Why knocking is so important.

[Drich]

There's a difference here Drich. My faith in what science says about gravity can be confirmed by rational research, testing, and inspection. What you are asking us to have faith in is the truth of words in a two thousand year old book which we can't verify.

Which is also true about may of the theories and laws of science. Of those who hold to science as their God, how many are truly smart enough/have the resources to test all that they believe?

The two kinds of faith aren't in any way comparable. The rest is just window dressing.

when striped down to it's core, faith is faith. If and when you put Faith in God and were able to test Him in your own way with your own tests and not only did everyone expectation get meet your experience far exceeded what you were looking for, would you consider your faith in God any less valid that than your faith in Global climate change?

(And unfortunately for you, anyone with a fair knowledge of physics could see that Chuck handed you your ass. Average acceleration of gravity at the earth's surface is independent of any other forces which might act upon and interfere with the pull of gravity at the earth's surface, such as air drag. That you don't understand this basic fact is your failing, not his.)

Their were two arguements i was involved in concerning eart's gravity, one being the direct relation on acceleration of an object, (Which would include a drag coefficient, this is what chuck answered) and of the misrepersentation of the principle it self. The principle arguement addressed the fact that the formula presented was the acceleration rate @ sea level. This was repersented as the average acceleration 'g' on earth. This is incorrect, because that formula does not include a .9% variance at alititude. This means the average gravitational acceleration rate on earth as the orginal arguement stated is actually half way between the rate at sea level and the rate at alititude.
Which again the numbers provided in the orginal arguement is the known rate at sea level, and not the earth's average.

To which none of this really even matters because everything I said had to do with the illustration of the faith needed to believe what ever set of numbers and or interpertation of said number needed. The fact that neither chuck or R2 did not or could not provide supporting documentation to their side of the arguement supports my illustration of the faith they had in what they believed...


They were supporting my purposed arguement the whole time, one of them figured it out, and dropped out of the arguement while your hero is still chasing his tail.
[/quote]

---

God simply asks that you take a mustard seeds worth and place it where He tells us to place it.

And everyone here has, in one form or another, told you where to place it. Nobody's interested in buying your bridge without it first being established that there's even a bridge. Assertions piled on top of assertions will never become compelling evidence.

I have no doubt everyone has made an honest effort if they say they have (as you say) in one form or another.
In the OP I point out that your disbelief in your specific brand of christianity could be apart of an answered prayer. The other half of the answered prayer could be just on the other side of the bend if you continue to knock.

Again, God wiped away your corupt view of Him so you had the oppertunity to build a correct understanding. (Build you house on the rock rather than sand)

---

Did you ever once consider if God could be demonstrated or 'proofed' as gravity is proofed He would not be God?

By George, I think he's got it!

Drich, it's not our fault if what you are touting as "God" fails to meet basic standards of evidence. Maybe you need to reassess your claims, why you believe them to be true and certainly your reasons for foisting them onto others.

What god fails to do is submit to man's authority and evaluation. Meaning anything and everything we deem as scientific evidence, we must have complete control and mastery over other wise it is deem a theory. If you want 'evidence/proof' of God under the wisdom of science, means you want mastery over God. If one has Mastery over God in anyway God ceases to be the God of the bible.