LHC disproves ghosts

[Huggy Bear]

How is that disingenuous? By definition either that scripture is describing the relativity of time or it isn't, which is it?

It's describing a sort of psychological relativity.
Not "the relativity" as it is expanded in the Theory of Relativity by Einstein.
The theory of relativity explains how time passes differently for objects moving at different speeds... wait for it.... RELATIVE to each other.

What is in that scripture has nothing to do with it... it merely pertains to how the passage of time is perceived differently by the two entities: humans and god.
Which then begs the question: how would anyone know about that to put in writing?
We do know, however, that we perceive time to pass differently, when we are in different environments...


Because you are talking about a psychological perception of the passage of time and calling it Relativity, as if it's the same thing as the Theory of Relativity, I was labeling you disingenuous.

I simply stated that time is relative, If you're claiming that I'm conflating between psychological perception and the Theory of Relativity, then what is the point of your Einstein quote? It doesn't say "that's psychological relativity, it simply states "that's relativity".

Since obviously that quote is meant to explain how the Theory of Relativity works, would not that be conflating the two also?

*emphasis mine*
Then you misunderstood what I asked you. I asked you to provide an example of completely separate species producing fertile offspring.

If you're stating that different species cannot interbreed, then you agree with what I said.

The Fruit flies in the experiment became a different species, compared to the original species, and were happily producing offspring.
Whatever happened to that IQ?!

No one said a species cannot evolve into a separate species, I said separate species cannot produce fertile offspring. So far you agree with everything I've said.

Just so you don't claim I'm moving goal posts I'll reference a previous post from 2015
http://atheistforums.org/thread-31486-po...#pid873918

I believe animals can evolve within their group, I don't believe however, that all creatures evolved from the same ancestor.

*emphasis mine*

Or are you wanting an example of completely different species interbreeding and producing offspring.... and fertile ones at that?!
Well, then... if that was possible, they wouldn't be different species to begin with, would they? It's kinda in the definition of species.
So it seems you're asking for me to supply you with a married bachelor... the edges of a sphere... the fourth side of a triangle...
Why?

*emphasis mine*
A definition that the bible came up with first, and has held true... which was my original point.  

Your question was
If I define a spirit as being incorporeal, then it does not agree with reality. I posted a video I thought gave a reasonable explanation.



 

In the example Carl Sagan gives "up" does not exist in a 2 dimensional world, therefore a 3 dimensional entity does not agree with that reality.

Are you saying that you know that there are higher dimensional beings, but we just can't detect them with conventional 3-dimensional means?
If you came across such information, then surely you can describe how those beings interacted with out 3D plane...

quote from the video starting at 4:04 :

"Getting into another dimension, provides as an incidental benefit a kind of "x-ray vision". Now our flat creature slowly descends to the surface and his friends rush up to see him, from thier point of veiw he has mysteriously appeared from nowhere, he hasn't walked from somewhere else he's come from some other place. They say

"for heavens sake what happened to you?"

And the poor square has to say

"well I was in some other mystic dimension called Up"

And they will pat him on his side and comfort him, or else they'll ask

"well show us, where is that 3rd dimension, point to it."

And the poor square will be unable to comply."

Humor me.

An electromagnetic wave does not age as it moves through the Universe... in it's inertial frame of reference.
In any slower frame of reference, it does age.

A photon doesn't experience time or distance, so it does not "move" through the universe as you put it, it's arrival is instantaneous.

That would seem to fly in the face of your assertion of:

"No time" is not "stopped time".
"No time" is not "all time".
"No time" is no action, no entropy, no energy, nothing... and as far as I can see it, unless we posit an illogical exception, no god - no reasoning, no thinking, no creating.

*emphasis mine*