Proving "God" is real..

Chief Walkin Eagle

Chief Walkin Eagle

Well-Known Member
Know that most of the worlds Egyptologists are Muslim and for them to say that the sphinx and the pyramids are older than 8000 years old would go against their religion.
 
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
Chief Walkin Eagle

Chief Walkin Eagle

Well-Known Member
cannabineer said:
Here is a sample using radiocarbon.
http://www.archaeology.org/9909/abstracts/pyramids.html
Here is a sample using a clever astronomical supposition. Graham uses another clever astronomical supposition, but if you compare texts, Graham had to presume a stack of interdependent what-ifs to be fact. Spence et al. only used one. cn
http://www.archaeology.org/9909/abstracts/pyramids.html
Click to expand...
Ah yes, a piece of technology proving Hancock wrong... Hancocks "what if's" is just his way of teaching, his book "Fingerprints of the Gods" is full of him asking questions while hinting at the answer at the same time, so the what ifs prove nothing... I view this as your word against mine
 
mindphuk

mindphuk

Well-Known Member
Chief Walkin Eagle said:
Its a documentary... Know theres not spiritual stuff in here, just mathematical facts http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3yUqb0wrxRw
Click to expand...
I'm not about to slog through a 1 hour 40 minute movie to find where they mention that single point, one that you should be able to summarize in one or two sentences.

Unless you give me a timecode of where the information that I'm requesting it's a very inappropriate and rude way to answer such a request.

Even before I hear your 'evidence' I will begin to destroy it. The speed of light in a vacuum is a ratio of a distance over time. Let's say it's kilometers per second. In order to claim it is encoded must mean that the units must also be encoded. IOW, some way to demonstrate that the builders measured distances like meters. If, for example, one of the main measurements was a specific multiples of meters, that would be helpful. But then we have to have evidence that the builders also measured time using seconds. If neither of these can be demonstrated, then any resemblance of a number like 300,000,000 (or more accurately 299,792,458) should be considered coincidental. Likewise if we get a number like 186,000 (mph) 0.307 (parsecs/year) or any other combination of distance and time. If you look hard enough at something with multiple dimensions and ways of measuring, you are bound to get some sort of measurement that seems to have some significance to some other significant number. Just think of how many different constants we have in astronomy and physics.

Now constants that are special ratios, dimensionless physical constants, are a totally different subject. Now if we found ratios that were the same as proton-electron mass ratio or strong force coupling constant, I might stand up and take notice.
 
mindphuk

mindphuk

Well-Known Member
Chief Walkin Eagle said:
Know that most of the worlds Egyptologists are Muslim and for them to say that the sphinx and the pyramids are older than 8000 years old would go against their religion.
Click to expand...
Nothing like a good poisoning of the well now is there?


Evaluation of any evidence, whether it supports what you (want to) believe or not should always be looked at with a critical eye. In fact if something seems to support what you are looking for you should be even more skeptical, especially if it counters the vast majority of experts in a field. You display all of the characteristics of a conspiracy theorist. You give greater weight to anything that supports your view, including listening to only certain authorities that support your view while dismissing all of the other authorities, usually in an overwhelming consensus on the broad strokes at least. If you can't even pretend to be impartial when examining evidence, why should anyone discuss this with you? You have your mind made up.
 
Chief Walkin Eagle

Chief Walkin Eagle

Well-Known Member
mindphuk said:
I'm not about to slog through a 1 hour 40 minute movie to find where they mention that single point, one that you should be able to summarize in one or two sentences.

Unless you give me a timecode of where the information that I'm requesting it's a very inappropriate and rude way to answer such a request.

Even before I hear your 'evidence' I will begin to destroy it. The speed of light in a vacuum is a ratio of a distance over time. Let's say it's kilometers per second. In order to claim it is encoded must mean that the units must also be encoded. IOW, some way to demonstrate that the builders measured distances like meters. If, for example, one of the main measurements was a specific multiples of meters, that would be helpful. But then we have to have evidence that the builders also measured time using seconds. If neither of these can be demonstrated, then any resemblance of a number like 300,000,000 (or more accurately 299,792,458) should be considered coincidental. Likewise if we get a number like 186,000 (mph) 0.307 (parsecs/year) or any other combination of distance and time. If you look hard enough at something with multiple dimensions and ways of measuring, you are bound to get some sort of measurement that seems to have some significance to some other significant number. Just think of how many different constants we have in astronomy and physics.

Now constants that are special ratios, dimensionless physical constants, are a totally different subject. Now if we found ratios that were the same as proton-electron mass ratio or strong force coupling constant, I might stand up and take notice.
Click to expand...
Start watching at 1 hour and 18 minutes... Im not gunna slog through the rest of the paragraph you typed =p

It also explains throughout the video how many times Pi and the Golden Number is found throughout the video
 
Chief Walkin Eagle

Chief Walkin Eagle

Well-Known Member
mindphuk said:
Nothing like a good poisoning of the well now is there?


Evaluation of any evidence, whether it supports what you (want to) believe or not should always be looked at with a critical eye. In fact if something seems to support what you are looking for you should be even more skeptical, especially if it counters the vast majority of experts in a field. You display all of the characteristics of a conspiracy theorist. You give greater weight to anything that supports your view, including listening to only certain authorities that support your view while dismissing all of the other authorities, usually in an overwhelming consensus on the broad strokes at least. If you can't even pretend to be impartial when examining evidence, why should anyone discuss this with you? You have your mind made up.
Click to expand...
rriiiggghhtt....
 
Chief Walkin Eagle

Chief Walkin Eagle

Well-Known Member
mindphuk said:
I'm not about to slog through a 1 hour 40 minute movie to find where they mention that single point, one that you should be able to summarize in one or two sentences.

Unless you give me a timecode of where the information that I'm requesting it's a very inappropriate and rude way to answer such a request.

Even before I hear your 'evidence' I will begin to destroy it. The speed of light in a vacuum is a ratio of a distance over time. Let's say it's kilometers per second. In order to claim it is encoded must mean that the units must also be encoded. IOW, some way to demonstrate that the builders measured distances like meters. If, for example, one of the main measurements was a specific multiples of meters, that would be helpful. But then we have to have evidence that the builders also measured time using seconds. If neither of these can be demonstrated, then any resemblance of a number like 300,000,000 (or more accurately 299,792,458) should be considered coincidental. Likewise if we get a number like 186,000 (mph) 0.307 (parsecs/year) or any other combination of distance and time. If you look hard enough at something with multiple dimensions and ways of measuring, you are bound to get some sort of measurement that seems to have some significance to some other significant number. Just think of how many different constants we have in astronomy and physics.

Now constants that are special ratios, dimensionless physical constants, are a totally different subject. Now if we found ratios that were the same as proton-electron mass ratio or strong force coupling constant, I might stand up and take notice.
Click to expand...
LOL I just read the rest of what you said, ALL you speak of is mentioned multiple times in that documentary... Nice attempt at "destroying" the evidence though... But Im sure if I convinced you to watch the whole thing you'll still come up with some kinda of explanation saying its false because your such a smartypants =)
 
Heisenberg

Heisenberg

Well-Known Member
Chief Walkin Eagle said:
rriiiggghhtt....
Click to expand...
This is how you have responded to every well though out reply you have received, side stepping and blatant dismissal. The best you can manage is to point to other people's fallacious information. You demonstrate no interest in distinguishing truth from fantasy and rudely discount other's efforts at being careful. This is not the way in which meaningful discussion is conducted. This is not the manner in which reliable information is ascertained. The only things you have demonstrated is that you have a very relaxed understanding of physics and history and a fairly loose grip on reality. This comes from approaching learning and knowledge with an arrogant and presumptuous attitude instead of that of humble discovery. If truth is indeed important to you, you will find this path leads to empty pretense rather than intellectual fulfillment.
 
Chief Walkin Eagle

Chief Walkin Eagle

Well-Known Member
Heisenberg said:
This is how you have responded to every well though out reply you have received, side stepping and blatant dismissal. The best you can manage is to point to other people's fallacious information. You demonstrate no interest in confirming truth over fantasy and rudely discount other's efforts at being careful. This is not the way in which meaningful discussion is conducted. This is not the manner in which reliable information is ascertained. The only things you have demonstrated is that you have a very relaxed understanding of physics and history and a fairly loose grip on reality. This comes from approaching knowledge and learning with an arrogant and presumptuous attitude instead of that of humble discovery. If truth is indeed important to you, you will find this path leads to empty pretense rather than intellectual fulfillment.
Click to expand...
Boobookittyfuck
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top