flat earth, and for the same reason.

(May 23, 2025 at 11:45 am)Sheldon Wrote: No, you clearly clipped a tiny part of a question...

Yes and I'll continue to parse your questions as long as you keep stacking multiple premises and conditionals inside them.